The main question is:

What is Truth and Proof in Science?

What other scientific arguments are needed for the truth in science?

Actually, the uploaded preprints (see the project “Presentation of the scientific evidence for the nullity of the special theory of relativity”):

1. One-way measurement of the speed of light - the factual analysis

2. Michelson-Gale-Pearson experiment - the factual analysis

3. Sagnac experiment – the factual analysis

4. Michelson-Morley experiment - the factual analysis

not only prove that the speed of light is not the same for all frames of reference, but in the first section is presented a solution of all the "unexpected" and "inexplicable" results of experiments related to the behavior and measurement of the speed of light and carried out within our local time-spatial region, … and without of paradoxes.

5. In "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies - the factual analysis of the article" is shown exactly where and how the erroneous claim “the speed of light is the same in all inertial frames of reference” is applied and actually rejects with arguments special theory of relativity.

6. The preprint "On the fundamental tests of the Special theory of relativity" reveals the essence of all the fundamental tests of SR.

What else is necessary for the truth to exist in physics?

More Gocho Sharlanov's questions See All
Similar questions and discussions