Thanks to a private message from Bernhard I can continue from where my previous post stopped.
(I measure V in the direction implied by post #27, opposite to the private message. Just a change of sign.)
Now consider Einstein-synced coordinates [itex](t'_E, x')[/itex] in the
I' frame. These are related to the Einstein-synced coordinates [itex](t_E, x)[/itex] in the
I frame by the Lorentz transform
[tex]x' = \gamma (x - V t_E) = \gamma \left(1 - \frac{V}{c}(1 - c/c_f) \right) x - \gamma V t_a[/tex] (2)
[tex]t'_E = \gamma (t_E - V x / c^2) = \gamma t_a + \gamma \left( 1 - \frac{c}{c_f} - \frac {V}{c} \right) \frac {x} {c}[/tex] (3)
Now choose [itex]c_f[/itex] to be the value which makes equation (3) independent of [itex]x[/itex], i.e.
[tex]1 - \frac{c}{c_f} - \frac{V}{c} = 0[/tex] (4)
which solves as
[tex]c_f = \frac{c}{1 - V/c}[/tex] (5)
Substitution in (2) and (3) gives:
[tex]x' = \frac{x}{\gamma} - \gamma V t_a[/tex] (6)
[tex]t'_E = \gamma t_a[/tex] (7)
That all seems correct to me.
If anyone other than Bernhard is following this, what we have done is define an alternative coordinate system [itex](t_a, x)[/itex] in the
I frame which is related to the
I'-frame coordinates [itex](t'_E, x')[/itex] via equations (6) and (7) instead of the usual Lorentz Transform. Equation (7) shows that both coordinate systems
agree in their definitions of simultaneity -- if two events share the same [itex]t'_E[/itex] coord, they must also share the same [itex]t_a[/itex] coord.
Putting [itex]t_a = 0[/itex], equation (6) shows that a rod of length [itex]x'[/itex] that is stationary in the
I' frame is
longer in [itex](t_a, x)[/itex] coordinates, which is the counterexample to the original implied proposition of post #1.