Reply to comment

The light in the fiber is only traveling *relatively* faster than the reference pulse.
The relevance is a factor of the medium itself, as well as the spacial reference of the observers. Observers is a casual way to describe the measuring technique used to 'replay' the *relative* speeds of both light pulses.

One cannot determine that light is 'traveling faster than normal light' unless one actually IS a pulse of light. Let alone, the fact that the reference light pulse would have to exist in the SAME spacial coordinates as well (not parallel on the same plane, and not fired back to back alone the same plane/path, either!).

Of course, that is where the funky bit gets funkier... if you are trying to measure a DIFFERENCE in speed of two light pulses that are occupying the same space, well, it's impossible to do if the pulses actually ARE travelling at different speeds...b/c they cannot then occupy the same physical space except for the insant of conception.

Never mind the 'informational' side of light in the above example...because you would just have a double-amplitude single pulse at that point, and unless the waveform itself gets distorted, you'll never be able to have to pulses of light, occupying the same space, and travelling at different speeds.

So, Einstein is not yet proven 'wrong'; any more than a circus mirror would prove him wrong. 'sall relative, remember?