"Koobee Wublee" <email@example.com> wrote in message news:firstname.lastname@example.org... > On Jun 25, 9:41 pm, Tom Roberts wrote: > >> Yes. This is just one of the theories that are equivalent to SR (i.e. >> they are >> experimentally indistinguishable from SR). > > Don't hide behind interpretations of mathematical models. There are > Larmor's and the Lorentz transforms. See: > > http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/9886f187e761954c?hl=en > > And > > http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/c5a0a3c587fd4df4?hl=en > > Larmor's transform does not satisfy the principle of relativity while > the Lorentz transform does, but only Larmor's transform satisfies the > null results of the MMX while the Lorentz transform is a special case > to Larmor's transform. <shrgu>
Are there any experimental predictions of SR with which you disagree?
Or do you believe that every experimental prediction of SR is absolutely correct?