Traditionally, standard SRT textbooks begin with a description of the allegedly then existing crisis of physics and experiments that preceded the generation and establishment of SRT. However, there exists the opinion [38] that SRT was originated as a pure theoretical "breakthrough" having no need of any experimental substantiation. The author does not agree with such a view, for physics is destined primarily to explain the really existing world and to find interrelations between observed (measurable) physical quantities. Nevertheless, we begin the book with the theoretical consideration of relativistic kinematics, not with the analysis of experiments. The matter is that several theories can try to interpret the same observed phenomenon in quite different ways (such is and will indeed the case for physics). However, it is common practice to abandon the theory manifesting logical contradictions. The history of physics demonstrates repeated changes of conventional interpretations for many phenomena. And it is not to be believed that the elapsed century was the last one for these changes.

In textbooks on general and theoretical physics, and in the popular scientific literature, there exists almost advertising support of special relativity theory (SRT). This is expressed in headings like: "on the Practical Importance of SRT", "on the Uniqueness and Foundation of all Mathematical Derivations and Corollaries from SRT", "on the Simplicity and Elegance of all SRT Results", "on Full Confirmation of SRT by Experiments", "on the Absence of Logical Inconsistencies in SRT", etc. But if we keep aside issues of particle dynamics (they will be discussed in Chapter 4), and consider only kinematic notions, then the "Practical Significance of SRT" will be obviously zero. The uniqueness and theoretical foundation of SRT can also be attacked [58,65,102,111]. In papers [48-50,52] a series of logical contradictions, related to the basic notions of space, time, and relativity of simultaneity, was analyzed in detail and the complete lack of logical grounding for SRT was proved. Also, the complete lack of experimental grounding for SRT was shown (these issues will be considered in Chapter 3 of the book); and as a demonstration that SRT is not uniquely implied by anything, the possibility of a frequency parameterization of all SRT results was described (although such a parameterization was not the main purpose of the cited work; it will be presented in Appendixes as a particular hypothesis).

In this Chapter, criticism of kinematic notions in SRT will be presented in
detail, and attention will be given to some apparent errors from textbooks.
All these circumstances force us to return to classical notions of space and
time, as advanced by Newton. He formulated these notions in *Mathematical
Principles of Natural Philosophy* as a brilliant generalization of works of
precursors (including ancient Greeks). Relativists aspired to destroy
the former conceptions at any cost (carping, basically, at the word "absolute")
and to allege "something new and great". They could present no definitions
for notions of time, space and motion, but only manipulated with the
mentioned words. Therefore, though brief comments on Newton's classical
notions [28] ought to be given in Introduction.

Proceeding from practical demands of natural science, Newton understood that
any creature is "excellently familiar" with the mentioned notions and
__practically__ uses" theirs (for example, insects that are
incapable of abstract thinking in opinion of people). So, these notions
are the basic ones, i.e. they cannot be defined through anything. Then,
it is possible to give only an enumeration of "things" that will be meant by
these notions or will be used in practice and to separate the abstraction
that will be implied for idealized mathematical calculations. Because of this,
Newton clearly separated __absolute__, __true__,
__mathematical time__ or __duration__ (all these words
simply are synonyms in this case!) from __relative__,
__seeming__ or __ordinary time__. Thus, time means the
mathematical comparison between duration of the process under investigation and
duration of the standard process. In classical physics the possibility of
introducing the universal time has not been directly connected with the obvious
restriction on the speed of signal transmission. More likely obtaining the
universal time was connected with the possibility to recalculate it from
local times with reasonable exactness. In perfect analogy to this, Newton
separated the absolute space notion from the relative one, distinguished
absolute and relative place, and distinguished between absolute and relative
motions. If the search of relationships of cause and effect is believed to be one of
the goal of sciences, then the important positive moment of the classical
approach consists in a separation of an object under investigation from the rest
of the Universe. For example, in the overwhelming majority of cases "the motion
of observer's eyes" does not exert any noticeable influence on a concrete
proceeding process and, so all the more, on the rest of the Universe. Certainly,
there exist "seeming effects", but to concentrate just upon the process under
study, they can be eliminated by the graduating of devices, recalculations etc..
The classical kinematic notions was actually introduced by Newton just for
the determination of registration points and standards independent of the
process under investigation. This founds the grounds for the common description
of different phenomena, for the joining of various fields of knowledge and for
the simplification of the description. Also classical notions intuitively
coincide with ones given to us in sensations: it is stupid not use they -
it equals "to try to go by ears".
A centuries-old development of sciences (from ancient Greeks) shows
that the classical kinematic concepts lead neither to internal logical
contradictions nor to discrepancy with experiments.

Now we shall pass to "the things, created by relativists" in this field, and consider logical contradictions in the fundamental notions of "space" and "time" in SRT. We begin with the conception of time.