A personal note: Another forum and I have come to a parting of the ways. I haven't been 86'd, I've just been effectively censored for what I personally considered creative and significant. If I err in my biased assessment, so be it, but a constant rule I have for critics is, prove it. The unfettered and uncontrolled activity by arbitrarily acting mentors has reached a level that I no longer care to continue my relationship with that forum, or its employees, spelled mentors, whose strongest scientific arguments are derision and sneering. To my friends and colleagues there I will truly miss the spirited and unabashed enthusiasm they exhibit in prosecuting the publication of their ideas and beliefs. So with this my, favorite whine, I welcome myself once again to the real world. Relative velocity of frame and photon consistent with laws of physics and a death to SR. The dispute over the truth of SR or not is passionately described in the context of relativity and the measurement of the speed of light. SR theorists impose the impossible physical consideration that in measuring the relative velocity of frame and photon that the frame may be considered stationary, even though it is known to be physically moving. No wonder one measures the relative velocity of photon and frame as C under these artificial conditions, it is a n intrinsic theoretical model design flaw. I know, I know, all the experimental evidence that ... The earth frame is sufficiently at rest with respect to all measurements of the relative velocity of photons and earth related platforms. This result follows experimentally even though the earth has a known sun orbital velocty of 30km/sec. There is complete agreement between the laws of physics and relativity when the moving frame observer also determines that her velocity relative to the earth platform is not dependent on the orbital or daily spin velocity of the inertial platform earth - the earth may be considered as a zero velocity inertial frame.. Therefore, using the earth as a common inertial frame for photon and moving frame we may determine the combined relative velocity of photon and moving frame with respect to the common inertial platform earth. Simply said, repeated even, the relative velocity of photons and material frames may be easily determined by using the earth frame as common zero velocity frame. All this does not impose contradictions to with experimental results. It is esential to keep in mind that what we are calculating here is relative velocity of photon and frame. We are not adding photon velocity to moving frame velocity to arrive at a photon velocity > c. Determining the relative velocity, Vrel, of photon, C, and frame, V, where C and V both are moving in the same direction, Vrel = |C| - |V|. When photon and frame are moving anti-parallel the relative velocity of photon and frame is Vrel = |C| + |V| which expresses a measure of the relative (expanding velocity) of photon and frame. As C is > V always, we use the convention of taking the relative vector velocity direction parallel to C. All the postulates of light are protected here as are the concepts of relativity. The only difference is that my solution does not require the insertion of time dilation or frame contraction to arrive at the measurement of C = 3x10^8m/sec. Hence the current model is SR defect free. Of particular importance is the consideration of an assumed fictional zero velocity moving frame is avoided when determining the relative velocty of photon and moving frame. This consideration is particularly destructive to a rational interpretation of experimental results by the arbitrary mathematical contrivance of considering the moving frame velocity as stationary. A moving platform observer may not arbitrarily consider her frame as stationary when it is in fact moving. Train stations do not accelerate and trains do not consider themselves stationary and watch train stations go whizzing past. These mathematical processes are physically impossible to achieve and using these assumed models in calculating SR results is bogus. What I mean here is that the practice of SR theorists who "determine their velocity as stationary" and the stationary frame as moving are assuming a physical impossibility. How many of you have ever seen a railway station accelerate where the people on the platform are observed to exhibit a reaction to an acceleration by the plaform? You SR theorists should best insert some simple laws of physics into that sillines you call special relativity. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Aw come on, just kidding. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!