<div dir="auto"><div>Tom,</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Usually I do not believe in criticizing unless an alternate possible solution is discussed. Relativity is a well formulated and widely accepted theory.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">So my question would be that if not Relativity then what?.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Every theory is built upon certain basic assumption and if those assumptions are not actual truth, then it is certain that theory is in error. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">In case of relativity that assumption is  about the physical existence of a "body of reference"/ coordinate system  extending from -infinity to infinity for every moving body. The truth may be completely different from what Einstein has proposed.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap">Quoting from the paper which you shared, Einstein himself admitted that: </span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap">"In practice, the rigid surfaces which constitute the system of co-ordinates are generally not available ; furthermore, the magnitudes of the co-ordinates are not actually determined by constructions with rigid rods, but by indirect means. If the results of physics and astronomy are to maintain their clearness, the physical meaning of specifications of position must always be sought in accordance with the above considerations"</span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap">Despite the above admission, he assumed as follows for formulation of his theory of relativity.  </span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap">"Every description of events in space involves the use of a rigid body to which such events have to be referred. The resulting relationship takes for granted that the laws of Euclidean geometry hold for "distances;" the "distance" being represented physically by means of the convention of two marks on a rigid body".</span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap">We have to recognize that  in  practice/reality , atmost only a 2-D surface is ever available as a rigid body of reference: like the surface of earth. </span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap">Due the practical non-existence of such a "rigid body of reference"/"coordinate system" for 3-D, for all those applications to which relativity is related, the validity of the theory is doubtful if it is based upon such a coordinate system which assumes that.</span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap">1. All length intervals or distance between neighbouring points are equidistant.</span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap">2. All points of space are available(continue) for positioning a physical object made of matter. </span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap">Indeed, maths should represent what is physical, and we should seek for truth of physically existing coordinate system that represent our reality, not the mathematical coordinate system assumed by Einstein.</span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap">POSSIBLE ALTERNATE REALITY</span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap">Physical properties of space are based on all kinds Fields that exists in that space. </span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:arial;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap">The existence and interaction  of Fields should possibly alter some configuration of space, so that length separation between neighbouring  "available points" are not same everywhere, but time interval is same. </span></div><div dir="auto"><font face="arial"><span style="font-size:14.6667px;white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span></font></div><div dir="auto"><font face="arial"><span style="font-size:14.6667px;white-space:pre-wrap">IMPLICATIONS OF PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE  <br></span></font><br><div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto"><div dir="ltr">1. Space is divided by equidistant time interval , hence time becomes absolute.</div><div dir="ltr">2. Space is not divided by equidistant length interval, hence it may still become possible to explain constant speed of light for all observers. </div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr"><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:14.6667px;white-space:pre-wrap">RELATED QUESTIION  </span><br></div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">What alternative 3-D truth exists which mathematically appears/behave as 4D continuum?</div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">Regards,<br></div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">Tufail </div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">On Mon, 3 Dec 2018, 23:36 <a href="mailto:carmam@tiscali.co.uk">carmam@tiscali.co.uk</a> <<a href="mailto:carmam@tiscali.co.uk">carmam@tiscali.co.uk</a> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div>Tuffail, I have read the whole book many times since buying it in the early 70s. I was just beginning to doubt SRT at the time and thought that this book would revive my interest. It certainly did! I have read it cover to cover many times, and it contains absurdities, which some people call paradoxes. Ever since that time, I have been vociferous in my condemnation of SRT and GRT. I have seen nothing to change my mind, and done my own thought experiments to prove that both SRT and GRT are wrong. Tiscali hosted my web page until recently (they have stopped their hosting service), it was titled "Problems With Relativity", you may have seen it. I am searching for another web host. It is in two parts, both are attached, but the chapter links may not work as it is not on the host website. You will have to scroll manually.<div><br><div>I repeat, I was quoting Einstein. Here is part of that quote again :- "...meter rod moving with the velocity c relative to K". The observer is in frame K.</div><div>As I have not read chapters 1 to 5 recently I will do so again.</div><div><br></div><div>Tom </div><div><br></div><div><div><br>----Original Message----<br>From: <a href="mailto:tufail.abbas@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tufail.abbas@gmail.com</a><br>Date: 03/12/2018 4:54 <br>To: <<a href="mailto:carmam@tiscali.co.uk" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">carmam@tiscali.co.uk</a>><br>Subj: Re: [Physics] Physics Digest, Vol 19, Issue 5<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><span style="font-family:TimesNewRomanPSMT"><p align="LEFT">Tom,</p><p align="LEFT">I hope that you have not jumped straight to Chapter 12 without reading previous chapters . I repeat again that in relativity, K is not the position of the observer and it is not described by a single point. K is the " system of co-ordinates," or "body of reference " attached to observer. Read full Chapter 1 to 5 of the same paper that you only shared, as you said - straight from horse's mouth.</p><p align="LEFT"></p><p align="LEFT">Regards,</p><p align="LEFT">Tufail</p></span></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div>
</blockquote></div></div></div>