>>13172657>>13172694You won't find any tests to distinguish the two theories, Lorentz ether theory and Special Relativity, because mathematically there aren't any. Any experiment that confirms SR also confirms LET and viceversa, and any experiment that disproves either also disproves the other.
If there's any claims to this effect, they either:
1. Don't even consider LET on philosophical basis and are searching purely for SR effects.
2. Is a misunderstanding of the above research.
3. Is a misunderstanding of the difference between the two theories.
Or 4. Is in bad faith.
Note that while it is called Lorentz "ether" theory, as far as the mathematics goes, there is no requirement for an "ether", i.e. the ether according to Lorentz, at this stage, was incompressible and stationary, and didn't show up in any calculation.
LET and SR describe the exact same mathematical theory, but use the word space and time to describe different things. They cannot be distinguished by experiment. They will simply call each other's effects something else.
The cause which made SR prevail in history over LET is:
1. Invoking Occam's razor on the absolute space-time and ether of Lorentz, as according to LET and SR it is undetectable.
2., and the actual real reason, SR was the preferred theory for the interested mathematicians, who then went on to develop General Relativity to include gravity.
This second reason is split into two secondary reasons:
1. GR, as a spacetime theory of gravity, simply came first.
2. It was believed at the time that GR had certain special mathematical properties that made it in some sense unique and special, and that the Lorentzian interpretation of SR could not be extended to GR. As such, no effort to find such interpretation was put forth.
(cont)
