Have we been conned by Einstein?

[wisp]

Einstein expects us to believe that the measured speed of light in a vacuum is the same, c, in all inertial frames – the principle of relativity.

However, by using a method to synchronize clock that sets the speed of light as c, it makes any test (including GPS) to measure the speed of light in one direction invalid. Einstein stated that such a test was meaningless several times in his papers.

As a consequence few one-way light speed experiments have been done, and those that have been carried out suggest that the speed of light may not be constant.

By supporting the principle of relativity, we are effectively saying that

c+V=c or c-V=c, which is the same as saying 10+4=10 or 10-4=10

Am I alone in thinking we’ve been conned by Einstein?

[wisp]

To clarify - the two postulates in SR are:

Postulate 1: principle of relativity
All laws of physics have the same mathematical form in all reference frames moving at constant velocity.
Postulate 2: absoluteness of the speed of light
The speed of light in a vacuum has the same measured value in all reference frames moving at a constant velocity.

[wisp]

I fully support these statements on the wikipedia site

****

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sokane

Despite the fact that the round-trip case was closed decades ago, the just-mentioned one-way case remains open, and any reasonable person would ask Why?

It cannot be due to a lack of the necessary technology because said experiment has not even been done on paper. (I.e., no one has even shown on paper how to measure light's one-way, two-clock speed without first assuming the result. For example, Einstein assumed the result "invariance," and then set the clocks to match his assumed result.)….

Thus, the full implications of "There are currently no experimental tests of Einstein's second postulate, not even on paper" are "Not only is the second postulate untestable, but special relativity itself is not a scientific theory."

****

Additional Note: This topic was also posted on the Special and General Relativity section of physicsforums.com, but was deleted. Are they afraid to face the truth that relativity is a false theory?

[dleviwing]

Wisp;
I agree completely. The key word in Einstein's postulate is "MEASURE". When we use the defined method of measurement of the speed of light, we will always obtain the same number. This does not however mean it is truly the same speed in all reference frames. As you have noted, the actual velocity of light is dependent on spatial density. Too many people leave out the word "measured" when referring to the value of the speed of light as being constant.

[wisp]

Wisp;
I agree completely. The key word in Einstein's postulate is "MEASURE". When we use the defined method of measurement of the speed of light, we will always obtain the same number. This does not however mean it is truly the same speed in all reference frames. As you have noted, the actual velocity of light is dependent on spatial density. Too many people leave out the word "measured" when referring to the value of the speed of light as being constant.

dleviwing

You've picked up on a key point. The measured value and the actual speed of light are completely different things. For example, it is possible for the one-way speed of light to vary by flowing with and against the ether, but the measured speed of light shows as constant. At present all measured speeds of light are two-way, as relativity rules out the possibility of carrying out one-way tests.
However, in all the text books that show relativity calculations, they always use equations that set the speed of light as being constant, c. Even though there is at present lack of firm proof that this is the case.
And some books some books state the second postulate without using the word measured.
I wounder if this bothered Einstein. Did he think the actual speed of light was constant???
The speed of light is only constant with respect to the ether and not any moving inertial frame.
What a mess physics is in. How is it going to get out of this?

[Guille]

I agree with you wisp. In fact the speed of light can never be measured as c because there is no such thing as true vacuum that we come along yet.

[dleviwing]

What a mess physics is in. How is it going to get out of this?

Wisp;
I think we need to convince them to get their head out of their math and start observing the physical realities of the universe. As Feynman would say: get rid of the wooly philosophers.

[michellemfry]

"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts."-Albert Einstien

You are correct in being attentive to the facts. He said it himself.

[dleviwing]

"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts."-Albert Einstien

What's scary Michelle; Was Albert really joking?

[michellemfry]

I don't know. I just thought about what you guys were discussing, the speed of light issue, and I saw that quote. It leaves an impression, doesn't it.