Re: Teaching logic is urgent (the only reasonable transformatio

[pvalev <pvalev@BAS.BG>]

  Moreover, as Pentcho himself points out, they are incompatible
> with the postulate of the constancy of the speed of light.  This
> principle has been repeatedly tested and found reliable, from the
> Michelson-Morley experiments on to more modern tests.  In itself,
this
> eliminates any transformation that does not agree with the
constancy of
> the speed of light (at least within the limits of experimental
error).


Let me make a seemingly pompous statement here. Although I have not
read enough about performed experiments, I am sure the principle, in
its claim that the speed of light is independent of the speed of the
observer, has NEVER been tested. My conviction involves the
understanding that, essentially, the respective experiment is unique.
The light source must be outside the (moving) system of the observer,
and the observer must record the times the light enters and then
leaves his/her system. If such an experiment had ever been done,
textbooks would have mentioned it. I don't believe the
conclusion "speed of light does not depend / depends on the speed of
the observer" could be extracted from different experiments,
Michelson-Morley included.

Pentcho