I'm not clear what you mean by your last bit. First you say "which is why he ended up "justifying" a static Earth in a revolving universe" but a little later: "Einstein "invented" his relativity to keep the Earth in motion". Maybe this is a language barrier thing, but these seem like contradictory statements.
Not to demean you in anyway but it's your ignorance of just exactly what modern physics holds.
Einstein invented his 1905 STR to counter the sudden outpouring of empirical evidence pouring in in the early 1800s of a Static Earth.
The flaws of STR had him inventing GTR and introducing it in 1915....but now brings back the aether and incorporating Mach's Principle that justifies a Static Earth.
In 1916 Einstein wrote:
...in 1905 I was of the opinion that it was no longer allowed to speak about the ether in physics. This opinion, however, was too radical, as we will see later when we discuss the general theory of relativity. It does remain allowed, as always, to introduce a medium filling all space and to assume that the electromagnetic fields (and matter as well) are its states...once again “empty” space appears as endowed with physical properties,
i.e., no longer as physically empty, as seemed to be the case according to special relativity. One can thus say that the ether is resurrected in the general theory of relativity....Since in the new theory, metric facts can no longer be separated from “true” physical facts, the concepts of “space” and “ether” merge together.
It would have been more correct if I had limited myself, in my earlier publications, to emphasizing only the non‐existence of an ether velocity, instead of arguing the total non‐existence of the ether, for I can see that with the word
ether we say nothing else than that space has to be viewed as a carrier of physical qualities."
Prior to this shift, Einstein had made the following statements, five years apart, the first from his famous 1905 paper:
The introduction of a ‘light ether’ will prove to be superfluous, because the view here to be developed will introduce neither a ‘space at absolute rest’ provided with special properties, nor assign a velocity vector to a point of empty space in which electro‐magnetic processes take place.
The second, in 1910, stated: “The first step to be made...is to renounce the ether.”
So there we have it.
What Special Relativity taketh away with the left hand, General Relativity giveth back with the right hand. Few are aware of this dramatic shift in Einstein’s thinking, and of those, many are embarrassed to admit that the ether concept had to be reintroduced and coincided with the very leg of the Relativity theory that had vociferously denied it. The reason? Prior to 1916, Einstein wanted to divest physics entirely of the notion of absolute rest. The concept of an immobile Earth or immobile ether was, for some odd reason, repugnant to him. Having already accepted Copernican cosmology, the ether was the last thing standing in his way. As he understood it, if ether existed, it necessitated that there be absolute space. If there is absolute space, then there is absolute rest. Obviously, Relativity cannot exist with anything being at absolute rest, for, by definition, the theory would be nullified.
Just found this on Wikipedia: "However, Einstein himself noted that his own model which replaced these theories could itself be thought of as an aether, as it implied that the empty space between objects had its own physical properties." So I stand corrected.
I applaud you for finding that as this is not readily available ....however wiki is not so much objective information with facts as it is more opinionated.
Again, the majority have no idea about this precisely for the fact that it's intentionally being suppressed.
Einstein gets rid of the aether in his 1905 STR then brings it back in his 1915 GTR LOL! So tell me how can his STR be true without the aether....and still be true with the aether??? LOL...why in the first place did he get rid of it??? ....It's precisely because with the aether's existence ....WE HAVE A STATIC EARTH in the center! ....Einstein's preferred cosmology wouldn't have it and his STR was a way to get rid of it....and thereby keeping the Earth in motion.
Einstein:
“Soon I came to the conclusion that our idea about the motion of the Earth with respect to the ether is incorrect, if we admit Michelson’s null result as a fact. This was the first path which led me to the special theory of relativity. Since then I have come to believe that the motion of the earth cannot be detected by any optical experiment, though the earth is revolving around the sun.
“How I created the theory of relativity” Einstein 1924
How does he "know" that the Earth is revolving around the sun? In essence what he is attempting to do in the face of the data showing a static Earth against the aether....is that there must be something wrong with our acceptance of the existence of the aether ...BECAUSE we "know the Earth is revolving around the sun since Copernicus & Galileo." ....so he pushes the concept of "NO AETHER" in his INVENTED STR Theory. But again his STR can't be used in the presence of forces...gravity, inertial, euler, centrifugal..etc.
This is where he compensates and invents his 1915 GTR which factors in all these forces. But now..... the aether exists again! LOL
But now he incorporates Mach's work and Mach's Principle for the very fact that Mach's Principle is fact!
Einstein:
"The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either CS [coordinate system] could be used with equal justification. The two sentences, 'the sun is at rest and the earth moves', or 'the sun moves and the earth is at rest', would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different CS [coordinate systems]."
-"The Evolution of Physics: From Early Concepts to Relativity and Quanta, Albert Einstein and Leopold Infeld, New York, Simon and Schuster 1938, 1966 p.212
Notice now the 2 contradictions with Einstein above? LOL
Although Einstein was intrigued and inspired by Mach's principle, Einstein's formulation of the principle is not a fundamental assumption of
general relativity."
Again... wiki is not so much objective information with facts as it is more opinionated.
Here's Einstein practically patting himself on the back on the embarrassment of all the evidence since Newton confirming a static Earth and his Relativity Theories vindicating.
Of this experiment and previous other data, Einstein wrote,
"If the Michelson–Morley experiment had not brought us into serious embarrassment, no one would have regarded the relativity theory as a (halfway) redemption."[A 2]:219
In 1971 …a biography is written about Einstein. Here's his biographer acknowledging the same thing:
“In the United States Albert Michelson and Edward Morley performed an experiment which confronted scientists with an appalling choice. Designed to show the existence of the ether, at that time considered essential, it had yielded a null result leaving science with the alternative of tossing aside the key which had helped to explain the phenomenon of electricity, magnetism and light, or of deciding that the earth was not in fact moving at all.”
(Einstein: The life and times”, 1971 p. 57)
James Clerk Maxwell's monumental work with his unification of electricity, magnetism and light based off of the aether....was a big stickler for Einstein in getting rid of aether. Why? Because he used the aether!
Einstein’s biographer Ronald Clark says it best and acknowledges the M/M experiment was THE motivating factor for Einstein to INVENT Relativity:
“The problem which now faced science was considerable. For there seemed to be only three alternatives. The first was that the Earth was standing still, which meant scuttling the whole Copernican theory and was unthinkable” (Einstein: The Life and Times, 1984, p. 109-110.)
Why should empirical evidence be "unthinkable" Lol???
Here's the evidence with citations you requested on the speed of light under General Relativity:
“If gravitational fields are present the velocities of either material bodies or of light can assume any numerical value depending on the strength of the gravitational field."
"If one considers the rotating roundabout as being at rest, the centrifugal gravitational field assumes enormous values at large distances, and it is consistent with the theory of General Relativity for the velocities of distant bodies to exceed 3 x10^8 m/sec under these conditions."
(An Introduction to the Theory of Relativity, William G. V. Rosser, London, Butterworths, 1964, p. 460) Rosser adds:
And Einstein himself:
Einstein:
“One need not view the existence of such centrifugal forces as originating from the motion of K’ [e.g.-the Earth]; one could just as well account for them as resulting from the average rotational effect of distant, detectable masses as evidenced in the vicinity of K’, whereby K’ is treated as being at rest.” --Albert Einstein, quoted in Hans Thirring, “On the Effect of Distant Rotating Masses in Einstein’s Theory of Gravitation”, Physikalische Zeitschrift 22, 29, 1921
Einstein is contradicting his STR with GTR above. Contrary to your "fictitious" claim with centrifugal, Eular forces ..etc ...Einstein is showing that a rotating universe creates forces akin to gravity that would account for those forces.
So as unbelievable as it may seem ....Einstein's GTR claims that a Static Earth in the center ....the farthest edges of the universe can make a 24 hour rotation around the Earth at super gargantuan superluminal speeds!
So again....with or without Relativity.....objects can travel at humongous speeds above the speed of light.