Vasile Effect

  Einstein’s immaginary light clock was based on two mirrors and a light pulse which reflected between them, and then he made the light follow the moving mirrors in a diagonal for no reason which implies that light somehow inherits the horizontal speed of the mirrors, which is wrong and doesnt happen with waves, but only with particles or objects like balls. That made the traveled distance between each reflection longer, causing the moving clock to tick at a different rate, but thats only because his crackpot imagination illogically FORCED the light wave to follow the moving mirrors. Indeed, the way in which Einstein derrived length contraction and time dilation is illogical and pseudo-scientific because its based on an immaginary experiment where he imagined a light clock which doesnt actually exist, and which does whatever Einstein’s imagination wanted it to, like the light wave following the moving mirrors and moving diagonally on a longer path so that it could reflect between t...

There are many reasons why it is flawed, but the most obvious one is because the light in the horizontal arm is reflected back on the same path that it is emmited toward the mirror, which makes standing waves inevitable. And the light in the perpendicular arm is reflected back on the same path that it comes toward the mirror from the splitter. Standing waves do not carry light energy back to the detector. So the whole setup of the experiment was wrong from the start.  Another reason is that it was not made in a vacuum, but in air which is stationary relative to the earth, so you can never detect an ‘aether wind’ in that setup.  That’s why I have developed a much more reliable experiment which can accuratelly test whether the aether exists. This involves testing whether the Doppler effect for EM waves (for example radio or microwave) is symmetric or asymmetric, as explained in my paper ‘A test for aether using Doppler effect’, which is linked in my profile and can also be found...

Relative physicists claim that time dilation and length contraction are real phenomenons which explain experiments like Michelson Morley. First of all, they dont explain anything because they're just mathematical constructs, who's only purpose was to make Lorentz's aether theory comply with the observations like the null result of MM experiment.  Then the obvious one: length contraction was NEVER experimentally confirmed. They are all assuming that it was, when in fact it was NOT. There were several experiments done to test it, some proposed by Lorentz himself, and they all failed to confirm it. Lorentz was shocked that this happened, and instead of admiting that his length contraction was falsified, he made up another ad-hoc concept called 'local time' to explain why length contraction wasn't detectable locally. But there is no local time or time dilation either. There simply is no need for time dilation and length contraction to explain the invariance of the ...

All physicsist applied galillean relativity to waves, by using the rest frame of a moving observer as the frame of reference for the wave. But that is wrong because waves have a preffered frame of refrence which is the rest fraem of its medium. So it is simply wrong to use the reference frame of the observer when measuring the speed of waves, and add the speed of the wave to the speed of the observer and then conclude that the moving observer measures a different speed of the wave. They only measure a different freqeuncy and wavelength, not a different speed. And then they were shocked when experiments did not show the speed of light to be variant for moving observers ! Because they did not understand classical wave physics, where waves have a preffered frame of reference, the rest frame of their medium, and their speed is independent of the speed of source or observer. So the speed of the wave remains constant no matter how the source or observer are moving, and is always measured rel...

 https://youtu.be/yG5QmX0v-LA?si=B3tioT5cJP3O7Hm- 2:29 So you get the two-way speed of light c=2L/T, and the twoway time T=2L/c . But if you compare that to how Michelson Morley calculated the two way time, it doesnt add up. Because in a longitudinal direction they get T=2L/c * 1/(c+v^2/^c2), where v was the speed of the earth. Which means they did not calculate the two way time correctly. They should have simply used T=2L/c, as you show here, because the speed of the earth does not influence the two way travel time of light in any way, since the speed of waves does not depend on the speed of the source or observer, and the total distance traveled by the wave is always fixed at 2L. So they really fucked up that experiment, and Lorentz and Einstein fucked it up even harder by failing to see this simple thing and inventing ad-hoc non-sensical metaphysics to explain the null result, which is super obvious if they used the equation T=2L/c for both the paralel and vertical arms

The light box imaginary experiment is misleading and inconclusive because: 1. It is an immaginary experiment, and produces whatever Einstein's imagination wants to   2. Light is a wave, not a projectile like particle. Einstein treats it as the latter, which is plain wrong. 3. If light is a wave then its speed relative to the box doesnt change and does not add to the speed of the box, so it doesnt hit it faster or slower, like a ball would. 4. Did I mention light is a wave and that an observer or a box cant chase it ? The box cant chase the 'photon', as if light was a particle. 5. Because the light is encased in the box, there are no Doppler shifts and the energy of light remains unchanged. Light is a WAVE, and a wave always travels at the same speed c no matter how fast the source or observer are moving. How can the box move away or toward the light wave, if no matter how you move the box, the wave still moves at the same speed ? It looks like Einstein was treating ligh...