Why SR/Lorentz Transformation is Non-Physical

Recent posts have pointed to the fact that Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity SR is empty of physics and thus says nothing about the physical world, and so serves no scientific purpose. 

How can this be understood? We have put forward the argument that the basic postulate P of SR (with P stating that the speed of light is the same for all inertial observers moving with constant velocity with respect to each other), with the 2019 SI meter Standard is no longer a statement about physics but instead a prescription/standard/definition to follow by every observer to measure distance in lightseconds so that by definition the speed of light is the same for all observers, namely exactly 299792458 meter/second.

The basic postulate of SR is thus not a statement about physics, but a dictate to measure distance so that the speed of light is the same for every observer. 

The real question is then how well the 2019 SI Standard will work, that is to what extent different observers will agree on physics beyond the speed of light. SR has no information to offer, while Many-Minds Relativity has. 

Let us here understand the non-physical aspect of SR by inspecting the Lorentz transformation LT which Einstein in his 1905 article introducing SR derived from the basic postulate P.  

LT connects two 1d Euclidean space-time coordinates $(x,t)$ and $(x^\prime ,t^\prime )$ by the non-singular linear transformation

• $x^\prime =\gamma (x-vt)$, $t^\prime =\gamma (t-vx)$        

where $v$ with $\vert v\vert <1 $ is a given constant and $\gamma =\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-v^2}}$. 

We see that $x=vt$ in transformed coordinates reads $x^\prime =0$, which states the the origin $x^\prime =0$ in the $(x^\prime ,t^\prime )$-system moves along the trajectory $x=vt$ in the $(x,t)$-system.

We see that $x=t$ if $x^\prime =t^\prime$ and vice versa. So far LT is simply a coordinate transformation without physics. 

Physics is introduced by assuming that a light signal emitted at $(0,0)$ in the $(x,t)$-system follows the trajectory $x=t$ for $t>0$, thus with speed $\frac{dx}{dt}=1$. 

Likewise a light signal emitted at $(0,0)$ in the $(x^\prime ,t^\prime )$-system follows the trajectory $x^\prime =t^\prime $ for $t^\prime >0$, again with speed 1. 

In Einstein's SR these two light signals are viewed to be the same physical light signal, since they are both initiated from $(0,0)$. Einstein thus views the same physics being expressed in two different coordinate systems connected by the Lorentz transformation, which establishes a connection between the two systems coming with strange physical effects of time dilation and space contraction.

But a closer inspection shows that the two light signals are not the same, because emission of a light signal at $t=0$ in the $(x,t)$-system requires extension in $x$ of the emitting source to be physical. Similarly, emission of a  light signal at $t^\prime =0$ in the $(x^\prime ,t^\prime )$-system requires extension in $x^\prime$ of the emitting source to be physical. 

The catch is now that the emitting sources extended in $x$ at $t=0$ and extended in $x^\prime$ at $t^\prime =0$, are not same, and hence neither are the emitted light signals. It means that the two systems are not connected by a common light signal and so the Lorentz transformation is non-physical and so SR is non-physical and so serves no purpose in physics. Connecting to the previous post, co-existence is not the same and so the physics is different in the two systems.

Einstein is misled to believe the light signals to be the same because a distinction between $(x,0)=(0,0)$ and $(x^\prime ,0)=(0,0)$ cannot be made. 

Einstein's big mistake to give meaning to events labeled by $(x,t)$-coordinates as something without extension in space happening at the point $x$ at time $t$, thus with events being non-physical, because physical events have extension in space. 

We have now seen two arguments showing that SR is non-physical or void of physics:

1. Non-physicality of basic postulate P with 2019 SI Standard made into a prescription/definition. 
2. Non-physicality of LT as describing events without extension in space.