I can explain many, but I actually don't need to. If I can show a theory is self contradictory and defies the very foundation of reasoning itself (that there is objective truth) then I've exposed it as horrendously flawed.

It's certainly possible to make some correct calculations from a horrible illogical theory. I could create math that assumes Earth accelerates upward and come up with some useful calculations for kinematics of falling objects, but then it will fail miserably elsewhere.

edit: Despite that valid disclaimer, I can show that SR doesn't work for time dilation. As Herbert Dingle and Ron Hatch have already illustrated , under SR there is no one sided time dilation which is found in GPS. So the apparent clock slowing on GPS satellites is only calculated by Lorentz (as Ron Hatch notes) and not Einstein (who requires two symmetrical equations).

Relativity is contradiction after contradiction that its adherents paper over with bad and inconsistent logic. One relativist will give you one excuse to weasel out of a contradiction, compared to another relativist who provides another. Neither are valid. Specifically for the problem of asymmetry in Einstein's time dilation applied in GPS they have multiple excuses all of which are wrong.

1. "It involves acceleration, therefore is a non-intertial frame" The problem with this excuse is it means the phenomena is no longer governed by SR which does not account for acceleration.

2. "This is covered by GR which involves acceleration". No further detail is given and if asked for a derivation of this time dilation from GR using acceleration they cannot because it does not exist. SR is the basis for velocity based time dilation, using equations with constant velocity. But since they are bound by velocity being "relative" the effects must be symmetrical and only apparent.

I can explain many, but I actually don't need to. If I can show a theory is self contradictory and defies the very foundation of reasoning itself (that there is objective truth) then I've exposed it as horrendously flawed.

It's certainly possible to make some correct calculations from a horrible illogical theory. I could create math that assumes Earth accelerates upward and come up with some useful calculations for kinematics of falling objects, but then it will fail miserably elsewhere.

edit: Despite that valid disclaimer, I can show that SR doesn't work for time dilation. As Herbert Dingle and Ron Hatch have already illustrated , under SR there is no one sided time dilation which is found in GPS. So the apparent clock slowing on GPS satellites is only calculated by Lorentz (as Ron Hatch notes) and not Einstein (who requires two symmetrical equations).

Relativity is contradiction after contradiction that its adherents paper over with bad and inconsistent logic. One relativist will give you one excuse to weasel out of a contradiction, compared to another relativist who provides another. Neither are valid. Specifically for the problem of asymmetry in Einstein's time dilation applied in GPS they have multiple excuses all of which are wrong.

1. "It involves acceleration, therefor is a non-intertial frame" The problem with this excuse is it means the phenomena is no longer governed by SR which does not account for acceleration.

2. "This is covered by GR which involves acceleration". No further detail is given and if asked for a derivation of this time dilation from GR using acceleration they cannot because it does not exist. SR is the basis for velocity based time dilation, using equations with constant velocity. But since they are bound by velocity being "relative" the effects must be symmetrical and only apparent.

I can explain many, but I actually don't need to. If I can show a theory is self contradictory and defies the very foundation of reasoning itself (that there is objective truth) then I've exposed it as horrendously flawed.

It's certainly possible to make some correct calculations from a horrible illogical theory. I could create math that assumes Earth accelerates upward and come up with some useful calculations for kinematics of falling objects, but then it will fail miserably elsewhere.

edit: Despite that valid disclaimer, I can show that SR doesn't work for time dilation. As Herbert Dingle and Ron Hatch have already illustrated , under SR there is no one sided time dilation which is found in GPS. So the apparent clock slowing on GPS satellites is only calculated by Lorentz (as Ron Hatch notes) and not Einstein (who requires two symmetrical equations).

Relativity is contradiction after contradiction that its adherents paper over with bad and inconsistent logic. One relativist will give you one excuse to weasel out of a contradiction, compared to another relativist who provides another. Neither are valid. Specifically for the problem of asymmetry in Einstein's time dilation applied in GPS they have multiple excuses all of which are wrong.

1. "It involves acceleration, therefor is a non-intertial frame" The problem with this excuse is it means the phenomena is no longer governed by SR which does not account for acceleration.

2. "This is covered by GR which involves acceleration". No further detail is given and if asked for a derivation of this they cannot because it does not exist. SR is the basis for velocity based time dilation, but being bound by effects being "relative" the effects must be symmetrical and only apparent.

I can explain many, but I actually don't need to. If I can show a theory is self contradictory and defies the very foundation of reasoning itself (that there is objective truth) then I've exposed it as horrendously flawed.

It's certainly possible to make some correct calculations from a horrible illogical theory. I could create math that assumes the sky is falling towards the Earth and come up with some useful calculations for kinematics, but then it will fail miserably elsewhere.

edit: Despite that valid disclaimer, I can show that SR doesn't work for time dilation. As Herbert Dingle and Ron Hatch have already illustrated , under SR there is no one sided time dilation which is found in GPS. So the apparent clock slowing on GPS satellites is only calculated by Lorentz (as Ron Hatch notes) and not Einstein (who requires two symmetrical equations).

Relativity is contradiction after contradiction that its adherents paper over with bad and inconsistent logic. One relativist will give you one excuse to weasel out of a contradiction, compared to another relativist who provides another. Neither are valid. Specifically for the problem of asymmetry in Einstein's time dilation applied in GPS they have multiple excuses all of which are wrong.

1. "It involves acceleration, therefor is a non-intertial frame" The problem with this excuse is it means the phenomena is no longer governed by SR which does not account for acceleration.

2. "This is covered by GR which involves acceleration". No further detail is given and if asked for a derivation of this they cannot because it does not exist. SR is the basis for velocity based time dilation, but being bound by effects being "relative" the effects must be symmetrical and only apparent.

I can explain many, but I actually don't need to. If I can show a theory is self contradictory and defies the very foundation of reasoning itself (that there is objective truth) then I've exposed it as horrendously flawed.

It's certainly possible to make some correct calculations from a horrible illogical theory. I could create math that assumes the sky is falling towards the Earth and come up with some useful calculations for kinematics, but then it will fail miserably elsewhere.