Einstein’s Time Synchronization versus Special Relativity Postulates

One fundamental principle of physics is all observers concurrently witnessing the output of an experiment must have identical or equivalent results, especially when the recorded data are transformed to one inertial frame. However, Einstein did not apply this principle for all inertial observers concerning his stipulation of clock synchronization using light and his special relativity postulates. Einstein claimed that the one-way time interval using light from one end of a uniformly moving rod to the other end was equal to half of the roundtrip for light originating from the rod’s end and reflecting from the other end toward the origination, which forms Einstein’s time synchronization method. For an observer stationary relative to the rod, light completes a roundtrip of two rod lengths. For an external inertial observer, the roundtrip distance is greater than two rod lengths and increases for a faster uniformly moving rod. Length contraction from special relativity undercompensates for this extra distance. In all ultraprecise lab  measurements, the observed light speed is a constant and satisfies Einstein’s time synchronization convention when the distance between the light source and detector is always fixed. For the external observer to witness the same output, light must obey vector velocity addition. The Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatories (LIGO) consortium verifies these conditions as the ends of each arm move at different velocities due to Earth’s rotation, making all one-way light paths different in inertial space, yet null results are output for all observers, whether accelerated on Earth’s surface or inertial.
One key equation in the evaluation corrects a mathematical error in the distance that light traverses toward an approaching object in five previous papers by the author. An appendix in this paper contains the errata to correct the corresponding equations and replaces inaccurate summaries to correct the results and conclusions in those five papers.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Not applicable

The datasets used in this study are openly available at [repository link] and the source code is available on GitHub at [GitHub link].

This work did not receive any external funding.