Tony2018

Do you mean this? Galileo said that without rocking, on a smooth sea; any observer doing experiments below the deck would not be able to tell whether the ship was moving or stationary. I can also understand this.

I read his article more carefully. 1. his logic should be to compare A and B in space, and it is necessary to have the participation of C, otherwise the state of A and B can not be clearly stated. Space-time is a very suitable C. At least it's logically reasonable. 2. from his analysis of Lorenz transformation, the implied reference point O, O', is also clear. 3. the relationship between t and t' that he derives is different from that of Einstein. Are they all right? 4. according to his derivation, A and B refer to each other, and the conclusions are different.

Your description is very abstract. Do you have any specific examples and rigorous mathematical derivation like the Lorenz transformation? Can you point out where his Lorenz derivation is wrong? It looks very correct.

But his Lorenz derivation looks very reasonable. His logical reasoning is also more rigorous. I'm a rookie. I may see only fur.

But Einstein told us that x=0, then Who can help me explain where he was wrong? I am in a perplexity. https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/113238-whether-the-special-theory-of-relativity-needs-space-time/