MacM,

So this was another of your "killer paper" that "debunk relativity", huh? Let's have a little look.

First of all, the authors assumed from the very beginning that SR was not applicable in their analysis and probably in any other cases since -- for instance -- they applied Galilean relativity (GR)'s addition of velocities formula v = v' + v<sub>o</sub> (instead of SR's one) to compute their so called solar system "absolute velocity", whatever that means. The authors don't seem to try to debunk SR (contrary to what you might had expected) but to prove that muon flux anisotropy enable them to predict our solar system "absolute velocity" (well, it is absolute velocity so it is relative to nothing -- let's ignore this part for now).

Now, if the muon velocity relative to earth (v') is 0.9991c and the "absolute solar system velovity" (v<sub>o</sub>) is 300 km/s or 0.001c, what would be v? It is v = 0.9991c + 0.001c = 1.0001c, exceeds the speed of light slightly! Then, equation:

t = t<sub>o</sub> [1-v<sup>2</sup>/c<sup>2</sup>]<sup>1/2</sup>

fails miserably since we will get an imaginary figure on the right side of equation.

You may say, hey the muon relative velocity is not 0.999c...it is just about 0.95c. Although a small numbers of the muon may have relative velocity 0.999c or more, for you only, let assume v' is just 0.95c. Now we have this situation. Based on their massive 18 years of measurement of muon flux, the authors calculated that our solar system "absolute velocity" v<sub>o</sub> is 359 plus or minus 180 km/s. Say, the figure is 300km/s or 0.001c just for simplicity sake. They computed using GR, therefore in their computation v should be 0.951c (max) and 0.949c (min).

They did not measure v<sub>o</sub> directly, they computed it. Let's try to redo their calculation using SR instead of GR (not general relativity). I estimated v<sub>o</sub> should be about 0.01036c or 3,107 km/s, ten times their given estimate! If they computed this way, shey should had thrown their 18 years research into the drain (instead of published it and misled smart guys like you) since they failed to match the figure around 300 km/s obtained by others using other method and seem to be for other reason -- not about solar system "absolute velocity".

This is enough. Did you see what I see here MacM? I don't think you did. You seem to value any paper that "disprove" SR as pure germ, doesn't matter the content or whether the paper or experiment or calculation is logical. If you ask me, I would say your killer paper here is gabage grade and I think you will ask me, "what paper have you written?" or "have you ever conducted any pasta pot experiment?"