Here we discuss and hope to solve a problem rooted in the necessity of the study of historical science, the slow deviation of physics education over the past century, and how the loss of crucial contextual tool has debilitated discussion of a very important yet specialized physics sub-topic: the isotropy of the one-way speed of light. Most notably, the information that appears to be most commonly missing is not simply the knowledge of the historical fact that Poincare and Lorentz presented a mathematically equivalent representation of relativity theory contemporary with Einstein’s publication, but the most deleterious outcome is a lack of understanding of how that theory worked within a mechanical wave system to give the same results in all known experiments via an instrumentation-based illusion. Unfortunately those well educated in relativity theory, often haven’t been granted the advantage of contrast this history of development of the theory gives and thus some of the most direct and critical implications of modern theory are often lost on even graduate students. Chief among the implications that should be trivial to a student of relativity is the incompatibility of a mechanical wave concept of light with the modern assumptions of relativity. However, one should also be able to expect a graduate student to also easily comprehend the mathematical necessity of conjoining space with time is only descended from the presumption of isotropic constancy specifically, and further that the mechanics are one and the same as the relativity of simultaneity. However, many published papers appear to lack this understanding. The result is that the modern consensus appears to have arrived at the conclusion that the one-way speed of light is intrinsically untestable and therefore the physics community has accidentally pushed Minkowski spacetime, and most directly, the relativity of simultaneity, into the domain of pseudoscience, leaving only the historical relativistic “ether” described by Mansouri-Sexl test theory (AKA Lorentz Ether Theory) as the only workable alternative. This situation must be re-examined at the lowest possible level to arrive at an appropriate experimental regime.
Keywords Mansouri-Sexl test theory  Minkowski Spacetime  Relative simultaneity  Aether  Neoclassical Interpretation
Categories (categorize this paper)
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

A System of Axioms for Minkowski Spacetime.Lorenzo Cocco & Joshua Babic - 2021 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 50 (1):149-185.
A System of Axioms for Minkowski Spacetime.Lorenzo Cocco & Joshua Babic - 2020 - Journal of Philosophical Logic:1-37.
On the Reality of Minkowski Space.Vesselin Petkov - 2007 - Foundations of Physics 37 (10):1499-1502.
Taking Up Superspace: The Spacetime Structure of Supersymmetric Field Theory.Tushar Menon - 2018 - In Christian Wüthrich, Baptiste Le Bihan & Nick Huggett (eds.), Philosophy Beyond Spacetime. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Minkowski Spacetime and Lorentz Invariance: The Cart and the Horse or Two Sides of a Single Coin?Pablo Acuña - 2016 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 55:1-12.
Persistence and Spacetime.Yuri Balashov - 2010 - Oxford University Press.
Classical Relativity Theory.David Malament - 2005 - In Jeremy N. Butterfield & John Earman (eds.), Philosophy of Physics. Elsevier.
How to Be a Realist About Minkowski Spacetime Without Believing in Magical Explanations.Adán Sus - 2020 - Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 35 (2):175-195.


Added to PP index

Total views
10 ( #872,518 of 2,448,887 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
10 ( #63,717 of 2,448,887 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes