## Reply to ‘Critical Comments on the Paper “On the Logical Inconsistency of the Special Theory of Relativity” ’

**Authors:** Stephen J. Crothers

It has been critically argued by V.A. Leus (Sobolev Institute of Mathematics, Novosibirsk, Russia) that in my proof that Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity is logically inconsistent and therefore false, I violated the basic tenets of Special Relativity and foisted an alternative theory upon Einstein’s. A careful study of the critical analysis reveals however a failure to address the key arguments I adduced to prove Special Relativity logically inconsistent, and a concomitant invocation of Einstein’s theory to try to argue that my analysis is incorrect because it does not concur with Einstein. There is therefore no proof advanced of any alleged error in my analysis. In my paper I did not introduce an alternative theory. The aforementioned critical paper affords opportunity in rebuttal to amplify the invalidity of A. Einstein’s tacit assumption, in constructing the Special Theory of Relativity, that systems of clock-synchronised stationary observers consistent with Lorentz Transformation can be mathematically constructed. Since such systems of observers have in fact no mathematical existence the Special Theory of Relativity is logically inconsistent. It is therefore invalid. The consequences for physics, astronomy, and cosmology, are significant.

**Comments:** 12 Pages. To cite this paper: Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics, Vol.6, No.6, 2018.

**Download:** **PDF**

### Submission history

[v1] 2018-08-29 07:50:37

**Unique-IP document downloads:** 120 times

Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary.
In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution.
Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

**Add your own feedback and questions here:**

*You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.*

*
*