The Sagnac effect is a very good example. Then there are various interferometry drift experiments, and most have shown some degree of drift, just far less that a static aether the earth moves through, positive results are more common than not. Results are often interpreted to agree with SR, but they don't.
Then there are findings of the speed of light not being constant (which might be a slightly separate things) varying along with the fine structure constant. Pulsar FTL has been widely reported, here is just one I found: http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2011/10/pulars-superluminal-speeds-really-faster-than-speed-of-light.html GPS Satellites have been reported to disagree with SR.. (below) http://phys.org/news/2011-11-scientists-vacuum.html <If the speed of light was always the same, then why do you have to move the mirror for it to be moving??? Wouldn't virtual particles (and photons at that) be immune to such 'extra motion? Podkletnov, Tesla, A submission to the International Tesla Symposium of an FTL transmission by a researcher (may be locatable) You must also consider that if you try and measure the 2 way speed of light which really isn't necessary (clocks can be synced together and separated at low speed), but it greatly reduces the effects of motion since it adds and removes speed, and then Lorentz transformations in an aether can make it impossible with the 2 way speed. Also consider that if you were trying to measure the speed of sound as a 2 way thing, and with cars moving toward and away from you, would you notice the speed of sound effected? If you were in a speeding car with the windows up and measured the speed of sound, still no change. If you measured the 2 way speed of sound on a fast moving platform with wind moving by, would you measure a difference? Yes but only small since the a mix of faster and slower sound readings. I suggest that you look closely at anything claiming to be evidence of SR and do your own interpretation. If you believe as I do in a fluid aether, then consider if you would expect it to be entrained by the earth (underground) or with a relative velocity above ground and not contained. If there is a small positive result, does that not mean the speed of light was found to be effected by motion? http://www.infinite-energy.com/iemagazine/issue59/adissidentview.html What does one of the world's foremost experts on GPS have to say about relativity theory and the Global Positioning System? Ronald R. Hatch is the Director of Navigation Systems at NavCom Technology and a former president of the Institute of Navigation. As he describes in his article for this issue (p. 25, IE #59), GPS simply contradicts Einstein's theory of relativity. His Modified Lorentz Ether Gauge Theory (MLET) has been proposed32 as an alternative to Einstein's relativity. It agrees at first order with relativity but corrects for certain astronomical anomalies not explained by relativity theory. (Also see IE #39, p. 14.) On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> wrote: > > John: > > Do you have a citation for all these "many findings"? I'm debating > someone elsewhere and she is not only unconvinced, she's far smarter and > better educated than I am. > > On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 10:24 PM, John Berry <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> >> Special Relativity has made the assumption that the speed of light is >> constant, this is despite many findings otherwise. >> > > >
