In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of Albert Einstein. Professors Frischand Smith joined forces with a movie producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIMprinciple of Occam's razor be applied to arrive at a much simpler and convincing explanation.
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
Below is a link to the companion paper to the 36 minute move
https://d1b10bmlvqabco.cloudfront.net/attach/j6wg9vo05d118z/hjzs14rvhz419k/j7jdyxbbpuwu/AJPpaperMuMesons.pdf
We now ask what best explains the data generated by the Rube Goldberg contraption Frisch and Smith used as their experimental apparatus? Are complex mathematical equations of special relativity, and all they imply, responsible for the data? Or can the
Homework: View the 36 min film from 1963 and read the companion paper. Then complete the problem set to check your understanding. Show your work.
Problem Set #1
1.1 What is the proper time half-life of a muon?
1.2 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel before disintegrating, assuming relativity is false?
1.3 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel, assuming relativity is true?
1.4 Why did most muons pass through the scintillator, instead of being trapped by it?
1.5 What are Legion's values for cosmic ray flux at
a) sea-level?
b) 2,200 feet?
c) 8,489 feet?
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of Albert Einstein. Professors Frischand Smith joined forces with a movie producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIMprinciple of Occam's razor be applied to arrive at a much simpler and convincing explanation.
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
Below is a link to the companion paper to the 36 minute move
https://d1b10bmlvqabco.cloudfront.net/attach/j6wg9vo05d118z/hjzs14rvhz419k/j7jdyxbbpuwu/AJPpaperMuMesons.pdf
We now ask what best explains the data generated by the Rube Goldberg contraption Frisch and Smith used as their experimental apparatus? Are complex mathematical equations of special relativity, and all they imply, responsible for the data? Or can the
Homework: View the 36 min film from 1963 and read the companion paper. Then complete the problem set to check your understanding. Show your work.
Problem Set #1
1.1 What is the proper time half-life of a muon?
patdolan <patd...@comcast.net> wrote:
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of Albert Einstein. Professors Frisch and Smith joined forces with a movie producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIM
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the
Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfmAnd typical crackpot behaviour is to go on and on
arguing about demonstrations from long ago,
as if these are still of more than historical importance.
It's a bit like Flat Earthers still arguing
about sails disappearing over the horizon,
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of Albert Einstein. Professors Frisch and Smith joined forces with a movie producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which
the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIM
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the
Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> wrote:
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the >> wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that
supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of
Albert Einstein. Professors Frisch and Smith joined forces with a movie
producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which
the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIM
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special
relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the
Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
And typical crackpot behaviour is to go on and on
arguing about demonstrations from long ago,
as if these are still of more than historical importance.
It's a bit like Flat Earthers still arguing
about sails disappearing over the horizon,
On 8/30/2023 4:30 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
patdolan <patd...@comcast.net> wrote:
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the >> wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that
supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of >> Albert Einstein. Professors Frisch and Smith joined forces with a movie
producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which >> the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIM
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special >> relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the
Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
And typical crackpot behaviour is to go on and on
arguing about demonstrations from long ago,
as if these are still of more than historical importance.
Part of that is that kooks think if they disprove the breakthrough
experiment they've disproved relativity/round earth/whatever.
sea level were just produced by cosmic rays between the mountain top and sea level, or else just above the mountain top with a higher speed that made them undetected, but both of those suggestions are utterly braindead, because (1) they explicitly pointFrisch and Smith state that the muons are traveling one thousand feet per usec.
at between .990c and .995c.
Right, the ones that decay in the scintillator are the ones that were moving that fast when they entered the calibrated stack of iron, and got slowed down to zero speed when reaching the scintillator. You were suggesting the "extra" mesons at
that were at 0.995c and slowed to zero at the mountain top. In other words, the mesons that were filtered out at the mountain top were also filtered out at sea level. They were not "forgotten". I say again: Sheesh.You are forgetting all the muons with velocities greater than .995c that pass
through the scintillator and don't get caught there.
No, those are not "forgotten". Sheesh. The depth of iron bars was re-calibrated at sea level to account for the effect of the atmosphere down to sea level, so that the mesons being slowed to zero at sea level are the same slice of the population
for the slowing of the air mass, i.e., it requires us not to be ignorant of this aspect of particle behavior.The iron depth recalibration for sea level is obviously wrong.
No, that's based on knowledge of how passage through iron and air affects the energy of the particles. If you're interested in that aspect of the phenomena, go ahead and study it.
honest experimentalists would add iron on top of Mt. Washington to
where there are no more "got-aways".
Huh? That makes no sense at all. The objective is to examine time dilation, which depends on velocity, so we need to select particles with a particular velocity (energy), and then examine this same population at sea level, which requires compensating
daylight for any knowledgeable person to check. My goodness, you objection comes down to "the bastards probably falsified the results".[The experimenters] probably tinkered with the iron pile for months trying to get
their numbers right...
That's doesn't make any sense. They state specifically how much they change the iron layers to compensate for the 6000 ft of air, based on knowledge of how passage through iron and air affect the energies of those particles. This presented in plain
And as is the case with Eddington an his bent starlight, so too with the FSX:
no one has ever been able to duplicate their results.
Both of those assertions are blatantly false. In particular, duplicating the Frisch ex is a undergraduate lab exercise. Basing your belief system on lies is not a good idea.
On the right side of Figure 6a of the Frisch-Smith paper we find that 350 out of 568 muons disintegrated in less than the published 2.2 usecs. muon half-life.
the average height above the summit of Mt. WA at which these muons
were born was no more than 2,200 ft.
Most first time readers of the FSX are overwhelmed by the huge number
of moving parts of this experiment.
A muon simultaneously [sic] comes to rest [sic] and disintegrates in a laboratory scintillator on the surface of the earth just as the laboratory clock strikes 0.000 hours. The muon's trajectory was normal to the surface of the earth. The muon'svelocity relative to the earth [sic] was measured to be [v=]0.867c which results in g = 2. The muon's clock showed an elapsed proper time of 2.2 microseconds between the spacetime event corresponding to its creation and the spacetime event corresponding
1) What did the muon calculate its proper altitude above the earth to be at the spacetime event corresponding to its creation?
2) What did the scientists in the scintillator lab calculate the muon's altitude to be at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?
3) What did the lab scientist read on the scintillator lab's clock at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?
how far will the average muon travel before disintegrating?
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 9:44:40 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:Frisch and Smith joined forces with a movie producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of Albert Einstein. Professors
the principle of Occam's razor be applied to arrive at a much simpler and convincing explanation.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIM
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
Below is a link to the companion paper to the 36 minute move
https://d1b10bmlvqabco.cloudfront.net/attach/j6wg9vo05d118z/hjzs14rvhz419k/j7jdyxbbpuwu/AJPpaperMuMesons.pdf
We now ask what best explains the data generated by the Rube Goldberg contraption Frisch and Smith used as their experimental apparatus? Are complex mathematical equations of special relativity, and all they imply, responsible for the data? Or can
Ross, you homework has been give two points of extra credit.Homework: View the 36 min film from 1963 and read the companion paper. Then complete the problem set to check your understanding. Show your work.
Problem Set #1
1.1 What is the proper time half-life of a muon?34:30, "This is an example of the Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction, ...."
1.2 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel before disintegrating, assuming relativity is false?
1.3 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel, assuming relativity is true?
1.4 Why did most muons pass through the scintillator, instead of being trapped by it?
1.5 What are Legion's values for cosmic ray flux at
a) sea-level?
b) 2,200 feet?
c) 8,489 feet?
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of Albert Einstein. Professors Frischand Smith joined forces with a movie producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIMprinciple of Occam's razor be applied to arrive at a much simpler and convincing explanation.
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
Below is a link to the companion paper to the 36 minute move
https://d1b10bmlvqabco.cloudfront.net/attach/j6wg9vo05d118z/hjzs14rvhz419k/j7jdyxbbpuwu/AJPpaperMuMesons.pdf
We now ask what best explains the data generated by the Rube Goldberg contraption Frisch and Smith used as their experimental apparatus? Are complex mathematical equations of special relativity, and all they imply, responsible for the data? Or can the
Homework: View the 36 min film from 1963 and read the companion paper. Then complete the problem set to check your understanding. Show your work.
Problem Set #1
1.1 What is the proper time half-life of a muon?2.2 micro-seconds (give yourself 5 points)
1.2 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel before disintegrating, assuming relativity is false?"About 2,200 feet"
1.3 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel, assuming relativity is true?9 times farther than question 1.2
1.4 Why did most muons pass through the scintillator, instead of being trapped by it?The pass-through muons had velocities in excess of .955c
1.5 What are Legion's values for cosmic ray flux at0.03 uSv/hr
a) sea-level?
b) 2,200 feet?see next chapter
c) 8,489 feet?see next chapter
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 11:07:36 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:Frisch and Smith joined forces with a movie producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 9:44:40 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of Albert Einstein. Professors
the principle of Occam's razor be applied to arrive at a much simpler and convincing explanation.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIM
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
Below is a link to the companion paper to the 36 minute move
https://d1b10bmlvqabco.cloudfront.net/attach/j6wg9vo05d118z/hjzs14rvhz419k/j7jdyxbbpuwu/AJPpaperMuMesons.pdf
We now ask what best explains the data generated by the Rube Goldberg contraption Frisch and Smith used as their experimental apparatus? Are complex mathematical equations of special relativity, and all they imply, responsible for the data? Or can
Homework: View the 36 min film from 1963 and read the companion paper. Then complete the problem set to check your understanding. Show your work.
Problem Set #1
Ross, you homework has been give two points of extra credit.1.1 What is the proper time half-life of a muon?34:30, "This is an example of the Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction, ...."
1.2 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel before disintegrating, assuming relativity is false?
1.3 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel, assuming relativity is true?
1.4 Why did most muons pass through the scintillator, instead of being trapped by it?
1.5 What are Legion's values for cosmic ray flux at
a) sea-level?
b) 2,200 feet?
c) 8,489 feet?
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:09:02 AM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:Frisch and Smith joined forces with a movie producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 11:07:36 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 9:44:40 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of Albert Einstein. Professors
can the principle of Occam's razor be applied to arrive at a much simpler and convincing explanation.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIM
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
Below is a link to the companion paper to the 36 minute move
https://d1b10bmlvqabco.cloudfront.net/attach/j6wg9vo05d118z/hjzs14rvhz419k/j7jdyxbbpuwu/AJPpaperMuMesons.pdf
We now ask what best explains the data generated by the Rube Goldberg contraption Frisch and Smith used as their experimental apparatus? Are complex mathematical equations of special relativity, and all they imply, responsible for the data? Or
Homework: View the 36 min film from 1963 and read the companion paper. Then complete the problem set to check your understanding. Show your work.
Problem Set #1
That's funny, I was going to shred it and make the dog eat it.Ross, you homework has been give two points of extra credit.1.1 What is the proper time half-life of a muon?34:30, "This is an example of the Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction, ...."
1.2 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel before disintegrating, assuming relativity is false?
1.3 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel, assuming relativity is true?
1.4 Why did most muons pass through the scintillator, instead of being trapped by it?
1.5 What are Legion's values for cosmic ray flux at
a) sea-level?
b) 2,200 feet?
c) 8,489 feet?
On 8/30/2023 4:30 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> wrote:
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the >> wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that
supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of >> Albert Einstein. Professors Frisch and Smith joined forces with a movie >> producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which >> the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIM
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special >> relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the
Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
And typical crackpot behaviour is to go on and on
arguing about demonstrations from long ago,
as if these are still of more than historical importance.
Part of that is that kooks think if they disprove the breakthrough
experiment they've disproved relativity/round earth/whatever. Dolan
thinks that breaking Frisch-Smith will somehow disprove muons, yet the experiment is repeated in an undergrad course. Disprove the 1919
Eddington data and disprove gravitational bending despite the fact there
have been many eclipses since then and satellites don't even need
eclipses these days.
It's a bit like Flat Earthers still arguing
about sails disappearing over the horizon,
Volney <vol...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 8/30/2023 4:30 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
patdolan <patd...@comcast.net> wrote:
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the
wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that
supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of
Albert Einstein. Professors Frisch and Smith joined forces with a movie >> producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which >> the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIM
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special
relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the
Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
And typical crackpot behaviour is to go on and on
arguing about demonstrations from long ago,
as if these are still of more than historical importance.
Part of that is that kooks think if they disprove the breakthrough experiment they've disproved relativity/round earth/whatever. Dolan
thinks that breaking Frisch-Smith will somehow disprove muons, yet the experiment is repeated in an undergrad course. Disprove the 1919
Eddington data and disprove gravitational bending despite the fact there have been many eclipses since then and satellites don't even need
eclipses these days.
Yes, and even Flat Earthers will believe in their GPS device,It's a bit like Flat Earthers still arguing
about sails disappearing over the horizon,
On Thursday, 31 August 2023 at 11:23:54 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
Volney <vol...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 8/30/2023 4:30 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
It's a bit like Flat Earthers still arguing
about sails disappearing over the horizon,
Yes, and even Flat Earthers will believe in their GPS device,
Only relativistic idiots insist it is improper and
broken.
On 8/31/2023 5:59 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
On Thursday, 31 August 2023 at 11:23:54 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
Volney <vol...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 8/30/2023 4:30 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
It's a bit like Flat Earthers still arguing
about sails disappearing over the horizon,
Yes, and even Flat Earthers will believe in their GPS device,
Only relativistic idiots insist it is improper andAnd speaking of flat-earthers believing in GPS devices, along comes our janitor, so similar, claiming GPS works despite also claiming (without evidence, of course) to have disproven relativity.
broken.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 9:09:11 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:Professors Frisch and Smith joined forces with a movie producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:09:02 AM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 11:07:36 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 9:44:40 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of Albert Einstein.
can the principle of Occam's razor be applied to arrive at a much simpler and convincing explanation.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIM
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
Below is a link to the companion paper to the 36 minute move
https://d1b10bmlvqabco.cloudfront.net/attach/j6wg9vo05d118z/hjzs14rvhz419k/j7jdyxbbpuwu/AJPpaperMuMesons.pdf
We now ask what best explains the data generated by the Rube Goldberg contraption Frisch and Smith used as their experimental apparatus? Are complex mathematical equations of special relativity, and all they imply, responsible for the data? Or
Homework: View the 36 min film from 1963 and read the companion paper. Then complete the problem set to check your understanding. Show your work.
Problem Set #1
Now, the reason why I commented, was, that, when they mentioned "Lorentz _Fitzgerald_ contraction",That's funny, I was going to shred it and make the dog eat it.Ross, you homework has been give two points of extra credit.1.1 What is the proper time half-life of a muon?34:30, "This is an example of the Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction, ...."
1.2 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel before disintegrating, assuming relativity is false?
1.3 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel, assuming relativity is true?
1.4 Why did most muons pass through the scintillator, instead of being trapped by it?
1.5 What are Legion's values for cosmic ray flux at
a) sea-level?
b) 2,200 feet?
c) 8,489 feet?
I immediately related that to the notion that _Fitzgerald_ contraction is _space_ contraction which always combines length contraction and time dilation, and Patty as you know: I _demand_ space contraction.
Then I have a very strong admiration for a very correct opinion and a very sound intuition and a quite comprehensive foundation.
And not much for less.
Mathematics _owes_ physics more and better mathematics of infinity and the continuum, and immediately
in the foundations instead of contradictarily at the other end, and gravity deserves its place _right in the middle_. (Of GR and QM.)
... Which makes for real space contraction and a fall gravity.
... All quite consistently with Einstein's final theory of course, and in line with his goals of a total field theory,
and with regards to his deconstructive account of classical motion.
It's a continuum mechanics, ....
It's a bit like Flat Earthers still arguing
about sails disappearing over the horizon,
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 9:48:38 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:Professors Frisch and Smith joined forces with a movie producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 9:09:11 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:09:02 AM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 11:07:36 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 9:44:40 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of Albert Einstein.
Or can the principle of Occam's razor be applied to arrive at a much simpler and convincing explanation.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIM
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
Below is a link to the companion paper to the 36 minute move
https://d1b10bmlvqabco.cloudfront.net/attach/j6wg9vo05d118z/hjzs14rvhz419k/j7jdyxbbpuwu/AJPpaperMuMesons.pdf
We now ask what best explains the data generated by the Rube Goldberg contraption Frisch and Smith used as their experimental apparatus? Are complex mathematical equations of special relativity, and all they imply, responsible for the data?
Homework: View the 36 min film from 1963 and read the companion paper. Then complete the problem set to check your understanding. Show your work.
Problem Set #1
No Ross, I did not know about your strong feelings for space contraction. Then you must be a fan of my Lorentz contraction velocity formula.Now, the reason why I commented, was, that, when they mentioned "Lorentz _Fitzgerald_ contraction",That's funny, I was going to shred it and make the dog eat it.Ross, you homework has been give two points of extra credit.1.1 What is the proper time half-life of a muon?34:30, "This is an example of the Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction, ...."
1.2 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel before disintegrating, assuming relativity is false?
1.3 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel, assuming relativity is true?
1.4 Why did most muons pass through the scintillator, instead of being trapped by it?
1.5 What are Legion's values for cosmic ray flux at
a) sea-level?
b) 2,200 feet?
c) 8,489 feet?
I immediately related that to the notion that _Fitzgerald_ contraction is _space_ contraction which always combines length contraction and time dilation, and Patty as you know: I _demand_ space contraction.
Then I have a very strong admiration for a very correct opinion and a very sound intuition and a quite comprehensive foundation.
And not much for less.
Mathematics _owes_ physics more and better mathematics of infinity and the continuum, and immediately
in the foundations instead of contradictarily at the other end, and gravity deserves its place _right in the middle_. (Of GR and QM.)
... Which makes for real space contraction and a fall gravity.
... All quite consistently with Einstein's final theory of course, and in line with his goals of a total field theory,
and with regards to his deconstructive account of classical motion.
It's a continuum mechanics, ....
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 3:40:37 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:Professors Frisch and Smith joined forces with a movie producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 9:48:38 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 9:09:11 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:09:02 AM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 11:07:36 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 9:44:40 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of Albert Einstein.
Or can the principle of Occam's razor be applied to arrive at a much simpler and convincing explanation.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIM
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
Below is a link to the companion paper to the 36 minute move
https://d1b10bmlvqabco.cloudfront.net/attach/j6wg9vo05d118z/hjzs14rvhz419k/j7jdyxbbpuwu/AJPpaperMuMesons.pdf
We now ask what best explains the data generated by the Rube Goldberg contraption Frisch and Smith used as their experimental apparatus? Are complex mathematical equations of special relativity, and all they imply, responsible for the data?
Homework: View the 36 min film from 1963 and read the companion paper. Then complete the problem set to check your understanding. Show your work.
Problem Set #1
No Ross, I did not know about your strong feelings for space contraction. Then you must be a fan of my Lorentz contraction velocity formula.Now, the reason why I commented, was, that, when they mentioned "Lorentz _Fitzgerald_ contraction",That's funny, I was going to shred it and make the dog eat it.Ross, you homework has been give two points of extra credit.1.1 What is the proper time half-life of a muon?34:30, "This is an example of the Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction, ...."
1.2 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel before disintegrating, assuming relativity is false?
1.3 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel, assuming relativity is true?
1.4 Why did most muons pass through the scintillator, instead of being trapped by it?
1.5 What are Legion's values for cosmic ray flux at
a) sea-level?
b) 2,200 feet?
c) 8,489 feet?
I immediately related that to the notion that _Fitzgerald_ contraction is _space_ contraction which always combines length contraction and time dilation, and Patty as you know: I _demand_ space contraction.
Then I have a very strong admiration for a very correct opinion and a very sound intuition and a quite comprehensive foundation.
And not much for less.
Mathematics _owes_ physics more and better mathematics of infinity and the continuum, and immediately
in the foundations instead of contradictarily at the other end, and gravity deserves its place _right in the middle_. (Of GR and QM.)
... Which makes for real space contraction and a fall gravity.
... All quite consistently with Einstein's final theory of course, and in line with his goals of a total field theory,
and with regards to his deconstructive account of classical motion.
I remember challenging you to the duel. But I no longer recall the issue(s) between us. It was a duel to be fought at dawn the following day. And it was to be fought online. Did we ever decide what our weapons were to be?No, I don't think so, because you have a privileged frame that isn't the moving frame.It's a continuum mechanics, ....
I figured you'd be familiar with my opinion about length contraction and time dilation
and they're only together and space contraction, from the "Open Letter to..." me
and when you challenged me to stand up about dogma and of course there was the
"I demand space contraction" bit which rhymes with "I demand retraction" and I demand satisfaction", then the "my study is mathematical foundations, with physics second".
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 3:40:37 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:Professors Frisch and Smith joined forces with a movie producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 9:48:38 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 9:09:11 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:09:02 AM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 11:07:36 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 9:44:40 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of Albert Einstein.
Or can the principle of Occam's razor be applied to arrive at a much simpler and convincing explanation.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIM
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
Below is a link to the companion paper to the 36 minute move
https://d1b10bmlvqabco.cloudfront.net/attach/j6wg9vo05d118z/hjzs14rvhz419k/j7jdyxbbpuwu/AJPpaperMuMesons.pdf
We now ask what best explains the data generated by the Rube Goldberg contraption Frisch and Smith used as their experimental apparatus? Are complex mathematical equations of special relativity, and all they imply, responsible for the data?
Homework: View the 36 min film from 1963 and read the companion paper. Then complete the problem set to check your understanding. Show your work.
Problem Set #1
No Ross, I did not know about your strong feelings for space contraction. Then you must be a fan of my Lorentz contraction velocity formula.Now, the reason why I commented, was, that, when they mentioned "Lorentz _Fitzgerald_ contraction",That's funny, I was going to shred it and make the dog eat it.Ross, you homework has been give two points of extra credit.1.1 What is the proper time half-life of a muon?34:30, "This is an example of the Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction, ...."
1.2 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel before disintegrating, assuming relativity is false?
1.3 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel, assuming relativity is true?
1.4 Why did most muons pass through the scintillator, instead of being trapped by it?
1.5 What are Legion's values for cosmic ray flux at
a) sea-level?
b) 2,200 feet?
c) 8,489 feet?
I immediately related that to the notion that _Fitzgerald_ contraction is _space_ contraction which always combines length contraction and time dilation, and Patty as you know: I _demand_ space contraction.
Then I have a very strong admiration for a very correct opinion and a very sound intuition and a quite comprehensive foundation.
And not much for less.
Mathematics _owes_ physics more and better mathematics of infinity and the continuum, and immediately
in the foundations instead of contradictarily at the other end, and gravity deserves its place _right in the middle_. (Of GR and QM.)
... Which makes for real space contraction and a fall gravity.
... All quite consistently with Einstein's final theory of course, and in line with his goals of a total field theory,
and with regards to his deconstructive account of classical motion.
No, I don't think so, because you have a privileged frame that isn't the moving frame.It's a continuum mechanics, ....
I figured you'd be familiar with my opinion about length contraction and time dilation
and they're only together and space contraction, from the "Open Letter to..." me
and when you challenged me to stand up about dogma and of course there was the
"I demand space contraction" bit which rhymes with "I demand retraction" and I demand satisfaction", then the "my study is mathematical foundations, with physics second".
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 6:13:10 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:Professors Frisch and Smith joined forces with a movie producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 3:40:37 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 9:48:38 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 9:09:11 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:09:02 AM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 11:07:36 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 9:44:40 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of Albert Einstein.
data? Or can the principle of Occam's razor be applied to arrive at a much simpler and convincing explanation.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIM
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
Below is a link to the companion paper to the 36 minute move
https://d1b10bmlvqabco.cloudfront.net/attach/j6wg9vo05d118z/hjzs14rvhz419k/j7jdyxbbpuwu/AJPpaperMuMesons.pdf
We now ask what best explains the data generated by the Rube Goldberg contraption Frisch and Smith used as their experimental apparatus? Are complex mathematical equations of special relativity, and all they imply, responsible for the
Homework: View the 36 min film from 1963 and read the companion paper. Then complete the problem set to check your understanding. Show your work.
Problem Set #1
No Ross, I did not know about your strong feelings for space contraction. Then you must be a fan of my Lorentz contraction velocity formula.Now, the reason why I commented, was, that, when they mentioned "Lorentz _Fitzgerald_ contraction",That's funny, I was going to shred it and make the dog eat it.Ross, you homework has been give two points of extra credit.1.1 What is the proper time half-life of a muon?34:30, "This is an example of the Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction, ...."
1.2 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel before disintegrating, assuming relativity is false?
1.3 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel, assuming relativity is true?
1.4 Why did most muons pass through the scintillator, instead of being trapped by it?
1.5 What are Legion's values for cosmic ray flux at
a) sea-level?
b) 2,200 feet?
c) 8,489 feet?
I immediately related that to the notion that _Fitzgerald_ contraction is _space_ contraction which always combines length contraction and time dilation, and Patty as you know: I _demand_ space contraction.
Then I have a very strong admiration for a very correct opinion and a very sound intuition and a quite comprehensive foundation.
And not much for less.
Mathematics _owes_ physics more and better mathematics of infinity and the continuum, and immediately
in the foundations instead of contradictarily at the other end, and gravity deserves its place _right in the middle_. (Of GR and QM.)
... Which makes for real space contraction and a fall gravity.
... All quite consistently with Einstein's final theory of course, and in line with his goals of a total field theory,
and with regards to his deconstructive account of classical motion.
All frames are moving. Even still in gravity on Earth shares the Earth rotation.No, I don't think so, because you have a privileged frame that isn't the moving frame.It's a continuum mechanics, ....
Are you arguing against no absolute rest?
The universe is filled with frames to compare. So how
is relativity going to be accurate?
I figured you'd be familiar with my opinion about length contraction and time dilationIf time slows down it can speed back up. It happens in space travel.
and they're only together and space contraction, from the "Open Letter to..." me
and when you challenged me to stand up about dogma and of course there was the
"I demand space contraction" bit which rhymes with "I demand retraction" and
I demand satisfaction", then the "my study is mathematical foundations, with physics second".
Mitchell Raemsch
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 6:41:39 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:Professors Frisch and Smith joined forces with a movie producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 6:13:10 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 3:40:37 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 9:48:38 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 9:09:11 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:09:02 AM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 11:07:36 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 9:44:40 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of Albert Einstein.
data? Or can the principle of Occam's razor be applied to arrive at a much simpler and convincing explanation.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIM
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
Below is a link to the companion paper to the 36 minute move
https://d1b10bmlvqabco.cloudfront.net/attach/j6wg9vo05d118z/hjzs14rvhz419k/j7jdyxbbpuwu/AJPpaperMuMesons.pdf
We now ask what best explains the data generated by the Rube Goldberg contraption Frisch and Smith used as their experimental apparatus? Are complex mathematical equations of special relativity, and all they imply, responsible for the
Homework: View the 36 min film from 1963 and read the companion paper. Then complete the problem set to check your understanding. Show your work.
Problem Set #1
No Ross, I did not know about your strong feelings for space contraction. Then you must be a fan of my Lorentz contraction velocity formula.Now, the reason why I commented, was, that, when they mentioned "Lorentz _Fitzgerald_ contraction",That's funny, I was going to shred it and make the dog eat it.Ross, you homework has been give two points of extra credit.1.1 What is the proper time half-life of a muon?34:30, "This is an example of the Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction, ...."
1.2 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel before disintegrating, assuming relativity is false?
1.3 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel, assuming relativity is true?
1.4 Why did most muons pass through the scintillator, instead of being trapped by it?
1.5 What are Legion's values for cosmic ray flux at
a) sea-level?
b) 2,200 feet?
c) 8,489 feet?
I immediately related that to the notion that _Fitzgerald_ contraction is _space_ contraction which always combines length contraction and time dilation, and Patty as you know: I _demand_ space contraction.
Then I have a very strong admiration for a very correct opinion and a very sound intuition and a quite comprehensive foundation.
And not much for less.
Mathematics _owes_ physics more and better mathematics of infinity and the continuum, and immediately
in the foundations instead of contradictarily at the other end, and gravity deserves its place _right in the middle_. (Of GR and QM.)
... Which makes for real space contraction and a fall gravity.
... All quite consistently with Einstein's final theory of course, and in line with his goals of a total field theory,
and with regards to his deconstructive account of classical motion.
All frames are moving. Even still in gravity on Earth shares the Earth rotation.No, I don't think so, because you have a privileged frame that isn't the moving frame.It's a continuum mechanics, ....
Are you arguing against no absolute rest?
The universe is filled with frames to compare. So how
is relativity going to be accurate?
I figured you'd be familiar with my opinion about length contraction and time dilationIf time slows down it can speed back up. It happens in space travel.
and they're only together and space contraction, from the "Open Letter to..." me
and when you challenged me to stand up about dogma and of course there was the
"I demand space contraction" bit which rhymes with "I demand retraction" and
I demand satisfaction", then the "my study is mathematical foundations, with physics second".
Time only slows and length only shortens--under the effects of increasing relative velocity and increasing gravity. This leads directly to another Einstein-esque mathematical inferenceMitchell Raemsch"Time only slows", is the catch-phrase with respect to this notion in the many hundreds
and more posts I less-than-surreptitiously insert in these essays.
State and change are complements. "Complementary duals".
I really like to read so I wrote about ten thousand posts to print out.
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 7:40:16 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:Professors Frisch and Smith joined forces with a movie producer on a 36 min empirical "demonstration" of time dilation in which the pi meson (nee) now the muon, is the hero of the story:
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 6:41:39 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 6:13:10 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 3:40:37 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 9:48:38 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 9:09:11 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:09:02 AM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 11:07:36 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 9:44:40 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
In the early 1960s two academics threw caution of confirmation bias to the wind then painstakingly put together and experimental narrative that supposedly confirmed for the first time the relativistic time dilation of Albert Einstein.
data? Or can the principle of Occam's razor be applied to arrive at a much simpler and convincing explanation.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbzt8gDSYIM
This "demonstration" is considered so fundamental to the cause of special relativity that a commemorative plaque was placed on the site of the Frisch Smith Experiment in 2014.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201412/muon.cfm
Below is a link to the companion paper to the 36 minute move
https://d1b10bmlvqabco.cloudfront.net/attach/j6wg9vo05d118z/hjzs14rvhz419k/j7jdyxbbpuwu/AJPpaperMuMesons.pdf
We now ask what best explains the data generated by the Rube Goldberg contraption Frisch and Smith used as their experimental apparatus? Are complex mathematical equations of special relativity, and all they imply, responsible for the
Homework: View the 36 min film from 1963 and read the companion paper. Then complete the problem set to check your understanding. Show your work.
Problem Set #1
No Ross, I did not know about your strong feelings for space contraction. Then you must be a fan of my Lorentz contraction velocity formula.Now, the reason why I commented, was, that, when they mentioned "Lorentz _Fitzgerald_ contraction",That's funny, I was going to shred it and make the dog eat it.Ross, you homework has been give two points of extra credit.1.1 What is the proper time half-life of a muon?34:30, "This is an example of the Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction, ...."
1.2 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel before disintegrating, assuming relativity is false?
1.3 According to Frisch and Smith, how far will the average muon travel, assuming relativity is true?
1.4 Why did most muons pass through the scintillator, instead of being trapped by it?
1.5 What are Legion's values for cosmic ray flux at
a) sea-level?
b) 2,200 feet?
c) 8,489 feet?
I immediately related that to the notion that _Fitzgerald_ contraction is _space_ contraction which always combines length contraction and time dilation, and Patty as you know: I _demand_ space contraction.
Then I have a very strong admiration for a very correct opinion and a very sound intuition and a quite comprehensive foundation.
And not much for less.
Mathematics _owes_ physics more and better mathematics of infinity and the continuum, and immediately
in the foundations instead of contradictarily at the other end, and gravity deserves its place _right in the middle_. (Of GR and QM.)
... Which makes for real space contraction and a fall gravity.
... All quite consistently with Einstein's final theory of course, and in line with his goals of a total field theory,
and with regards to his deconstructive account of classical motion.
All frames are moving. Even still in gravity on Earth shares the Earth rotation.No, I don't think so, because you have a privileged frame that isn't the moving frame.It's a continuum mechanics, ....
Are you arguing against no absolute rest?
The universe is filled with frames to compare. So how
is relativity going to be accurate?
I figured you'd be familiar with my opinion about length contraction and time dilationIf time slows down it can speed back up. It happens in space travel.
and they're only together and space contraction, from the "Open Letter to..." me
and when you challenged me to stand up about dogma and of course there was the
"I demand space contraction" bit which rhymes with "I demand retraction" and
I demand satisfaction", then the "my study is mathematical foundations, with physics second".
Mitchell Raemsch"Time only slows", is the catch-phrase with respect to this notion in the many hundreds
and more posts I less-than-surreptitiously insert in these essays.
State and change are complements. "Complementary duals".
I really like to read so I wrote about ten thousand posts to print out.Time only slows and length only shortens--under the effects of increasing relative velocity and increasing gravity. This leads directly to another Einstein-esque mathematical inference
v = const x mass
m/s = const x mass
t = length/(mass x cost)
Eureka! I have answered the ancient question: what is time?
sea level were just produced by cosmic rays between the mountain top and sea level, or else just above the mountain top with a higher speed that made them undetected, but both of those suggestions are utterly braindead, because (1) they explicitly pointFrisch and Smith state that the muons are traveling one thousand feet per usec.
at between .990c and .995c.
Right, the ones that decay in the scintillator are the ones that were moving that fast when they entered the calibrated stack of iron, and got slowed down to zero speed when reaching the scintillator. You were suggesting the "extra" mesons at
that were at 0.995c and slowed to zero at the mountain top. In other words, the mesons that were filtered out at the mountain top were also filtered out at sea level. They were not "forgotten". I say again: Sheesh.You are forgetting all the muons with velocities greater than .995c that pass
through the scintillator and don't get caught there.
No, those are not "forgotten". Sheesh. The depth of iron bars was re-calibrated at sea level to account for the effect of the atmosphere down to sea level, so that the mesons being slowed to zero at sea level are the same slice of the population
for the slowing of the air mass, i.e., it requires us not to be ignorant of this aspect of particle behavior.The iron depth recalibration for sea level is obviously wrong.
No, that's based on knowledge of how passage through iron and air affects the energy of the particles. If you're interested in that aspect of the phenomena, go ahead and study it.
honest experimentalists would add iron on top of Mt. Washington to
where there are no more "got-aways".
Huh? That makes no sense at all. The objective is to examine time dilation, which depends on velocity, so we need to select particles with a particular velocity (energy), and then examine this same population at sea level, which requires compensating
daylight for any knowledgeable person to check. My goodness, you objection comes down to "the bastards probably falsified the results".[The experimenters] probably tinkered with the iron pile for months trying to get
their numbers right...
That's doesn't make any sense. They state specifically how much they change the iron layers to compensate for the 6000 ft of air, based on knowledge of how passage through iron and air affect the energies of those particles. This presented in plain
And as is the case with Eddington an his bent starlight, so too with the FSX:
no one has ever been able to duplicate their results.
Both of those assertions are blatantly false. In particular, duplicating the Frisch ex is a undergraduate lab exercise. Basing your belief system on lies is not a good idea.
On the right side of Figure 6a of the Frisch-Smith paper we find that 350 out of 568 muons disintegrated in less than the published 2.2 usecs. muon half-life.
the average height above the summit of Mt. WA at which these muons
were born was no more than 2,200 ft.
Most first time readers of the FSX are overwhelmed by the huge number
of moving parts of this experiment.
A muon simultaneously [sic] comes to rest [sic] and disintegrates in a laboratory scintillator on the surface of the earth just as the laboratory clock strikes 0.000 hours. The muon's trajectory was normal to the surface of the earth. The muon'svelocity relative to the earth [sic] was measured to be [v=]0.867c which results in g = 2. The muon's clock showed an elapsed proper time of 2.2 microseconds between the spacetime event corresponding to its creation and the spacetime event corresponding
1) What did the muon calculate its proper altitude above the earth to be at the spacetime event corresponding to its creation?
2) What did the scientists in the scintillator lab calculate the muon's altitude to be at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?
3) What did the lab scientist read on the scintillator lab's clock at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?
how far will the average muon travel before disintegrating?
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 7:54:08 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:at sea level were just produced by cosmic rays between the mountain top and sea level, or else just above the mountain top with a higher speed that made them undetected, but both of those suggestions are utterly braindead, because (1) they explicitly
Frisch and Smith state that the muons are traveling one thousand feet per usec.
at between .990c and .995c.
Right, the ones that decay in the scintillator are the ones that were moving that fast when they entered the calibrated stack of iron, and got slowed down to zero speed when reaching the scintillator. You were suggesting the "extra" mesons
population that were at 0.995c and slowed to zero at the mountain top. In other words, the mesons that were filtered out at the mountain top were also filtered out at sea level. They were not "forgotten". I say again: Sheesh.You are forgetting all the muons with velocities greater than .995c that pass
through the scintillator and don't get caught there.
No, those are not "forgotten". Sheesh. The depth of iron bars was re-calibrated at sea level to account for the effect of the atmosphere down to sea level, so that the mesons being slowed to zero at sea level are the same slice of the
compensating for the slowing of the air mass, i.e., it requires us not to be ignorant of this aspect of particle behavior.The iron depth recalibration for sea level is obviously wrong.
No, that's based on knowledge of how passage through iron and air affects the energy of the particles. If you're interested in that aspect of the phenomena, go ahead and study it.
honest experimentalists would add iron on top of Mt. Washington to where there are no more "got-aways".
Huh? That makes no sense at all. The objective is to examine time dilation, which depends on velocity, so we need to select particles with a particular velocity (energy), and then examine this same population at sea level, which requires
daylight for any knowledgeable person to check. My goodness, you objection comes down to "the bastards probably falsified the results".[The experimenters] probably tinkered with the iron pile for months trying to get
their numbers right...
That's doesn't make any sense. They state specifically how much they change the iron layers to compensate for the 6000 ft of air, based on knowledge of how passage through iron and air affect the energies of those particles. This presented in plain
elapsed proper time the expected number of survivors would be about 27, whereas if the proper time of the muons at that speed is 0.7 usecs (which is the predicted relativistic proper time at that speed) the expected number would be about 412. TheAnd as is the case with Eddington an his bent starlight, so too with the FSX:
no one has ever been able to duplicate their results.
Both of those assertions are blatantly false. In particular, duplicating the Frisch ex is a undergraduate lab exercise. Basing your belief system on lies is not a good idea.
On the right side of Figure 6a of the Frisch-Smith paper we find that 350 outHuh? What's shown on the right side of that figure is the expected number of surviving muons after a noted amount of proper time, given that they have a proper half-life of 2.2 usecs. The elapsed coordinate time is 6.4 usecs, so if that was also the
of 568 muons disintegrated in less than the published 2.2 usecs. muon half-life.
mountain top, with that specific depth of iron.the average height above the summit of Mt. WA at which these muonsNo, almost all were created much higher, but the height at which they were created is fairly irrelevant. The density of muons in the narrow speed/energy range around 0.995 (before entering the iron layers) at the mountain top is what's measured at the
were born was no more than 2,200 ft.
velocity relative to the earth [sic] was measured to be [v=]0.867c which results in g = 2. The muon's clock showed an elapsed proper time of 2.2 microseconds between the spacetime event corresponding to its creation and the spacetime event correspondingMost first time readers of the FSX are overwhelmed by the huge numberHuh? This is an extremely simple demonstration, performed with very simple equipment.
of moving parts of this experiment.
A muon simultaneously [sic] comes to rest [sic] and disintegrates in a laboratory scintillator on the surface of the earth just as the laboratory clock strikes 0.000 hours. The muon's trajectory was normal to the surface of the earth. The muon's
Let S and S' denote standard inertial coordinate systems in which the lab and the muon in flight are at rest, respectively. Four relevant events - among infinitely many - that you might be interested in are the muon's creation event e1, the lab evente2 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S, the lab event e3 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S', and the collision event e4. In terms of S the height of the muon at creation is D = (2.2)(vg) where g = 1/sqrt(1-v^2). This is the magnitude of the interval from
about when the muons "must have been created" in the Frisch experiment.1) What did the muon calculate its proper altitude above the earth to be at the spacetime event corresponding to its creation?Again, muon's don't calculate things, and even if they did, it would be irrelevant. In terms of S', the spatial distance between the muon and the lab at the time of the muon's creation is D/g. This is the magnitude of the interval from e1 to e3.
2) What did the scientists in the scintillator lab calculate the muon's altitude to be at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?As noted above, in terms of S, the altitude of the muon's creation event is D, which in your example is 2.2(vg) light micro-seconds.
3) What did the lab scientist read on the scintillator lab's clock at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?In terms of S, the lab clock read -D/v at event e2, and it reads -D/(vg^2) at event e3. The elapsed proper time in the lab between e2 and e3 is Dv. Do you understand these things?
By the way, based on your confusion over the Frisch experiment, I suspect one of your underlying problems is that you don't understand the proper half-life of an existing muon that was created, say, 5 usec ago. This is probably why you are confused
how far will the average muon travel before disintegrating?Ah, here you confirm my diagnosis of the source of your confusion. The question for you is, for an existing muon that was created 5 proper usec ago, what is its expected proper time (from now) to decay?
e2 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S, the lab event e3 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S', and the collision event e4. In terms of S the height of the muon at creation is D = (2.2)(vg) where g = 1/sqrt(1-v^2). This is the magnitude of the interval fromLet S and S' denote standard inertial coordinate systems in which the lab and the muon in flight are at rest, respectively. Four relevant events - among infinitely many - that you might be interested in are the muon's creation event e1, the lab event
1) What did the muon calculate its proper altitude above the earth to be at the spacetime event corresponding to its creation?Again, muon's don't calculate things, and even if they did, it would be irrelevant. In terms of S', the spatial distance between the muon and the lab at the time of the muon's creation is D/g. This is the magnitude of the interval from e1 to e3.
2) What did the scientists in the scintillator lab calculate the muon's altitude to be at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?As noted above, in terms of S, the altitude of the muon's creation event is D, which in your example is 2.2(vg) light micro-seconds.
3) What did the lab scientist read on the scintillator lab's clock at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?In terms of S, the lab clock read -D/v at event e2, and it reads -D/(vg^2) at event e3. The elapsed proper time in the lab between e2 and e3 is Dv. Do you understand these things?
We will get to your ingenious 4-event spacetime scenario in due course.
The Frisch-Smith muon data is easily explained...
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 10:47:24 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:event e2 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S, the lab event e3 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S', and the collision event e4. In terms of S the height of the muon at creation is D = (2.2)(vg) where g = 1/sqrt(1-v^2). This is the magnitude of the
Let S and S' denote standard inertial coordinate systems in which the lab and the muon in flight are at rest, respectively. Four relevant events - among infinitely many - that you might be interested in are the muon's creation event e1, the lab
proper usec ago, what is its expected proper time (from now) to decay?1) What did the muon calculate its proper altitude above the earth to be at the spacetime event corresponding to its creation?Again, muon's don't calculate things, and even if they did, it would be irrelevant. In terms of S', the spatial distance between the muon and the lab at the time of the muon's creation is D/g. This is the magnitude of the interval from e1 to e3.
2) What did the scientists in the scintillator lab calculate the muon's altitude to be at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?As noted above, in terms of S, the altitude of the muon's creation event is D, which in your example is 2.2(vg) light micro-seconds.
3) What did the lab scientist read on the scintillator lab's clock at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?In terms of S, the lab clock read -D/v at event e2, and it reads -D/(vg^2) at event e3. The elapsed proper time in the lab between e2 and e3 is Dv. Do you understand these things?
We will get to your ingenious 4-event spacetime scenario in due course.LOL. Running away as always.
The Frisch-Smith muon data is easily explained...
No, you misunderstand, and the string of words you typed is wrong for the reasons patiently explained to you several times. Again, you won't be able to understand until you can answer this very simple question: For an existing muon that was created 5
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 12:57:08 AM UTC-7, Bill wrote:event e2 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S, the lab event e3 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S', and the collision event e4. In terms of S the height of the muon at creation is D = (2.2)(vg) where g = 1/sqrt(1-v^2). This is the magnitude of the
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 10:47:24 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
Let S and S' denote standard inertial coordinate systems in which the lab and the muon in flight are at rest, respectively. Four relevant events - among infinitely many - that you might be interested in are the muon's creation event e1, the lab
proper usec ago, what is its expected proper time (from now) to decay?1) What did the muon calculate its proper altitude above the earth to be at the spacetime event corresponding to its creation?Again, muon's don't calculate things, and even if they did, it would be irrelevant. In terms of S', the spatial distance between the muon and the lab at the time of the muon's creation is D/g. This is the magnitude of the interval from e1 to e3.
2) What did the scientists in the scintillator lab calculate the muon's altitude to be at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?As noted above, in terms of S, the altitude of the muon's creation event is D, which in your example is 2.2(vg) light micro-seconds.
3) What did the lab scientist read on the scintillator lab's clock at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?In terms of S, the lab clock read -D/v at event e2, and it reads -D/(vg^2) at event e3. The elapsed proper time in the lab between e2 and e3 is Dv. Do you understand these things?
We will get to your ingenious 4-event spacetime scenario in due course.LOL. Running away as always.
The Frisch-Smith muon data is easily explained...
No, you misunderstand, and the string of words you typed is wrong for the reasons patiently explained to you several times. Again, you won't be able to understand until you can answer this very simple question: For an existing muon that was created 5
Legion, you logical fool. It is YOU who does not understand that concealed in that question is the assumption that SR is the correct interpretation of the experimental results.above the summit. The other 200 disintegration blips are long-lived stochastic outliers also created in said layer. When you protest "That's a lot of outliers" I retort that just as many short-lived outliers were created in said layer. But they did not
Here is my answer. Just like a very old German Shepherd of 20 years, a muon that has reached the venerable old age of 5 usec has done so by stochastic chance.
The majority of the FSX muon disintegration blips (350 out of 568) occurs between a fraction of a usec and 2 usecs. This is consistent with those muons being created within atmospheric layer that lies between the summit of Mt. Washington and 2,200 feet
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 12:57:08 AM UTC-7, Bill wrote:event e2 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S, the lab event e3 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S', and the collision event e4. In terms of S the height of the muon at creation is D = (2.2)(vg) where g = 1/sqrt(1-v^2). This is the magnitude of the
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 10:47:24 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
Let S and S' denote standard inertial coordinate systems in which the lab and the muon in flight are at rest, respectively. Four relevant events - among infinitely many - that you might be interested in are the muon's creation event e1, the lab
proper usec ago, what is its expected proper time (from now) to decay?1) What did the muon calculate its proper altitude above the earth to be at the spacetime event corresponding to its creation?Again, muon's don't calculate things, and even if they did, it would be irrelevant. In terms of S', the spatial distance between the muon and the lab at the time of the muon's creation is D/g. This is the magnitude of the interval from e1 to e3.
2) What did the scientists in the scintillator lab calculate the muon's altitude to be at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?As noted above, in terms of S, the altitude of the muon's creation event is D, which in your example is 2.2(vg) light micro-seconds.
3) What did the lab scientist read on the scintillator lab's clock at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?In terms of S, the lab clock read -D/v at event e2, and it reads -D/(vg^2) at event e3. The elapsed proper time in the lab between e2 and e3 is Dv. Do you understand these things?
We will get to your ingenious 4-event spacetime scenario in due course.LOL. Running away as always.
The Frisch-Smith muon data is easily explained...
No, you misunderstand, and the string of words you typed is wrong for the reasons patiently explained to you several times. Again, you won't be able to understand until you can answer this very simple question: For an existing muon that was created 5
Legion, you logical fool. It is YOU who does not understand that concealed in that question is the assumption that SR is the correct interpretation of the experimental results.above the summit. The other 200 disintegration blips are long-lived stochastic outliers also created in said layer. When you protest "That's a lot of outliers" I retort that just as many short-lived outliers were created in said layer. But they did not
Here is my answer. Just like a very old German Shepherd of 20 years, a muon that has reached the venerable old age of 5 usec has done so by stochastic chance.
The majority of the FSX muon disintegration blips (350 out of 568) occurs between a fraction of a usec and 2 usecs. This is consistent with those muons being created within atmospheric layer that lies between the summit of Mt. Washington and 2,200 feet
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 12:57:08 AM UTC-7, Bill wrote:event e2 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S, the lab event e3 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S', and the collision event e4. In terms of S the height of the muon at creation is D = (2.2)(vg) where g = 1/sqrt(1-v^2). This is the magnitude of the
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 10:47:24 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
Let S and S' denote standard inertial coordinate systems in which the lab and the muon in flight are at rest, respectively. Four relevant events - among infinitely many - that you might be interested in are the muon's creation event e1, the lab
proper usec ago, what is its expected proper time (from now) to decay?1) What did the muon calculate its proper altitude above the earth to be at the spacetime event corresponding to its creation?Again, muon's don't calculate things, and even if they did, it would be irrelevant. In terms of S', the spatial distance between the muon and the lab at the time of the muon's creation is D/g. This is the magnitude of the interval from e1 to e3.
2) What did the scientists in the scintillator lab calculate the muon's altitude to be at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?As noted above, in terms of S, the altitude of the muon's creation event is D, which in your example is 2.2(vg) light micro-seconds.
3) What did the lab scientist read on the scintillator lab's clock at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?In terms of S, the lab clock read -D/v at event e2, and it reads -D/(vg^2) at event e3. The elapsed proper time in the lab between e2 and e3 is Dv. Do you understand these things?
We will get to your ingenious 4-event spacetime scenario in due course.LOL. Running away as always.
The Frisch-Smith muon data is easily explained...
No, you misunderstand, and the string of words you typed is wrong for the reasons patiently explained to you several times. Again, you won't be able to understand until you can answer this very simple question: For an existing muon that was created 5
Legion, you logical fool. It is YOU who does not understand that concealed in that question is the assumption that SR is the correct interpretation of the experimental results.above the summit. The other 200 disintegration blips are long-lived stochastic outliers also created in said layer. When you protest "That's a lot of outliers" I retort that just as many short-lived outliers were created in said layer. But they did not
Here is my answer. Just like a very old German Shepherd of 20 years, a muon that has reached the venerable old age of 5 usec has done so by stochastic chance.
The majority of the FSX muon disintegration blips (350 out of 568) occurs between a fraction of a usec and 2 usecs. This is consistent with those muons being created within atmospheric layer that lies between the summit of Mt. Washington and 2,200 feet
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 7:43:15 AM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:event e2 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S, the lab event e3 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S', and the collision event e4. In terms of S the height of the muon at creation is D = (2.2)(vg) where g = 1/sqrt(1-v^2). This is the magnitude of the
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 12:57:08 AM UTC-7, Bill wrote:
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 10:47:24 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
Let S and S' denote standard inertial coordinate systems in which the lab and the muon in flight are at rest, respectively. Four relevant events - among infinitely many - that you might be interested in are the muon's creation event e1, the lab
1) What did the muon calculate its proper altitude above the earth to be at the spacetime event corresponding to its creation?Again, muon's don't calculate things, and even if they did, it would be irrelevant. In terms of S', the spatial distance between the muon and the lab at the time of the muon's creation is D/g. This is the magnitude of the interval from e1 to e3.
5 proper usec ago, what is its expected proper time (from now) to decay?2) What did the scientists in the scintillator lab calculate the muon's altitude to be at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?As noted above, in terms of S, the altitude of the muon's creation event is D, which in your example is 2.2(vg) light micro-seconds.
3) What did the lab scientist read on the scintillator lab's clock at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?In terms of S, the lab clock read -D/v at event e2, and it reads -D/(vg^2) at event e3. The elapsed proper time in the lab between e2 and e3 is Dv. Do you understand these things?
We will get to your ingenious 4-event spacetime scenario in due course.LOL. Running away as always.
The Frisch-Smith muon data is easily explained...
No, you misunderstand, and the string of words you typed is wrong for the reasons patiently explained to you several times. Again, you won't be able to understand until you can answer this very simple question: For an existing muon that was created
feet above the summit. The other 200 disintegration blips are long-lived stochastic outliers also created in said layer. When you protest "That's a lot of outliers" I retort that just as many short-lived outliers were created in said layer. But they didLegion, you logical fool. It is YOU who does not understand that concealed in that question is the assumption that SR is the correct interpretation of the experimental results.
Here is my answer. Just like a very old German Shepherd of 20 years, a muon that has reached the venerable old age of 5 usec has done so by stochastic chance.
The majority of the FSX muon disintegration blips (350 out of 568) occurs between a fraction of a usec and 2 usecs. This is consistent with those muons being created within atmospheric layer that lies between the summit of Mt. Washington and 2,200
Or the short-lived outliers were blocked by the iron pile before making it to the scintillator. The Gaussian for muons is quite broad.I move that this forum vote yet again on the whose muon narrative, Legion's or mine, is more believe...wait!...I change the question on which to vote...
event e2 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S, the lab event e3 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S', and the collision event e4. In terms of S the height of the muon at creation is D = (2.2)(vg) where g = 1/sqrt(1-v^2). This is the magnitude of theLet S and S' denote standard inertial coordinate systems in which the lab and the muon in flight are at rest, respectively. Four relevant events - among infinitely many - that you might be interested in are the muon's creation event e1, the lab
1) What did the muon calculate its proper altitude above the earth to be at the spacetime event corresponding to its creation?Again, muon's don't calculate things, and even if they did, it would be irrelevant. In terms of S', the spatial distance between the muon and the lab at the time of the muon's creation is D/g. This is the magnitude of the interval from e1 to e3.
2) What did the scientists in the scintillator lab calculate the muon's altitude to be at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?As noted above, in terms of S, the altitude of the muon's creation event is D, which in your example is 2.2(vg) light micro-seconds.
3) What did the lab scientist read on the scintillator lab's clock at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?In terms of S, the lab clock read -D/v at event e2, and it reads -D/(vg^2) at event e3. The elapsed proper time in the lab between e2 and e3 is Dv. Do you understand these things?
We will get to your ingenious 4-event spacetime scenario in due course.LOL. Running away as always.
I'll respond later. I am dead tired after a day of razor clamming on the coast.
For an existing muon (say, at rest in a given frame) that was created 5 usec
ago, what is its expected time (from now) to decay?
Just like a very old German Shepherd of 20 years, a muon that has reached the
venerable old age of 5 usec has done so by stochastic chance.
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 7:43:15 AM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:event e2 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S, the lab event e3 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S', and the collision event e4. In terms of S the height of the muon at creation is D = (2.2)(vg) where g = 1/sqrt(1-v^2). This is the magnitude of the
Let S and S' denote standard inertial coordinate systems in which the lab and the muon in flight are at rest, respectively. Four relevant events - among infinitely many - that you might be interested in are the muon's creation event e1, the lab
1) What did the muon calculate its proper altitude above the earth to be at the spacetime event corresponding to its creation?Again, muon's don't calculate things, and even if they did, it would be irrelevant. In terms of S', the spatial distance between the muon and the lab at the time of the muon's creation is D/g. This is the magnitude of the interval from e1 to e3.
Ah! then you refuse to even consider, much less respond to my brilliant answer?2) What did the scientists in the scintillator lab calculate the muon's altitude to be at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?As noted above, in terms of S, the altitude of the muon's creation event is D, which in your example is 2.2(vg) light micro-seconds.
3) What did the lab scientist read on the scintillator lab's clock at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?In terms of S, the lab clock read -D/v at event e2, and it reads -D/(vg^2) at event e3. The elapsed proper time in the lab between e2 and e3 is Dv. Do you understand these things?
Still running.We will get to your ingenious 4-event spacetime scenario in due course.LOL. Running away as always.
On May 13 , patdolan wrote:
I'll respond later. I am dead tired after a day of razor clamming on the coast.
That was May 13, which was 110 days ago. Here we are on Day 111 of your recuperation from the clamming, and still no answer.
For an existing muon (say, at rest in a given frame) that was created 5 usec
ago, what is its expected time (from now) to decay?
Just like a very old German Shepherd of 20 years, a muon that has reached theSo, the answer to the question would be.... ? (Day 3 for this one.)
venerable old age of 5 usec has done so by stochastic chance.
lab event e2 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S, the lab event e3 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S', and the collision event e4. In terms of S the height of the muon at creation is D = (2.2)(vg) where g = 1/sqrt(1-v^2). This is the magnitude of theLet S and S' denote standard inertial coordinate systems in which the lab and the muon in flight are at rest, respectively. Four relevant events - among infinitely many - that you might be interested in are the muon's creation event e1, the
e3.1) What did the muon calculate its proper altitude above the earth to be at the spacetime event corresponding to its creation?Again, muon's don't calculate things, and even if they did, it would be irrelevant. In terms of S', the spatial distance between the muon and the lab at the time of the muon's creation is D/g. This is the magnitude of the interval from e1 to
2) What did the scientists in the scintillator lab calculate the muon's altitude to be at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?As noted above, in terms of S, the altitude of the muon's creation event is D, which in your example is 2.2(vg) light micro-seconds.
3) What did the lab scientist read on the scintillator lab's clock at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?In terms of S, the lab clock read -D/v at event e2, and it reads -D/(vg^2) at event e3. The elapsed proper time in the lab between e2 and e3 is Dv. Do you understand these things?
Still running.We will get to your ingenious 4-event spacetime scenario in due course.LOL. Running away as always.
On May 13 , patdolan wrote:
I'll respond later. I am dead tired after a day of razor clamming on the coast.
That was May 13, which was 110 days ago. Here we are on Day 111 of your recuperation from the clamming, and still no answer.
For an existing muon (say, at rest in a given frame) that was created 5 usec
ago, what is its expected time (from now) to decay?
Just like a very old German Shepherd of 20 years, a muon that has reached the
venerable old age of 5 usec has done so by stochastic chance.
So, the answer to the question would be.... ? (Day 3 for this one.)
Ah! then you refuse to even consider, much less respond to my brilliant answer?
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 8:54:20 AM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:lab event e2 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S, the lab event e3 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S', and the collision event e4. In terms of S the height of the muon at creation is D = (2.2)(vg) where g = 1/sqrt(1-v^2). This is the magnitude of the
Let S and S' denote standard inertial coordinate systems in which the lab and the muon in flight are at rest, respectively. Four relevant events - among infinitely many - that you might be interested in are the muon's creation event e1, the
to e3.1) What did the muon calculate its proper altitude above the earth to be at the spacetime event corresponding to its creation?Again, muon's don't calculate things, and even if they did, it would be irrelevant. In terms of S', the spatial distance between the muon and the lab at the time of the muon's creation is D/g. This is the magnitude of the interval from e1
Okay, I'll play.2) What did the scientists in the scintillator lab calculate the muon's altitude to be at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?As noted above, in terms of S, the altitude of the muon's creation event is D, which in your example is 2.2(vg) light micro-seconds.
3) What did the lab scientist read on the scintillator lab's clock at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?In terms of S, the lab clock read -D/v at event e2, and it reads -D/(vg^2) at event e3. The elapsed proper time in the lab between e2 and e3 is Dv. Do you understand these things?
Still running.We will get to your ingenious 4-event spacetime scenario in due course.LOL. Running away as always.
On May 13 , patdolan wrote:
I'll respond later. I am dead tired after a day of razor clamming on the coast.
Still running.That was May 13, which was 110 days ago. Here we are on Day 111 of your recuperation from the clamming, and still no answer.
For an existing muon (say, at rest in a given frame) that was created 5 usec
ago, what is its expected time (from now) to decay?
Just like a very old German Shepherd of 20 years, a muon that has reached the
venerable old age of 5 usec has done so by stochastic chance.
So, the answer to the question would be.... ? (Day 3 for this one.)
Ah! then you refuse to even consider, much less respond to my brilliant answer?You provided no answer. Again, for an existing muon (say, at rest in a given frame) that was created 5 usec ago, what is its expected time (from now) to decay?
For an existing muon (say, at rest in a given frame) that was created5 usec ago, what is its expected time (from now) to decay?
-2.8 usecs. Or 2.8 usecs ago.
How much lifetime is left for an average man born in the USA 93 years ago?
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 9:28:13 AM UTC-7, Bill wrote:the lab event e2 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S, the lab event e3 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S', and the collision event e4. In terms of S the height of the muon at creation is D = (2.2)(vg) where g = 1/sqrt(1-v^2). This is the magnitude of the
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 8:54:20 AM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
Let S and S' denote standard inertial coordinate systems in which the lab and the muon in flight are at rest, respectively. Four relevant events - among infinitely many - that you might be interested in are the muon's creation event e1,
to e3.1) What did the muon calculate its proper altitude above the earth to be at the spacetime event corresponding to its creation?Again, muon's don't calculate things, and even if they did, it would be irrelevant. In terms of S', the spatial distance between the muon and the lab at the time of the muon's creation is D/g. This is the magnitude of the interval from e1
At least 20 more years if he does planks and/or other exercises targeting core strength. I've been doing planks for four months now and they work wonders.2) What did the scientists in the scintillator lab calculate the muon's altitude to be at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?As noted above, in terms of S, the altitude of the muon's creation event is D, which in your example is 2.2(vg) light micro-seconds.
3) What did the lab scientist read on the scintillator lab's clock at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?In terms of S, the lab clock read -D/v at event e2, and it reads -D/(vg^2) at event e3. The elapsed proper time in the lab between e2 and e3 is Dv. Do you understand these things?
Still running.We will get to your ingenious 4-event spacetime scenario in due course.LOL. Running away as always.
On May 13 , patdolan wrote:
I'll respond later. I am dead tired after a day of razor clamming on the coast.
Still running.That was May 13, which was 110 days ago. Here we are on Day 111 of your recuperation from the clamming, and still no answer.
For an existing muon (say, at rest in a given frame) that was created 5 usec
ago, what is its expected time (from now) to decay?
Just like a very old German Shepherd of 20 years, a muon that has reached the
venerable old age of 5 usec has done so by stochastic chance.
So, the answer to the question would be.... ? (Day 3 for this one.)
Okay, I'll play.Ah! then you refuse to even consider, much less respond to my brilliant answer?You provided no answer. Again, for an existing muon (say, at rest in a given frame) that was created 5 usec ago, what is its expected time (from now) to decay?
-2.8 usecs. Or 2.8 usecs ago.
And may I request and answer from you? How much lifetime is left for an average man born in the USA 93 years ago?
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 9:35:40 AM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:the lab event e2 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S, the lab event e3 simultaneous with e1 in terms of S', and the collision event e4. In terms of S the height of the muon at creation is D = (2.2)(vg) where g = 1/sqrt(1-v^2). This is the magnitude of the
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 9:28:13 AM UTC-7, Bill wrote:
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 8:54:20 AM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
Let S and S' denote standard inertial coordinate systems in which the lab and the muon in flight are at rest, respectively. Four relevant events - among infinitely many - that you might be interested in are the muon's creation event e1,
e1 to e3.1) What did the muon calculate its proper altitude above the earth to be at the spacetime event corresponding to its creation?Again, muon's don't calculate things, and even if they did, it would be irrelevant. In terms of S', the spatial distance between the muon and the lab at the time of the muon's creation is D/g. This is the magnitude of the interval from
2) What did the scientists in the scintillator lab calculate the muon's altitude to be at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?As noted above, in terms of S, the altitude of the muon's creation event is D, which in your example is 2.2(vg) light micro-seconds.
3) What did the lab scientist read on the scintillator lab's clock at the spacetime event corresponding to the muon's creation?In terms of S, the lab clock read -D/v at event e2, and it reads -D/(vg^2) at event e3. The elapsed proper time in the lab between e2 and e3 is Dv. Do you understand these things?
Still running.We will get to your ingenious 4-event spacetime scenario in due course.LOL. Running away as always.
On May 13 , patdolan wrote:
I'll respond later. I am dead tired after a day of razor clamming on the coast.
Still running.That was May 13, which was 110 days ago. Here we are on Day 111 of your recuperation from the clamming, and still no answer.
For an existing muon (say, at rest in a given frame) that was created 5 usec
ago, what is its expected time (from now) to decay?
Just like a very old German Shepherd of 20 years, a muon that has reached the
venerable old age of 5 usec has done so by stochastic chance.
So, the answer to the question would be.... ? (Day 3 for this one.)
Okay, I'll play.Ah! then you refuse to even consider, much less respond to my brilliant answer?You provided no answer. Again, for an existing muon (say, at rest in a given frame) that was created 5 usec ago, what is its expected time (from now) to decay?
-2.8 usecs. Or 2.8 usecs ago.
And may I request and answer from you? How much lifetime is left for an average man born in the USA 93 years ago?At least 20 more years if he does planks and/or other exercises targeting core strength. I've been doing planks for four months now and they work wonders.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 18:15:39 |
| Calls: | 6,707 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,239 |
| Messages: | 5,351,542 |