  This work deals with the questions of absolute space and relativity. In
particular, an alternative derivation of the effects described by special
relativity is provided, which is based on a description that assumes a
privileged reference frame. The present theory follows the ideas of Lorentz and
Poincare, abandoning a strict view of Einstein's "equivalence" of all inertial
frames. The meaning of the Principle of Relativity is discussed and elucidated,
and it is shown that it is not incompatible with the existence of a preferred,
absolute, frame. Most scientists nowadays still consider the basic assumptions
of the theory proposed here to be plain wrong. Moreover, they tend to see an
irreconcilable conflict between the Lorentz-Poincare and the Einstein-Minkowski
formulations. However, as stated by John Bell [Bell1988], although there is a
stringent "difference in philosophy" between both views, "the facts of physics
do not oblige us to accept one philosophy rather than the other". The validity
of Bell's assertion is unambiguously demonstrated, and it is shown how and why
both approaches do indeed agree in the description of (most of?) the physical
phenomena. Evidently, the physical meaning of the different physical quantities
- such as "time", "speed", "simultaneity" and "synchronization" - is quite
different in both programmes. And yet, for perplexing it may look at first
sight, the present theory, developed under the Lorentz-Poincare assumption of a
preferred reference frame, somehow encompasses Einstein's theory. There is no
conflict, as there is one theory. It is stressed that reality is not changed by
the choices one makes to describe it, so it is not changed by the particular
way in which the clocks have been set.
