From 1905 the SRT doesn’t give sleep.
1.
One postulate of SRT takes vacuum as reference frame.
Another postulate of SRT takes inertial reference frame (s).
Can we say what these two (2) reference frames are equal ?
No, they aren’t equal.
Why ?
Because all inertial reference frames are relative.
And vacuum as reference frame isn’t relative,
it is motionless, fixed reference frame.
/ Michelson - Morley experiment. /
2.
In one reference frame speed of ‘Electrodynamics Bodies’ is constant.
In another reference frame speed of ‘Electrodynamics Bodies’ is relative.
3
And the Lorentz transformations explain interaction between
these two postulates.
==.
P.S.
"Einstein's special theory of relativity is based on two postulates:
One is the relativity of motion, and the second is the constancy
and universality of the speed of light.
Could the first postulate be true and the other false?
If that was not possible, Einstein would not have had to make two
postulates. But I don't think many people realized until recently
that you could have a consistent theory in which you changed only
the second postulate."
/ Lee Smolin, The Trouble With Physics, p. 226.
First published in 2006. /

===.
Socratus

 

Aren't there any theoretical physics forums where you could post your 'theories' ??

Dealing in things electrical and electronic in nature, I suspect most of us here, do not have the depth of field and width of education in the relevant subject matter to be of much use in your quest for the ultimate ?? of theoretical speculations in ??

(see what I mean?)

 

INTRODUCTION
Modified 01-10-11

Hans J. Zweig, With a PhD from Stanford, a masters degree
from Brown and a B.A. from University of Rochester:
#
Newtonian physics is not the ultimate truth about the universe,
but neither is Einstein's Relativity. Newton did not know, or anticipate,
an upper bound to motion. Einstein cannot simply have it that all motion
is relative and at the same time that there is a unique hard upper limit, c.

Einstein’s Special Relativity Theory (SRT) attempts to solve the problem,
but it is invalid, as can be shown using several distinct approaches:
(1) through a logical analysis of the important concepts and
thought experiments,
(2) through recently available empirical results in astronomy, and
(3) through a physical/ mathematical analysis of the foundation of SRT.
. . . . . . . . . . . .

The ultimate truth is still hidden from us but is somewhere
between these extremes.

http://www.aquestionoftime.com/intro.html