[humanbydefault]

Einstein hi!

I admire you for two reasons:
First because you seems to have the same passion for physics as some of us here even though it's not your background and second because you really have an open mind... bravo!

Allow me to answer [acoording to my views of reality] why I believe you should reconsider some of your concepts.

TIME ARROW>>> Time ALWAYS "moves" forward. In other words... the arrow of time is always positive [in its absolute nature].
Does it appears to some "observers" (FRAMES OF OBSERVATION) as "moving" backward? You bet! That's why the other Einstein [the real one] called it RELATIVITY.
So... In absolute terms? Always forward. In relative terms? In both possible directions.
Now! What is TIME? Is TIME capable of "moving"...? Those are very interesting perspectives for which I have decided for the logic one.
TIME is any intelligent being's tool used to measure ENTROPY. Entropy [as you may know from the physics books] always "moves" in one direction: the future. The ray of light that leaves its source once never returns unless it is reflected by some means. The object that falls [in a free fall] will never return to its original potential-energy position unless it would be placed in a region of the universe where gravity was not existent and it was equipped with some kind of metaphysical properties that are not a subject of this post...(?)

The notion of TIME is an infinite scalar [a reading on someone's instrument: a chronometer of some sort] and an useful variable in our mathematical equations... As for its "inherent and independent existence"... it belongs to sci-fi books and movies,sorry to say it.
If you have followed some of my threads concerning TIME, you'll find the connection with what I described as "local eathers." To me, each "local eather" in the universe "owns" its local-elapsing-rate-of-time. In simple words: The rate of the entropy process and the direct proportionality of its TIME depends on the region where the given "local eather" SPINS.
The relativistic notion [perception] of ENTROPY [Meaning also TIME] is a constant inside the boundaries [orbit] of one "local eather" and NON-CONSTANT [non-linear] when observations are performed including other "local eathers."

You mentioned that past observations have proved that the existence of the eather was not consistent with their results. You may be referring to those experiments trying to measure the effect of the eather as a frame of reference to the speed of light... IRRELEVANT!

"Our local eather" [whose boundaries are located in the Earth's orbit [spin-path] around the sun is CONSTANT [in its nature] no matter were point you chose for a final frame.
Let's put it this way: In any point of the Earth's orbit around our sun any scattering experiment concerning matter and its interaction with energy [E-M energy in this particular case] will give the same results always. The "Photoelectric effect" will have the same succes in space [inside the physical boundaries of our "local eather"] as it had in our labs on the ground. Those properties I mentioned in previous posting as the consequence of RULES imposed by the density energy-mass of a specific eather are in no way different as long as you do not "cross over" into another "eather's domain."

The speed of light "c" is what it is BECAUSE of the existence of the eather... It's particular density and SPIN configuration to be more precise.

So how could you expect a different result for a relativistic perception of light "c" when those who performed that experiment [you mentioned above] never actually "crossed-over" into an adyacent eather?

I posted [not long ago] that phosphorescense [the glowing green light you have observed in the past] was the perfect evidence of the impossibility [even for light itself] to be able to VIOLATE those rules imposed by the eather.

If it had been possible the scattering of E-M energy from FORBIDDEN electronic subshells, phosphorescense would have never even existed at all. HOWEVER... I believe that there are regions of the universe [probably even in the confines of our own galaxy] where phosphorescense can not exist... period. Meanning that those photons [forbidden by our "local eather"] are perfectly "legitimate" and can and do exist in remote regions of space.

Einstein stated that "c" was a constant... an absolute... I agree! It is in the PERCEPTION of that incredible speed that we must contemplate the effect caused by the "crossing over" of light from one "local eather" to the next.

Same with our perception of ENTROPY. It is [no doubts] an ABSOLUTE process along the entire universe. It "moves" [developes] in one direction only... however its perception will vary depending the frame of observation>>>> the inherent properties of the "local eather" used as reference.

I hope that I have clarify to you some of my positions with respect to those "results" you've mentioned concerning the inability to detect the eather.

HUMANBYDEFAULT