Jochen
"Paul, regarding superpositions..."
As per a post on your essay blog, the point is that the nature of physical existence comes first, ie generically, what can it be and how can that occur. If some 'theory' or experimentation then contradicts that, then there is something wrong with those. Indeed it is likely that the flaw lies in not following the one definitive physically existent state at a time rule, failing to differentiate the existential sequence from the existential representation thereof, or not understanding the reference used in timing.
In respect of SR, here is what Einstein (not Reed) defined it as. My point being that SR is irrelevant. The underlying concept of relativity is what is important, and that boils down to (although he did not express it this way because of the mistakes he made): there is a time differential in physical reality.
Einstein 1916 section7
"At this juncture the theory of relativity entered the arena. As a result of an analysis of the physical conceptions of time and space, it became evident that in reality there is not the least incompatibility between the principle of relativity and the law of propagation of light, and that by systematically holding fast to both these laws a logically rigid theory could be arrived at. This theory has been called the special theory of relativity to distinguish it from the extended theory, with which we shall deal later."
Einstein 1916 section 18
"provided that they are in a state of uniform rectilinear and non-rotary motion...The validity of the principle of relativity was assumed only for these reference-bodies, but not for others (e.g. those possessing motion of a different kind). In this sense we speak of the special principle of relativity, or special theory of relativity."
Einstein 1916 section 22
"A curvature of rays of light can only take place when the velocity of propagation of light varies with position. Now we might think that as a consequence of this, the special theory of relativity and with it the whole theory of relativity would be laid in the dust. But in reality this is not the case. We can only conclude that the special theory of relativity cannot claim an unlimited domain of validity; its results hold only so long as we are able to disregard the influences of gravitational fields on the phenomena (e.g. of light)."
Einstein 1916 section 28
"The special theory of relativity has reference to Galileian domains, ie to those in which no gravitational field exists. In this connection a Galileian reference-body serves as body of reference, ie a rigid body...In gravitational fields there are no such things as rigid bodies with Euclidean properties; thus the fictitious rigid body of reference is of no avail in the general theory of relativity."
Einstein 1921 para 11:
"The development of the special theory of relativity consists of two main steps, namely, the adaptation of the space-time "metrics" to Maxwell's electro-dynamics, and an adaptation of the rest of physics to that altered space-time "metrics."
So, special relativity, as defined by Einstein, involves:
-only motion that is uniform rectilinear and non-rotary
-only fixed shape bodies
-only light which travels in straight lines at a constant speed
It is special because there is no gravitational force, or more precisely, no differential in the gravitational forces incurred.
Paul
PS: as per a post on your essay blog, in order to try and resolve this Einstein argument which keeps arising I have put up the first section of a paper. My essay blog, me posting 24/4 04.19. Sorry I do not know how to do links.