Guideline for Refutation Against Rebigsol's Article
A Simple Question from but against Relativity
Let’s devise a moving system which contains two parallel axes X and Y. As inertial frames, both axes have rigidity that is approved by Newtonian physics. Relativity has insisted that its calculation abides to this rigidity. An observer staying on X, called the X observer, inspects the movement of Y, comparing its coordinates with that of the X axis as time progresses. All time instants in his inspection are recorded with a clock that is next to him. Therefore, no back and forth time conversion between two clocks in different frames will be involved in our calculation.
1. Randomly choose one point p from Y besides the origin. Identify its location on X at the last time instant Y stays motionless in the X observer’s inspection. Let’s call this time instant tk . At some time instant t0 that is no earlier than tk , the origin of Y begins moving at speed v in the inspection of the X observer. The time instant t0 is therefore the first time instant that the origin of Y gains speed v with respect to the X observer.
2. (a) Following what is proposed, allowed, in the quoted statement from relativity and the equations enabled later by the same, determine the speed of p with respect to the X observer in the time interval of [tk, t0]. In so doing, of course, the location of p on the X axis at t0 must be determined.
(b) Now, randomly choose another time interval [tk, t1], where t1> t0. Then calculate the time rate of location variation of p on the X axis with respect to this time interval.
(c) Randomly choose a point q, which is not the origin, away from p but on the Y axis. Repeat the same calculation as what is done for point p. Show that the time rate of location variation for point p and q is equal to each other with respect to the X axis. Calculation must show its universal applicability to any point chosen on Y, which is infinitely long.
The refutation work against Rebigsol’s calculation but aiming at defending relativity is considered a failure if any of the following can be led to by the refutation work:
(1) Speed of p is not finite during the time interval of [tk, t0], or greater than speed of light,
(2) Calculation leads to different speed values for p, q, and the origin of Y,
(3) Calculation leads to speed value other than zero or v, which is the only speed value allowed in the quoted statement for any point of Y.
Note: If a refutation work against Rebigsol’s calculation considers the word “then” in the quoted statement from relativity to be a time interval with value larger than zero, the refutation work must present description regarding the moving state of Y during this time interval.