
Originally Posted by
chinglu
Let's first agree, the spherical light wave in the rest frame must be transformed to the spherical light wave in the moving frame or SR is false.
This is what I mean by the language barrier, and I think it may be causing the whole problem, but the problem is not with us understanding you. I think the problem is you misunderstanding the language of the theory.
Transform.
In the context of
this discussion, transform can have two very different meanings.
In a general sense, the spherical light wave in one frame can be thought to transform into a spherical light wave in the other frame, when you switch frames. Here, I mean transform in the literal sense - something changes into something else. A larvae transforms into a butterfly. That is how it seems, if you consider the situation here.
And then there is the Lorentz Transformation, which is applied ONLY to the other frame of reference - giving you the time dilation and length contraction of the other frame,
relative to you. You measure that other frame to be time-dilated and length contracted in its direction of travel.
The speed of that spherical light wave is measured to be the same, from both frames of reference. Each of the frames measures that wave to be travelling at ~300,000 km/s in relation to themselves, as if they are at rest in relation to it. This is a postulate and is assumed true for all inertial frames, in SR.
Rather than just applying the Lorentz Transformation to the other frame, are you trying to apply the Lorentz Transformation
to the spherical light wave itself? If you are, it is because you misunderstood something in translation, and I think it would explain exactly the problem you are having, judging from what you are saying.
You should not be applying the LT to the spherical light wave, if that is what you are doing because you "know there is a hole in SR". You should only be applying it to time and length in the other frame.
Just trying to help.