Yeah, so, anyway, what about something quite different, eh? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! (Post 93 refers)
No, the physical number of muons reaching the earth has nothing to do with time dilation. It's the result of the "exponential function". Muons do not only decay they also multiply along the way. Why does this time dilation only apply to some muons and not to others? http://alternativephysics.org/book/MuonRelativity.htm So it is possible that some muons decay faster than others in the same frame of reference and in the exact same environment? How does that work? Do some muons travel faster than others? Note: I am not talking about muons but photons which do travel at "c" If you say that "c" can experience time dilation you are asserting that "c" is not constant but variable, and that cannot be, can it? Mathematics of general relativity Tensor classifications The metric tensor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics_of_general_relativity continued....
.....continued OK, now read this !!!!!!! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! A box containing muons coming down from the sky is approaching a similar box on the ground. An equal number of muons were boxed at the same time. The flashbulb ensures both groups were boxed simultaneously (this is also an accepted method in SR of synchronizing two clocks at a distance [3]). http://alternativephysics.org/book/MuonRelativity.htm Note that this experiment does not seem to account for a few environmental conditions and is: 1) Based on the assumption that not all muons travel at the same rate of speed 2) Based on the assumption that the muons are distributed evenly. 3) Based on the assumption that stratospheric conditions (which may affect decay) are distributed evenly. 4) Based on the assumption that the steel barrier has uniform densities (which may affect decay). 5) Based on the assumption that all the muons come straight (not at an angle) down and follow the shortest path.
I have only been talking about photons ("c"). One illustration and analysis. Always in relation to Einstein's man in the elevator, i.e an artificial simulation of the gravitational phenomenon where the effect of mass is substituted with the effect of constant acceleration. Everyone else has come up with different examples of what they considered as related to my posit. But it is always at less than "c". Does a clock stop ticking when traveling @ "c" ?
This is all taken from an anti-relativity crank website: http://alternativephysics.org So Write4U runs up the Jolly Roger at last, as anti-relativity crank. Well I never! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! One might also note, in post 102, a classic piece of Write4U "yes repeat no" (post 93 refers), where he says: So it is possible that some muons decay faster than others in the same frame of reference and in the exact same environment? How does that work? Do some muons travel faster than others? Note: I am not talking about muons but photons which do travel at "c" If you say that "c" can experience time dilation you are asserting that "c" is not constant but variable, and that cannot be, can it? So he's talking about muons...... but he's not talking about muons, but photons, you see. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! WTF? I'm no longer sure this guy should be posting in the hard science sections at all.
Yep, Frisch–Smith experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_testing_of_time_dilation#Frisch–Smith_experiment Something wrong with this?
I am only talking about muons because you introduced them and you have freedom to post as you like. I merely brought attention to the fact that while I may be responding to your example, I am concentrating on time dilation in relative to "c". Am I allowed? Don't play word games. We're all adults here.
Yes. Wiki is different from that other site - stop moving the goal posts. The LHC is best I think muon time dilation. If I'm a student of physics would I not be peeved to be given false information in alternativephysics dot org?
I am quoting your own words verbatim, which contradict themselves in the space of a couple of lines. So if you think there's a game going on it must you that is playing it. Unless you are simply losing control of your faculties. By the way, do you even realise you have been quoting chunks from a crank website?
Wiki seems to endorse the very same Frisch-Smith experiment as demonstrated in the Youtube video. What false information did I give? I gave you two references to that very same experiment. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_testing_of_time_dilation#Frisch–Smith_experiment Personally I believe the experiment is lacking but according to Wiki it is a valid experiment, so I posted both the actual experiment and the review by Wiki. If there are any errors between the two, I had NOTHING to do with that. p.s. according to your standards, citing the LHC experiments is also moving the goal posts, no? But give me a link, lest we get two different descriptions of the behavior of muons in the LHC and start haggling about that.
No I expect you to be able to parse the sentences. You're so good at that in many other posts, but I guess it depends on your mood. What site ? This one? I see where you are very sloppy in copying the full name of the portion of that website which deals with MuonRelativity, which linked to the Youtube video of the actual experiment. Even a crank website might have a chunk or two that's valid. But I know you don't have the patience for all that. Well, I do. Wiki linked that experiment as valid. .https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_testing_of_time_dilation#Frisch–Smith_experiment Is Wiki therefore a crank website? What are you complaining about? The alternative website, because it linked to the video of the actual experiment, or Wiki which validated the experiment? Apparently you never heard of the Frisch and Smith experiment and you did not bother to do any checking whatever. That I can understand, as you have told me several times you never check any of the links I provide in support of my narratives.......Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! W4U<- Shakes head in wonderment.
Well, I thank you for reminding that the LHC is certainly a reliable source for scientific experiments @ near "c" and might well offer insights on measurable time dilation. I'm intrigued. I find it curious that the Higgs boson produced by the LHC does not seem to show any time dilation. In spite of its speed it decays at an extremely fast rate and in a short time. Does time dilation apply here? Lots to look into.
