Speed of light

Is there some inaccurate reasoning at the root of special relativity?

" It was once assumed that the speed of light was invariant with respect to the aether, and that it could therefore not be invariant with respect to the Earth. Although the aim of the Michelson-Morley experiment was to confirm this assumption, the results obtained in the latter experiment seem to show on the contrary that the speed of light is invariant with respect to the Earth. It was this finding that probably led Albert Einstein to adopt the following reasoning: if the speed of light is invariant with respect to the Earth, then since the Earth is a moving body, the speed of light must be invariant with respect to any body in a state of inertia. If we apply this reasoning to Einstein’s train thought experiment, this means that if the speed of light is invariant with respect to the station, then it must also be invariant with respect to the train, which is in constant motion with respect to the station. However, as I propose to establish here, this reasoning is not entirely accurate. As we will see, it is probably far more reasonable to expect the speed of light to constantly adapt to the current spatial configuration, although no proof of this hypothesis has been definitely established so far " — Extract from the book "Paradox of the invariance of the speed of light".

There are not necessarily only two possible solutions regarding the speed of light:

Einstein’s solution (invariance of the speed of light with respect to different inertial frames of reference);

Lorentz’s solution involving a privileged frame of reference.

On this subject, if you search for "Lorentz ether theory" on Google, you will find:

"In Lorentz's Ether theory, the speed of light is isotropic only in the Ether frame and anisotropic otherwise; inertial frames are not physically equivalent."

There is at least a third possibility

The possibility of locally privileged frames of reference.

This point of view has not been considered by physics since the birth of special relativity. It leads to a new vision of space-time, a new conceptual framework for physics.

"I am merely seeking to show that, from a theoretical standpoint, physical invariance of the speed of light implies relativity of simultaneity at the physical level. However, since the latter leads to contradictions, this allows us to definitively eliminate the first possibility. And since Lorentz’s interpretation can likely also be ruled out, the only remaining interpretation is the one I propose: a speed of light that is locally invariant with respect to certain inertial observers, due to a constant adaptation of the speed of light to the spatial configuration (*). Moreover, this aspect could probably be measured..."
— Extract from the book "And He Was Hovering Over the Waters: Towards a New Vision of the Physical World ?"

(*) I might perhaps have written: "due to its dependence on the spatial configuration." One must, for example, take into account the Shapiro effect.

Philippe de Bellescize