David Wei Ge

Thank you for commenting on my article.

"Hi Jan, Thank you for sharing your work. You did good thinking. You are assuming that the light is inertial, just like sound in airplane cabin. This assumption is accepted by most physicists. But how to explain it is the problem: why light is inertial? Special Relativity provides, supposedly, an explanation by saying that absolute movement does not exist."

1) "You are assuming that the light is inertial, just like sound in airplane cabin."

That's your interpretation. I never said anything like that.

2) "Special Relativity provides, supposedly, an explanation by saying that absolute movement does not exist."

The movement of light in space, in a vacuum, is absolute.

Dear Jan Slowak ; Since you have researched SR, I think that this article will be of your interest. It challenges the common interpretation and proposes a novel approach that preserves the equations and may overcome your objections. Time dilation is just a change in the scale, and the passage of time is universal to all systems. Like a clock handle that points to "now", but with its dial changed by the presence of kinetic energy (see drawing). Note that SR equation of energy deals with mass at rest; this means that rest is identifiable and not relative. General relativity also reveals that gravity is an effect of space and is constant to all frames of reference and not relative to an observer. Initial thoughts about SR embrace "relativity" to an extreme, but with mass at rest and gravity, this is changed to an absolute idea. The recommended paper is: A new interpretation of the Special Theory of Relativity. DOI: 10.21275/SR23918031232. I hope it will inspire your research, regards

Jose Oreste Mazzini

Thank you Mr. J. O. Mazzini for reading my article and recommending your own. I read it. Here are my views:

1) "A New Interpretation of the Special Theory of Relativity"

Since I believe that SR is fundamentally flawed, I cannot imagine that another interpretation of this theory could be correct.

2) "1.1 Lorentz’s gamma factor, space contraction."

Time dilation and length contraction are consequences of SR. But they DO NOT occur in reality.

Preprint A Logical Critique of Time Dilation in Special Relativity

Preprint A Logical Critique of Length Contraction in Special Relativity

3) "1.3 Simultaneity" & "As seen previously, the value of each local time depends on the previous presence of energy"

In SR, time is NOT dependent on energy!

"For example, in the twin paradox, when they meet again, the traveler twin will be younger and their clocks will have different values. But from then on, both twins will have a similar time value variation."

How can two clocks that have "different values" give "similar time value variation"? And what is meant by similar? Either something is the same or different!

Preprint Simultaneity in Physical Reality