Why the Special Relativity is wrong

In Special Relativity (Remain of article be simplicity as SR) introduced two postulations.

The first postulation I thinks there had not augments. The second one may had a lot of augments
and hard understood. It stated: light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity
c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body. This postulation was wrong
because of it contained many unsure facts. Let’s discuss more detail.

As SR assuming, there were two inertial reference frames, one chose as stationary reference
frame, called K, other inertial reference frame was a long bar that laid on x axis and moved in a

constant speed v to +x axis with rigid length r AB

, called k. At t= t A
, the end of long bar A

overlaid with the original point O of the stationary reference frame, there was a light emitted to the

other end of the long bar B along +x axis, at t = t B

light arrived point B and reflected back to A,

arrived A at time t= t' A

(here follow the SR symbols and remain are the same). As SR, we got

two equations:
 AB
tB  t A  C v (1)

 AB
t 'A  tB  C v (2)

When A and O overlaid together, the light emitted at the same point at space, but after a certain
time the A and O separated, how to choose the paths of light to calculate from A or from O? SR
introduced stationary reference frame and long bar reference frame, also introduced Light Source
inertial reference frame. If the SR second postulation was true, Light Source inertial reference
frame can be any speed along x axis, (here we only discuss simplified condition, if Light Source
moved along any direction in space, there were more unsure facts created), only needed to satisfy

when t= t A
, the Light Source overlaid with A and O, the situation will exactly discussion as in SR.

After certain time, the Light Source could appear any points along the x axis, how to chose the
light path to calculate the equation (1)? Because the paths of light were un-sure, the equation (1)
could not create or at lease not such form. Equation (2) had the same problem.

Maybe someone said forgot the old stationary reference frame, considering the Light Source
itself as stationary inertial reference frame. That means the Light Source always rested with
stationary reference frame K. It is already recognized that the light speed dependent with
Light Source. Let’s continue discuss this situation that was a one of many possibilities that
discuss in SR.

At t=  0
, light emitted from O to B (same as from A to B because of A and O overlaid

together), at t=  1
meet B and reflected from B to A , arrived A at t=  2
. Light from O to B,
 r  v ( 1  0) r
 –1 0
= AB
C
, rewrite as  – 1 0
=
Cv
AB

In reflected situation, we assuming at t=  1

there was a mirror locate at point of stationary

reference frame K that was the same relative with point B of the k reference frame, the reflected
light considered as from second Light Source and clearly rested with reference frame K. During
reflection time, the A continue moved to a new point.

r  v ( 2-  1) r
 2
– 1
= AB
C
, rewrite as  2 
– 1
=
Cv
AB

1
2 0 2 1
( + )≠ , (not the same as SR)

Assuming time spends reverse proportional with speed, this assuming is good because with certain
amount distance, more fast speed spends less time to travel. The total time spend and one way
time spend relationship is
(C  v )
2C  0  2 
( + )= 1

Similar as SR derivation equation:

(C  v ) 1 1   1 
( + ) = +
2C C  v C  v t x ' C  v t
 
=0*
x ' t
The equation left side tell us, the space x’ of motion reference frame k has nothing to do with
time  . The equation right side tell us, time  of motional reference frame k and time t of
stationary reference frame K can be any forms of relationship that including synchronized or
unsynchronized, it is also tell us that the selection of time measurement determined randomly.
We choose synchronized time reference frame for simplicity calculation, choose the space as three
dimension also is for simplicity calculation and easy understand.

Now discuss the second condition, the Light Source always rested with the long bar reference
frame. According O observer, light emitted from A to B (same as O to B), speed C’=C+v

C’*( t -t )= r +v ( t -t ) rewrite as ( t -t )= r AB
B A AB B A B A
C ' v
Replace C’=C+v,

( t -t )= r AB
B A
C
assuming at end point B has a mirror stay with long bar reference frame and reflected light from B
to A, notice the speed C’=C-v, similar discuss get
 C’*( t ' -t )= r -v ( t ' -t ) rewrite as ( t ' -t )= r AB
A B AB A B A B
C ' v

 AB
( t ' -t
A B
)=
c
We can see when Light Source rested with moving reference frame, the forward and
backward time then equal. This is because the forward and backward light speed is same, the
length of long bar is not change. As SR derivation:
1 1 1   1 
(  )  
2 c c t x ' c t
 
 0*
x ' t
result is same as the Light Source rested at stationary reference frame.

In SR derivation, the equal forward and backward time get from the Light Source
rested with moving reference frame, but forward and backward relative speed get from
the Light Source rested with stationary frame. Such combination allow in SR second
postulation. As above discussion, it is important that Light Source links with which
reference frame. For an assuming sample, if the moving reference frame speed that
relative with stationary frame is fast than light, after overlay point, the light beam that
emitted from Light Source that rested with stationary frame, will never catch the moving
reference frame A point, not even say B point; if Light Source is rested with moving
frame A point, no mater what speed relative with stationary frame is, light beam always
propagate at speed c to arrive B point, and use the same time and speed reflect back to A
point. Time and relative speed correspondence can not break. Otherwise the strange
things are the results.
For easy to understand c’=c+v and c”=c-v, assuming the moving long bar is an optical cable,
the light beam that emitted from a Light Source that rested with A, split into two light beam, one
inject into the optical cable, other propagate in air parallel with optical cable, despite the delay in
optical cable propagation, two light beams should arrive at the same time at some space point, for
the light beam propagate inside the cable, it relative stationary speed is c  v , therefore the light
beam that propagate in the air should be the same speed as c  v relative the stationary frame.

Concluding:
Because of the SR second postulation was unreasonable, since SR created, the augment always
exist. The fuzzy postulation case the augment. In SR second postulation, it did not mention the
light speed definition with which relative was, just said “is always propagated in empty space with
a definite velocity c”. This definition is unclear, If modify the postulation as follow: “light
always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is dependent and relative
of the state of motion of the emitting body”, the path of light will be uniquely, the Relativity will
back to Newton theory.