Relativists have always claimed Divine Albert rigorously deduced his
special relativity from two postulates and countless experimental
confirmations of the theory are in fact confirmations of the truth of
the postulates. Yet lately relativists seem to have discovered
countless violations of the theory but somehow forget to relate them to
the problem of the truth or falsehood of the postulates. So Nobel
prizewinners have found some Lorentz violation and have dared (those
that are not Nobel prizewinners would never dare) to challenge Divine
Albert and "rewrite the rules of Einstein's special theory of
relativity":

http://space.newscientist.com/article/mg19325871.400
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006PhRvL..97b1601C

Perhaps in Very Special Relativity Einstein's false second postulate
will prove Very Little False. Perhaps not. Who knows.

Pentcho Valev

Relativists have always claimed Divine Albert rigorously deduced his
special relativity from two postulates and countless experimental
confirmations of the theory are in fact confirmations of the truth of
the postulates. Yet lately relativists seem to have discovered
countless violations of the theory but somehow forget to relate them to
the problem of the truth or falsehood of the postulates. So Nobel
prizewinners have found some Lorentz violation and have dared (those
that are not Nobel prizewinners would never dare) to challenge Divine
Albert and "rewrite the rules of Einstein's special theory of
relativity":

http://space.newscientist.com/article/mg19325871.400
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006PhRvL..97b1601C

Perhaps in Very Special Relativity Einstein's false second postulate
will prove Very Little False. Perhaps not. Who knows.

Pentcho Valev

Pentcho Valev wrote:
Relativists have always claimed Divine Albert rigorously deduced his
special relativity from two postulates and countless experimental
confirmations of the theory are in fact confirmations of the truth of
the postulates. Yet lately relativists seem to have discovered
countless violations of the theory but somehow forget to relate them to
the problem of the truth or falsehood of the postulates. So Nobel
prizewinners have found some Lorentz violation and have dared (those
that are not Nobel prizewinners would never dare) to challenge Divine
Albert and "rewrite the rules of Einstein's special theory of
relativity":

http://space.newscientist.com/article/mg19325871.400
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006PhRvL..97b1601C

Perhaps in Very Special Relativity Einstein's false second postulate
will prove Very Little False. Perhaps not. Who knows.

Pentcho Valev

Special relativity is what it says SPECIAL.

It simply is NOT TRUE if used in any situation where there is even the
slightest gravitational force of any kind.

This is why it is used in the microcosm far more than it is used here.

All the proofs against special relativity that I have seen were by
people who did not understand the meaning of SPECIAL in special
relativity.

Relativists have always claimed Divine Albert rigorously deduced his
special relativity from two postulates and countless experimental
confirmations of the theory are in fact confirmations of the truth of
the postulates. Yet lately relativists seem to have discovered
countless violations of the theory but somehow forget to relate them to
the problem of the truth or falsehood of the postulates. So Nobel
prizewinners have found some Lorentz violation and have dared (those
that are not Nobel prizewinners would never dare) to challenge Divine
Albert and "rewrite the rules of Einstein's special theory of
relativity":

http://space.newscientist.com/article/mg19325871.400
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006PhRvL..97b1601C

Perhaps in Very Special Relativity Einstein's false second postulate
will prove Very Little False. Perhaps not. Who knows.

Pentcho Valev