Special relativity paper pdf Continue Can Albert Einstein be mistaken in absolute motion, absolute time and gravity, but right about reducing space and the speed of light? Perhaps the great theoretical physicist is not entirely wrong. This paper proposes a new law to transform the reference framework for an absolutely touching observer. We can call this the obvious source theory (AST). With this transformation the space in front of absolutely moving observers seems to contract while the space behind the absolutely moving observer expands. Deeply, the ACT is changing the current understanding of the star aberration phenomenon. Star aberration occurs due to the compression (or expansion) of the space in front of the (behind) absolutely moving observer. The apparent change in the position of the star is not in the direction of the absolute speed of the observer, as it is widely believed, but in the opposite direction! The abnormal advance of Mercury's perihelion can be explained by the expansion of space, as seen in the Sun and as seen in Mercury. AST also provides a physical explanation for the new theory already proposed by this author: The Exponential Effect of Doppler Light: f ' f e V/c, q e-V/c. This agrees with the permanence of phase speed of light: f 'i' f q c and can explain the Yves-Stillwell experiment. Not only the frequency, but also the change in wavelength for absolutely moving observers and the change in wavelength for the moving observer can only be explained by the apparent expansion or reduction of space, as seen from the absolutely moving observer. AST has differences and similarities with the Special Theory of Relativity (SRT) and/or Lorentz Contraction (LC) as follows:1. AST postulates that the phase speed of light in a vacuum is constant c regardless of source, observer or mirror speed, but the group speed of light varies depending on the speed of the observer or mirror, but does not depend on the speed of the source 2. AST postulates absolute time 3. According to the ACT, absolute movement exists, but the airwaves don't exist as we know it. According to the ACT, the space appears to contract in front of an absolutely moving observer and expands behind him/her, only as seen by an absolutely moving observer, while space (or length) only contracts, both in forward and reverse directions, as seen by the stationary observer, in SRT and LC. In the ACT, space reduction is only used when objects are considered sources (light sources, EM-waves, electrostatic fields, gravity). In the theory of the visible source, it is assumed that only the position of the light source is likely to change in relation to the detector/observer, but mirrors, beam splitter and all other parts of the apparatus will be considered in their actual/physical position when analyzing the experiment. 5. In the ACT, it is space that concludes or expands compared to the moving observer in relation to the position of sources 6. Ast a new law transforming space that differs from Lorenz's transformations. 7. In the ACT, an observer is a light detection device, or a person who directly detects experiments at the speed of light and light should always be analyzed from the point of view of an inertial observer. More precisely, the observer is an atom that detects light. According to the theory of the visible source, the effect of the absolute movement of the Michelson-Morley experiment is to create an obvious change in the position of the light source, as seen (relatively) the observer/detector. The resulting fringe shift is the same as if the source was actually/physically moved in the same position. Intuitively, we can guess that actually changing the position of the source will not result in a significant fringe shift or gives only a small fringe shift. The theory of the obvious source not only took into account the zero shift of the fringe of the Michelson-Morley experiment, but also the small fringe shifts observed, for example, in Michelson's original 1881 experiment and Miller's experiments. This explains other light speed experiments, including the Sagnac effect, the Marinov experiment, the Silvertooth experiment, the Brian G Wallace experiment, Roland De Witte and other experiments. 2 Nature (absolute) movement and speed of light is a centuries-old problem. Classical light theories, ether theories and emission theories failed to explain the experiments consistently. The failure of classical theories led to unconventional ideas, such as shortening the length and extending the time of Lorenz and Einstein's theories. The basic opinion is that this problem was solved by Einstein in 1905, in his theory of relativity. The theory of relativity is based on the zero result of the Michelson-Morley experiment's zero-sum result, among other evidence such as previous first-order experiments and stellar aberration. However, relatively recent experiments seem to have revealed absolute movement, thus refuting the principle of relativity. Some of them are the Silvertooth experiment of 1986 and the CMBR experiment, both of which independently gave almost the same magnitude and direction of the Earth's speed in space: 390 km/s, to the constellation Leo. Stefan Marinov also discovered the effect of absolute movement of the first order, using a new time of flight experiment in 1975. Even the Michelson-Morley experiment did not produce a complete zero result, as is often claimed. Small fringe shifts have always been observed, especially in Miller's experiments, but the fringe shifts were much smaller than expected and therefore (perhaps misunderstood) interpreted as zero. However, there are problems with the argument of the ether. If the ether existed, why did Michelson-Morley's experiments not produce the expected fringe shifts? Proponents of ether theory offer airwaves earth's gravitational field. However, stellar stars Silvertooth experiment and Marinov's experiment disprove this hypothesis. Paradoxically, Mjelson-Morley's modern experiments are known to produce (almost) a complete zero result, refuting the ether. Ether knew conceptual problems as well. One could come up with a few conceptual problems with the broadcast as follows. According to the theory of the ether, light is nothing but a wave on the air, similar to the sound that is the wave on the air. If the ether exists in each object, then the light must also pass in each object, including opaque objects, which is absurd. As if these contradictions are not enough, there are experiments that seem to disprove not only the special theory of relativity, but also the theory of the ether. One of them is a not-so-well-known anomaly of the planet Venus's radar range, as reported by Brian G Wallace, which is consistent with the theory of emissions (ballistic). The Michelson-Morley experiment can also be seen as strong evidence of emissions theory. Experiments on the lunar laser range are consistent with emission theory and relativity. On the other hand, de Sitter's moving initial experiments and binary star argument disproved the theory of emissions. We see that all known classical and relativistic theories of the speed of light fail in at least one experiment. Thus, despite all the claims in basic physics, the problem of (absolute) movement and speed of light is still completely solved. The key question is: what is the correct model/theory of the speed of light that has eluded physicists so far? As they say, identifying the problem is halfway to a solution. We have seen many contradictions between different light experiments and observations. The problem identified here: the contradictions themselves. The first step towards a solution is to recognize these contradictions. Einstein's foundation article on the special theory of relativity of 1905 On the electrodynamics of moving bodies is discussed in the historical context. It shows how different Einstein's approach to electrodynamics of moving bodies is from the approach of major studies that tried to take all physics out of the theory of the electromagnetic field of G.A. Lorenz - the electromagnetic picture of the world. Opinions on the article are not included until December 2016. Albert Einstein's articles, published in the scientific journal Annalen der Physik in 1905 by Einstein in 1904 or 1905, around the time when he wrote annus Mirabilis works by Annus mirabilis works (from Latin annus m'r'bilis, Miracle Of the Year) are the work of Albert Einstein, published in the Annalen der Science Physics Journal in 1905. These four articles have made a significant contribution to the foundation of modern physics and have changed the way we look at space, time, mass and Annus Annus often referred to as Miracle of the Year in English or Wunderjahr in German. The first article explained the theory of photovoltaic effect; the second document explains the Browian movement; The third paper introduced a special theory of relativity; and the fourth, the equivalence of mass-energy. Together, these works have significantly advanced the field of modern physics. Von Einsteinhaus on Crumgass in Bern, Einstein's residence at the time. Most of the papers were written in his apartment on the ground floor above street level. At the time of writing, Einstein did not have easy access to a full set of scientific reference materials, although he regularly read and reviewed Annalen der Physik. In addition, the scientific colleagues available to discuss his theories were few. He worked as an expert at the patent office in Bern, Switzerland, and later he said of a colleague there, Michele Besso, that he couldn't find a better sounding board for his ideas throughout Europe.