Koorosh

In simple words, when utilizing a generalized Lorentz transformation that are not constant, then one could break down an event into infinitesimal events until we get inertial(ity). Taking the positions vectors into consideration, then we could make linear transformations at each point and glue them together on a base. The arguments are, if we make a synchronized observation of a fast moving event, by changing the coordinate base constantly, there will be a contraction on the observation compared to an stationary observer. On a whole both these observers could be seen as inertial as large distances make the slightly rotating observer an inertial observer with good approximation.

New version, "Lorentz symmetry broken": Kindly comment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Koorosh.shahdaei/sandbox

The 1st test with neutrino that exceeded speed of light was made in September at CERN, but everybody was skeptical, now we had the second confirmation that is convincing the mainstream physic and shaking the Relativity Theory fundamentally. This article also relieve another reality regarding Relativistic invariance and Lorentz Symmetry which are claimed to be inconsistence. People so far been skeptical but nobody so far claimed that it would be wrong either. It is maybe the time to reevaluate the counterarguments.

It was just an example to clarify, two systems are stationary to one another but not compared to O'. But in our case we can observation by O' are not trivial which is the point.

Currently Lorentz symmetries are hot topics for many researchers, and many sensitive experiments are being constructed to find violations by e.g. looking at quantities called coefficients for Lorentz violation, if coefficients disappear completely then there wouldn’t be any violations else tiny violations might be found. As regards approximately initial, for instance as earth rotates and spins still experiments can be performed as they would be in inertial system. Without considering too much technical details, as regards math for this paradox, simply consider Lorentz transformation for two inertial systems that move in parallel with same speed would simply become Galilean transformations, as theirs relative velocity will be zero and γ (Lorentz contraction factor) becomes 1, which is shown in the article.

http://en.wikipedia....hahdaei_Paradox The thought experiment in this article concerns one frame moves within an inertial frame and the other frame due to large be with good approximation be inertial... Very thankful for expert or others view.

Good now you agree that with a fair approximation, you can have Galilean transformation, once you understood that, the rest are just consequences. As regards MMX you can read in the references the most recent experiment with extreme precision, and many systematic errors that MM had, have been corrected. Also keep in mind that there are tons of paper rejecting the results of MMX, and recently it is a paper published that absolute motion is detectable if you make use different gases other then air which arguments that SR was wrong about absolute motion. As regards objects you'll get length contraction and light beam experiences relativistic Doppler effect. You need a good reading of SR, two systems that move e.g. in inertial frames could under special circumstances could be stationary in regard to each other for those LT will be GT, also people use always GT under low speed regardless frame which is just good approximation. As mentioned for large distances you could assume linearity as people do for low speed and don't bother SR.

Ok, assume a classical Galilean case; assume a train that passes between two points A and B with length L along x axis, for simplicity imagine a passenger O throwing a ball up (along y axis) and he captures that at same place while train moves distance L m during this time. An observer O’ on the platform in middle of AB standing still, he will see the ball moving in x and y direction, now imaging another observer O”, standing next to O’ his eyes following train’s motion (of course along x axis) so during distance L he is totally aligned with the balls motion, he will only see the ball move in y direction as O. Now imagine observer O' is in another train moving with same speed in Parrnell and same direction as 1st train he will also see what O sees.

You got same problematic with Ehrenfest or Sagnac in a rotating frame with length contraction and you could involve i.e. y coordinates, but in our case if the experiment center is 1000km away, the telescope of one meter length would move during a typical MM experiment about 0.00001 m or 0.00000001 km, that's an approximation for assuming linearity and was for simplification reason. Adding y coordinates doesn't make you move away from this paradox neither Ehrenfest paradox.

As mentioned this is not about Sagnac, and as many theoretical physics theories there are thought experiments, as regards mathematical support as it is about Lorentz transformation, same math is valid when you move an ε (Epsilon) on the circumference of a circle certainly you can make a valid approximation for large distance to the experiment's center. As regards length contraction it is contracted with factor γ while the coordinates are transformed by x' = ( x - vt )γ. You can't compare this situation with terrestrial GPS clock synchronization, rather you need to consider a rod clock that is consider in relativistic case.

The Sagnac effect doesn't violate SR or classical physics, and it's about traveling of light in a loop, in our case the exp. is performed in free space linearly but the observer is having a circular motion. Once the symmetry is violated the theories that are related to them can also be impacted. In this case if you can just imagine a alignment of observation by two observer, if these were moving in parallel with exactly same speed the transformation was exactly the same, this is the point.

Symmetries are hot topics is theoretical physics especially Lorentz symmetry, and there currently focus in various areas like String theory, Big Bang, quantum gravity. Symmetry violation are essential in these theories, read this article about Lorentz symmetry violation that shows Physical laws are not at same for different observers, i.e. pair-creation in a lab would not necessary be observed by another observer as length contraction and time dilation would pretty much follow Galilean transformation. Read about this article published at Science Publication NY: Full Text: http://www.scipub.or...i/pi1153-56.pdf