DaleSpam said:
I have to read the Anderson article (it is rather large), but RMS is definitely more general than the Winnie convention. Regardless of the intention of RMS the mathematics doesn't constrain their formalism this way. You can always set v=0 and e≠0 to get a stationary frame with an anisotropic one way speed of light. The Winnie convention assumes that the two-way speed of light is c and only allows the one way speed to vary. RMS is more general because it allows both. Essentially, with Winnie's convention every frame becomes Σ for ε=1/2.
Any Winnie frame can be expressed as a RMS frame, but not vice versa.
I may have something different to say once I finish the Anderson paper, but Winnie doesn't make the case.
RMS appears only more general because it allows for Lorentz symmetry violations in the form of anisotropic two-way speed and non-equivalence between Einstein synchronization and slow-clock transport synchronization.
But our discussion was about transformations that are empirically indistinguishable from the Lorentz transformation, making the one-way speed of light conventional in all frames of reference. Now, Mansouri and Sexl discussed
internal synchronization only in terms of Einstein synchronization and slow-clock transport synchronization; and conventionality only in terms of
external or absolute synchronization, by which they tried to emulate an "aether theory" equivalent (or not in the presence of Lorentz violations) to relativity.
So all of their definitions explicitly relied on the assumption of Einstein synchronization in the aether frame, with the Mansouri-Sexl transformation:
dt=ad\tau+\epsilon\cdot dx/c
dx=b\cdot(d\xi-vd\tau)
Anderson et al. reformulated this under consideration of the synchronization dependence in Σ. The Tildes denote that terms are now explicitly synchrony-dependent through the choice of the synchrony vectors \kappa_{0},\kappa in Σ and S, respectively (p. 144):
d\tilde{t}=\tilde{a}d\tilde{\tau}+\tilde{\epsilon}\cdot dx/c
dx=\tilde{b}\cdot(d\xi-\tilde{v}d\tilde{\tau})
with
\xi,\tilde{\tau}=\tau-\kappa_{0}\cdot\xi, for Σ;
x,\tilde{t}=t-\kappa\cdot x, for S;
\tilde{v}=v/(1-\kappa_{0}\cdot v/c);
\tilde{a}=a/(1-\kappa\cdot v/c)
