>>>>The choice of which co-ordinate system to use in this case makes a big difference as to how the rest of the program is written. That's why Einstein banished the absolute reference frame, because he had to make the speed of light constant in all relative frames.
>>>
>>>So you'd have a more complicated transitional matrix between reference frames, which would not be just 3x3, but would also have to include the speed, time etc, whatever it takes. IOW, the transition between the reference frames wouldn't be constant, but more a tensor. So what, differential geometry is not so new.
>>
>>"A more complicated transitional matrix between reference frames."
>>
>>Not sure I'm following.
>>
>>If our co-ordinate system was a relative reference frame, then it is trivial to make the relative speed of light constant.
>>
>>But if our co-ordinate system was absolute space, there is only one reference frame, and I am not sure where the transitional matrix between them comes in.
>>
>>It might help if you explained your idea with code.
>
>I was refering to the case where we have to code for two events in separate reference frames


But if your program has code for separate reference frames then you aren't using absolute space as the co-ordinate system.

In that case getting a constant speed of light is easy. There's nothing to solve there.

It's the case where you have a single observer indepedent reference frame that getting a constant relative speed of light is impossible.

I, to be honest, think the constant speed of light postulate is flawed, so there isn't a problem to actually solve there.

But I think observed effects like time dilation and length contraction need to be accounted for in the model. So that's a problem that would need solving.


Can you model motion for all observers and still account for time dilation and length contraction?