Einstein’s ether-less relativity claim was based mainly on the null effect on light propagation on Earth as it moves through space, according to the Michelson and Morley Experiment (MMX) (1887). Einstein believed that the MMX supported his inertial frame, where there is no difference between a constantly moving and stationary frame. But this is not possible, according to causal wave theory waves without PTA must mean that there is no relative motion with respect to the medium, i.e. the MMX is explained quite naturally with the medium moving with the Earth. There are no relativistic motion effects, they cannot explain the null result.
Sagnac’s (1913) classical rotating mirrors experiment provides the absolute confirmation of the medium’s presence. Relativistic effects are negligible at the mirror speeds ‘v’ compared to the speed of light ‘c’. Light is passed through the medium around a loop via four rotating mirrors in a square of perimeter d. The time t it takes for the light to pass around the loop in the medium is t=d/c. The small distance the loop rotates in the medium at speed v, is:
∆d=vt’=v(d+∆d)/c=M(d+∆d)
i.e. ∆d=[M/(1-M)]d≈Md for M=v/c <<1 (1)
PTA for the light to travel this distance is:
∆t=∆d/c≈Md/c≈Mt (2)
At typical speeds on Earth, Sagnac confirmed the presence of the medium and predicted the PTA effect precisely according to the classical part of equation 1, i.e. equation 2. Without the propagation medium this prediction equation could not work. These two experiments, MMX and Sagnac, despite popular belief, are based entirely on classical physics; they cannot be explained using relativistic effects.
Michelson and Gale’s (M&G) (1925) fixed optical loop showed that the medium on the Earth clings to its surface, increasing its speed towards the equator, relative to the surrounding stationary medium. This confirmed that there is an Electromagnetic Gravitational Boundary Layer (EGBL) with medium velocity gradients between the medium moving with the Earth surface and the surrounding stationary medium. The early objection to this experiment was that if the medium existed and rotated with the Earth out to infinity, there would be no measured relative motion. However, the medium is not rotating with the Earth out to infinity, the existence of the EGBL removes this possibility. The EGBL now invalidates the objection, confirming the mediums presence.
Further confirmation of this gravitational entrainment model is found in modern data. Saburi et al (1976) (satellite communication across the Pacific) measured classical PTA of 300ns (100m) in and against the Earth and satellite’s rotation with respect to the surrounding stationary medium, predicted using equation 2. Reasenberg et al (1979) (medium moving with the Sun and Solar System at high speed (M=10-3) through the universe in Mars-Earth communication), caused no relative motion, i.e. negligible PTA. If the propagation medium had been stationary in space, not moving with the Solar System, then there would have been considerable PTA, transmitting in each direction, across the Solar System, relative to the medium at rest in space, none was measured.
The effect on Global Positioning Systems (GPS) (1992) (satellite stations rotating relative to the stationary medium surrounding the Earth), is again classical. It is predicted using classical one way PTA causing a predicted measured surface positional displacement at the equator of 30 m, using equation 2, where ∆d=Md, M=1.5×10-6 and d=20,000km. If the medium had rotated with the Earth up to and including the satellite, there would have been no PTA. For satellites, there is need for minor adjustments which results from the long term drift associated with relativistic and gravitational effects and passing through non homogenous media such as the ionosphere.
PTA is the tell-tale evidence for causal predictions when systems move relative to the medium. All six of these successful classical and modern data predictions are explained through the classical PTA (equation 2), using a propagation medium. Whereas, claims that relativistic effects account for these motional changes are not possible at Earth speeds and short integration times. Inspection of Einstein’s field equations in his SR confirms that he used a propagation medium and did not comply with his own relative motion notion. Thus Einstein believed there was no medium but used one in his field equations. This caused confusion, it gave Einstein the capability of predicting causal (measured) properties, including PTA and LC inherent in LT, rather than the ether-less predictions he claimed.