As just one example, this is from "Physics Essays" in 2007:
This remodeled form of Einstein's relativity theories retains and incorporates only experimentally proven principles...From space age ephemeris generation experience and following nature's way to conserve energy and momentum, we found reason to replace the concept of "relativity of all frames" with that of "nature's preferred frame",
I can't cut and paste from this article (only from the abstract), but read it for yourself, Chem, if you care to contribute anything of substance to this topic. It's 48 pages long and, based on sound and fully articulated reasoning, it shows why the "reciprocal time dilation" and the "relativity of all frames" of SR must be rejected.
They demonstrate that there is a preferred frame, which they also call the "natural co-ordinate system," but point out that is not a matter of "selection" but rather of "detection." Put another way, one looks at the empirical results, and then searches for the preferred frame of reference which will predict those results. (see page 4)
The frame which gives accurate predictions is preferred because it is the only one which gives the correct answers, eh?
In the twin paradox, the earth's frame would be the preferred one, because it is the one which gives the correct answer. As between the two twins, one is in motion relative to the other, and one aint. The moving clock is the one which slows down.
As Feynman pointed out, it will be the twin who accelerates, because he is the one moving (relative to the other). He is the one who "blasted off" into space (an obvious instance of "motion").
I don't think you're interested in any such thoughts or considerations, though, eh, Chem? You just want to snipe and yell "crackpot" every now and again. Your motive for doing this is somewhat mystifying to me, truth be told.
Edited by Moronium, 24 January 2019 - 08:27 PM.