• #### Re: A final stroke to relativity, exposing the HOAX of muons decay time

From Richard Hertz@21:1/5 to Richard Hertz on Wed Aug 30 09:09:39 2023
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 1:17:45 AM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:
First things first: You have to learn a bit about what is known about cosmic muons. This is a good link, from the Universidad de La Plata (Buenos Aires).

Muon experiments@UNLP
http://www2.fisica.unlp.edu.ar/~veiga/index.html

Go here: The muon flux experiments. Basic facts http://www2.fisica.unlp.edu.ar/~veiga/experiments.html#flux

and then here: The muon lifetime experiment. PART V: Four different versions of the experiment

http://www2.fisica.unlp.edu.ar/~veiga/life53.html

Pay attention to the graphs of "Full histogram (4096 channels)" and
"Reduced histogram (128 channels)".

In both cases, the PDF function P(t) = K/τ e^(-t/τ) is said to fit the histograms statistically, with τ ≈ 2.6 μsec, and K a normalization factor.
Consider that the time span is 5 τ (five 5 rule), after which P(t) ≈ 0.

The mean value of P(t) can be give as E[X] = μ= ∫∞−∞ t P(t)dt = τ ≈ 2.6 μsec

This has been so, in muon experiments since 1962, considering it the greatest success of the special theory of relativity.

But this has been, ALWAYS, a deception, an HOAX. When the average is done after hours or days collecting data of muons decaying into electrons when hitting the scintillator, the INDIVIDUAL TIME of each muon IS LOST.

So, there is NO WAY TO RELATE muon's energy (speed) with TIME.

Only a grotesque average, masqueraded as a statistical proof of TIME DILATION, is presented to gullible imbeciles, who buy what their teachers taught them. And this is BECAUSE the PDF function λ e^(-λt) has been
used, for more than a century, as THE ABSOLUTE PDF FUNCTION OF
EVERYTHING IN NATURE, EVERYWHERE.

You CAN'T prove a deterministic theory like relativity with STATISTICS.
And this applies to all the HOAXES from the golden decade of the '60s.

Now, with A HEAVY HEART, truth start to emerge about muons.

It comes to be that ALL WHAT WAS KNOWN ABOUT THEM IS FALSE.

Read this very rarely known article, from Fermilab (also verified at CERN):

Scientists at Fermilab close in on fifth force of nature https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-66407099

*******
"Dr Mitesh Patel from Imperial College London is among the thousands of physicists at the LHC attempting to find flaws in the Standard Model. He told BBC News that the first people to find experimental results at odds with the standard model would be
one of the all time breakthroughs in physics".
.....
"Measuring behaviour that doesn't agree with the predictions of the Standard Model is the holy grail for particle physics. It would fire the starting-gun for a revolution in our understanding because the model has withstood all experimental tests for
more than 50 years."
.......
"Their behaviour (muons) is predicted by the standard model, and for fifty years it has predicted their behavior perfectly, with no errors whatsoever".
......

But new experiments (a new generation of experimental physicists) ARE SHOWING THAT WHAT WAS BELIEVED TO BE TRUE FOR SO LONG IS,
ACTUALLY, FALSE (Isn't this revealing a 60 years HOAX?).

The weird behavior of muons in the lab CAN'T BE EXPLAINED, unless a
new and unknown force BE PROPOSED AND THEN "DISCOVERED".

Then, this simple fact ERASES all the strong beliefs in SR and muons
decay, because THEY DIDN'T KNOW/DON'T KNOW what to expect about
muons behavior and the required FIFTH FORCE.

And now, einstenians? What to think, what to do? Tom: something to say?

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-66407099

Scientists near Chicago say they may be getting closer to discovering the existence of a new force of nature.
They have found more evidence that subatomic particles, called muons, are not behaving in the way predicted by the current theory of subatomic physics.
Scientists believe that an unknown force could be acting on the muons.
More data will be needed to confirm these results, but if they are verified, it could mark the beginning of a revolution in physics.

"We're really probing new territory. We're determining the (measurements) at a better precision than it has ever been seen before."

In an experiment with the catchy name 'g minus two (g-2)' the researchers accelerate the sub-atomic particles called muons around a 15m-diameter ring, where they are circulated about 1,000 times at nearly the speed of light. The researchers found that
they might be behaving in a way that can't be explained by the current theory, which is called the Standard Model, because of the influence of a new force of nature.

Scientists speculate that muons might gyrate differently because they're interacting with a short-lived quantum foam that blinks in and out of existence. Knowing the exact value of g could point the way to the "dance partner" particles affecting it.The
latest round of results were very precise, corresponding to an error of 0.20 parts per million.

https://www.livescience.com/physics-mathematics/wobbling-muon-experiment-could-reveal-a-5th-force-of-nature-if-the-results-hold-up
Wobbling muon experiment could reveal a 5th force of nature — if the results hold up

By looking at how muons wobbled as they made thousands of laps around the 50-foot-diameter (15 meters) ring, the physicists compiled data suggesting that the muon was wobbling far more than it should be.

The explanation, the study scientists say, is the existence of something not yet accounted for by the Standard Model — the set of equations that explain all subatomic particles, which has remained unchanged since the mid-1970s.

This mysterious something could be a completely unknown force of nature (the known four are gravitational, electromagnetic and the strong and weak nuclear forces). Alternatively, it could be an unknown exotic particle, or evidence of a new dimension or
an undiscovered aspect of space-time.

But whichever way they slice it, the physicists' data suggests that something unknown is nudging and tugging at the muons inside the ring.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Volney@21:1/5 to Richard Hertz on Wed Aug 30 17:41:27 2023
On 8/30/2023 12:09 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
This mysterious something could be a completely unknown force of nature (the known four are gravitational, electromagnetic and the strong and weak nuclear forces). Alternatively, it could be an unknown exotic particle, or evidence of a new dimension or
an undiscovered aspect of space-time.

But whichever way they slice it, the physicists' data suggests that something unknown is nudging and tugging at the muons inside the ring.

And your problem with this is......?

This is how science works. They come up with a theory, or set of
theories in the case of the standard model, and then perform experiments
to validate it, and this one suggests something isn't quite correct
somewhere.

The Standard Model isn't the Bible, where some minister says "This is
the unalterable Word of God, it is 100% true and if you don't believe,
you'll burn in hell forever!" No, science states that the standard model
is how the universe works TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE, we're always
testing it to see how good it is, and if we find surprises (and we hope
we do), we try to understand what's going on to make the model even better.

This g-2 test is relatively minor compared with what's known how the
muon behaves so there won't be anything major like tossing out the
cosmic muon time dilation experiments. But there are predictions that
aren't quite right. And scientists love that stuff.

If I recall there's another puzzle, how the effective radius of the
proton measured using electrons is a bit different from that measured
using muons. I'm not sure if this is from the same cause but who knows.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Richard Hertz@21:1/5 to Volney on Wed Aug 30 16:06:14 2023
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:41:31 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote:
On 8/30/2023 12:09 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
This mysterious something could be a completely unknown force of nature (the known four are gravitational, electromagnetic and the strong and weak nuclear forces). Alternatively, it could be an unknown exotic particle, or evidence of a new dimension
or an undiscovered aspect of space-time.

But whichever way they slice it, the physicists' data suggests that something unknown is nudging and tugging at the muons inside the ring.

And your problem with this is......?

This is how science works. They come up with a theory, or set of
theories in the case of the standard model, and then perform experiments
to validate it, and this one suggests something isn't quite correct somewhere.

The Standard Model isn't the Bible, where some minister says "This is
the unalterable Word of God, it is 100% true and if you don't believe, you'll burn in hell forever!" No, science states that the standard model
is how the universe works TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE, we're always
testing it to see how good it is, and if we find surprises (and we hope
we do), we try to understand what's going on to make the model even better.

This g-2 test is relatively minor compared with what's known how the
muon behaves so there won't be anything major like tossing out the
cosmic muon time dilation experiments. But there are predictions that
aren't quite right. And scientists love that stuff.

If I recall there's another puzzle, how the effective radius of the
proton measured using electrons is a bit different from that measured
using muons. I'm not sure if this is from the same cause but who knows.

Whether you like it or not, this NEW FORCE influences in the SACRED STATISTICAL MEAN DECAY TIME of muons.

There are INTERACTIONS not even dreamed before, which make ALL previous measurements a pile of crap, starting in 1962.

Prove me wrong, "Bodkin".

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Volney@21:1/5 to Richard Hertz on Wed Aug 30 21:18:40 2023
On 8/30/2023 7:06 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:41:31 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote:
On 8/30/2023 12:09 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
This mysterious something could be a completely unknown force of nature (the known four are gravitational, electromagnetic and the strong and weak nuclear forces). Alternatively, it could be an unknown exotic particle, or evidence of a new dimension
or an undiscovered aspect of space-time.

But whichever way they slice it, the physicists' data suggests that something unknown is nudging and tugging at the muons inside the ring.

And your problem with this is......?

This is how science works. They come up with a theory, or set of
theories in the case of the standard model, and then perform experiments
to validate it, and this one suggests something isn't quite correct
somewhere.

The Standard Model isn't the Bible, where some minister says "This is
the unalterable Word of God, it is 100% true and if you don't believe,
you'll burn in hell forever!" No, science states that the standard model
is how the universe works TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE, we're always
testing it to see how good it is, and if we find surprises (and we hope
we do), we try to understand what's going on to make the model even better. >>
This g-2 test is relatively minor compared with what's known how the
muon behaves so there won't be anything major like tossing out the
cosmic muon time dilation experiments. But there are predictions that
aren't quite right. And scientists love that stuff.

If I recall there's another puzzle, how the effective radius of the
proton measured using electrons is a bit different from that measured
using muons. I'm not sure if this is from the same cause but who knows.

Whether you like it or not, this NEW FORCE influences in the SACRED STATISTICAL MEAN DECAY TIME of muons.

And how is that? The decay of muons is measured, and regardless of any
new forces or invisible pink fairies which may cause or influence the
decays, the muon half-life is still 2.2µS and all experiments which
depend on that are unaffected. Because they have been measured.

There are INTERACTIONS not even dreamed before, which make ALL previous measurements a pile of crap, starting in 1962.

Wrong.

You know, you are really starting to lose it. Rather you're getting
worse and worse. Get help, soon.

Prove me wrong, "Bodkin".

It's your claim, it's up to you to prove it's correct.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From patdolan@21:1/5 to Richard Hertz on Wed Aug 30 18:24:40 2023
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 4:06:16 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:41:31 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote:
On 8/30/2023 12:09 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
This mysterious something could be a completely unknown force of nature (the known four are gravitational, electromagnetic and the strong and weak nuclear forces). Alternatively, it could be an unknown exotic particle, or evidence of a new
dimension or an undiscovered aspect of space-time.

But whichever way they slice it, the physicists' data suggests that something unknown is nudging and tugging at the muons inside the ring.

And your problem with this is......?

This is how science works. They come up with a theory, or set of
theories in the case of the standard model, and then perform experiments to validate it, and this one suggests something isn't quite correct somewhere.

The Standard Model isn't the Bible, where some minister says "This is
the unalterable Word of God, it is 100% true and if you don't believe, you'll burn in hell forever!" No, science states that the standard model is how the universe works TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE, we're always testing it to see how good it is, and if we find surprises (and we hope
we do), we try to understand what's going on to make the model even better.

This g-2 test is relatively minor compared with what's known how the
muon behaves so there won't be anything major like tossing out the
cosmic muon time dilation experiments. But there are predictions that aren't quite right. And scientists love that stuff.

If I recall there's another puzzle, how the effective radius of the
proton measured using electrons is a bit different from that measured using muons. I'm not sure if this is from the same cause but who knows.
Whether you like it or not, this NEW FORCE influences in the SACRED STATISTICAL MEAN DECAY TIME of muons.

There are INTERACTIONS not even dreamed before, which make ALL previous measurements a pile of crap, starting in 1962.

Prove me wrong, "Bodkin".
What!!! Gay Volney is actually Bodkin, back from the dead?????

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From patdolan@21:1/5 to Volney on Wed Aug 30 18:27:05 2023
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:18:43 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
On 8/30/2023 7:06 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:41:31 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote:
On 8/30/2023 12:09 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
This mysterious something could be a completely unknown force of nature (the known four are gravitational, electromagnetic and the strong and weak nuclear forces). Alternatively, it could be an unknown exotic particle, or evidence of a new
dimension or an undiscovered aspect of space-time.

But whichever way they slice it, the physicists' data suggests that something unknown is nudging and tugging at the muons inside the ring.

And your problem with this is......?

This is how science works. They come up with a theory, or set of
theories in the case of the standard model, and then perform experiments >> to validate it, and this one suggests something isn't quite correct
somewhere.

The Standard Model isn't the Bible, where some minister says "This is
the unalterable Word of God, it is 100% true and if you don't believe,
you'll burn in hell forever!" No, science states that the standard model >> is how the universe works TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE, we're always
testing it to see how good it is, and if we find surprises (and we hope >> we do), we try to understand what's going on to make the model even better.

This g-2 test is relatively minor compared with what's known how the
muon behaves so there won't be anything major like tossing out the
cosmic muon time dilation experiments. But there are predictions that
aren't quite right. And scientists love that stuff.

If I recall there's another puzzle, how the effective radius of the
proton measured using electrons is a bit different from that measured
using muons. I'm not sure if this is from the same cause but who knows.

Whether you like it or not, this NEW FORCE influences in the SACRED STATISTICAL MEAN DECAY TIME of muons.
And how is that? The decay of muons is measured, and regardless of any
new forces or invisible pink fairies which may cause or influence the decays, the muon half-life is still 2.2µS and all experiments which
depend on that are unaffected. Because they have been measured.

There are INTERACTIONS not even dreamed before, which make ALL previous measurements a pile of crap, starting in 1962.
Wrong.

You know, you are really starting to lose it. Rather you're getting
worse and worse. Get help, soon.

Prove me wrong, "Bodkin".
It's your claim, it's up to you to prove it's correct.
There are NO instances of the creation of a zero velocity muon. Every muon ever recognized as such, has ALWAY come with a velocity near the speed of light. So the 2.2 usec half-life of muons is a derived value, entirely dependent upon the theory of
special relativity.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Richard Hertz@21:1/5 to Volney on Wed Aug 30 18:58:27 2023
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:18:43 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote:
On 8/30/2023 7:06 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:41:31 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote:
On 8/30/2023 12:09 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
This mysterious something could be a completely unknown force of nature (the known four are gravitational, electromagnetic and the strong and weak nuclear forces). Alternatively, it could be an unknown exotic particle, or evidence of a new
dimension or an undiscovered aspect of space-time.

But whichever way they slice it, the physicists' data suggests that something unknown is nudging and tugging at the muons inside the ring.

And your problem with this is......?

This is how science works. They come up with a theory, or set of
theories in the case of the standard model, and then perform experiments >> to validate it, and this one suggests something isn't quite correct
somewhere.

The Standard Model isn't the Bible, where some minister says "This is
the unalterable Word of God, it is 100% true and if you don't believe,
you'll burn in hell forever!" No, science states that the standard model >> is how the universe works TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE, we're always
testing it to see how good it is, and if we find surprises (and we hope >> we do), we try to understand what's going on to make the model even better.

This g-2 test is relatively minor compared with what's known how the
muon behaves so there won't be anything major like tossing out the
cosmic muon time dilation experiments. But there are predictions that
aren't quite right. And scientists love that stuff.

If I recall there's another puzzle, how the effective radius of the
proton measured using electrons is a bit different from that measured
using muons. I'm not sure if this is from the same cause but who knows.

Whether you like it or not, this NEW FORCE influences in the SACRED STATISTICAL MEAN DECAY TIME of muons.
And how is that? The decay of muons is measured, and regardless of any
new forces or invisible pink fairies which may cause or influence the decays, the muon half-life is still 2.2µS and all experiments which
depend on that are unaffected. Because they have been measured.

There are INTERACTIONS not even dreamed before, which make ALL previous measurements a pile of crap, starting in 1962.
Wrong.

You know, you are really starting to lose it. Rather you're getting
worse and worse. Get help, soon.

Prove me wrong, "Bodkin".
It's your claim, it's up to you to prove it's correct.

These links, from the Universidad de La Plata (Buenos Aires), may teach something to you about how
the statistical mean decay value is measured. ALSO, it will teach you about the COMPLETE DISCONNECTION
between muon's proper time and measurements, because IT CAN'T BE MEASURED.

So, the famous 2.6 usec is an HOAX. Look at the charts, and try to relate ENERGY with decay time.

Muon experiments@UNLP (Main Page) http://www2.fisica.unlp.edu.ar/~veiga/index.html

Basic facts: http://www2.fisica.unlp.edu.ar/~veiga/experiments.html#life
....
PART V: The experiments. Different instrumental options.

Experiment 1: Coincidence triggers scope that records period http://www2.fisica.unlp.edu.ar/~veiga/life51.html
Experiment 2: TAC output recorded with scope http://www2.fisica.unlp.edu.ar/~veiga/life52.html
Experiment 3: TAC to MCA (full NIM) http://www2.fisica.unlp.edu.ar/~veiga/life53.html
Experiment 4: Microcontroller version http://www2.fisica.unlp.edu.ar/~veiga/life54.html
Experiment 5: Digitizer version http://www2.fisica.unlp.edu.ar/~veiga/life55.html

Read carefully everything and, in particular, analyze the graphs of Experiment 3.

When you have realized the essence of the PDF function that is DERIVED from these graphs P(t) = 1/τ (e^(-t/τ)
and learned how it's derived from the charts, let's talk again.

Meanwhile, this is a main conclusion: "Like in the previous experiment, a disadvantage of this method is that absolute time
information of the events is not recorded, so rate vs. time calculations are not available".

CONCLUSION: YOU CAN'T PROVE A DETERMINISTIC PSEUDO-THEORY LIKE SR BY USING STATISTICAL AVERAGES!!!

Do you understand this? Remember other imbeciles: Pound-Rebka and Hafele–Keating , joining Frisch-Smith in fudging
results by using statistics.

Never again these stupid experiments were repeated with modern technology, in the last 50 years.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Volney@21:1/5 to patdolan on Wed Aug 30 22:39:26 2023
On 8/30/2023 9:27 PM, patdolan wrote:

There are NO instances of the creation of a zero velocity muon.

Which body orifice did you pull that from? It happens regularly that
muons get stopped in material. Frequently they get captured by an atom
and behave much like an atom (google muonic atoms).

Every muon ever recognized as such, has ALWAY come with a velocity near the speed of light.

Why do you make up your own "facts" and pretend that they're true?

So the 2.2 usec half-life of muons is a derived value, entirely dependent upon the theory of special relativity.

Nope. Measured using stationary muons.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Volney@21:1/5 to Richard Hertz on Wed Aug 30 22:51:46 2023
On 8/30/2023 9:58 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:18:43 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote:
On 8/30/2023 7:06 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:

Prove me wrong, "Bodkin".

It's your claim, it's up to you to prove it's correct.

These links, from the Universidad de La Plata (Buenos Aires), may teach something to you about how
the statistical mean decay value is measured. ALSO, it will teach you about the COMPLETE DISCONNECTION
between muon's proper time and measurements, because IT CAN'T BE MEASURED.

I said prove your claim to be correct. All you did is babble nonsense
and link to a site that has nothing to do with your claim.

[snip nonsense]

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Richard Hertz@21:1/5 to Volney on Wed Aug 30 21:22:04 2023
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 11:51:48 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote:
On 8/30/2023 9:58 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:18:43 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote:
On 8/30/2023 7:06 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:

Prove me wrong, "Bodkin".

It's your claim, it's up to you to prove it's correct.

These links, from the Universidad de La Plata (Buenos Aires), may teach something to you about how
the statistical mean decay value is measured. ALSO, it will teach you about the COMPLETE DISCONNECTION
between muon's proper time and measurements, because IT CAN'T BE MEASURED.
I said prove your claim to be correct. All you did is babble nonsense
and link to a site that has nothing to do with your claim.

[snip nonsense]

You can't interpret text and graphics (Uni. La Plata), nor decode the breaking news about the mystery of muon behavior
moving at almost c for 10 Km, even when passing through layers of attenuation of its energy.

Keep waiting for the confirmation, then, in the next months.

Nothing that was known about muons is true, and it breaks the SMEP and the fake proves of SR time dilation.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to Volney on Wed Aug 30 22:15:27 2023
On Thursday, 31 August 2023 at 03:18:43 UTC+2, Volney wrote:
On 8/30/2023 7:06 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:41:31 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote:
On 8/30/2023 12:09 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
This mysterious something could be a completely unknown force of nature (the known four are gravitational, electromagnetic and the strong and weak nuclear forces). Alternatively, it could be an unknown exotic particle, or evidence of a new
dimension or an undiscovered aspect of space-time.

But whichever way they slice it, the physicists' data suggests that something unknown is nudging and tugging at the muons inside the ring.

And your problem with this is......?

This is how science works. They come up with a theory, or set of
theories in the case of the standard model, and then perform experiments >> to validate it, and this one suggests something isn't quite correct
somewhere.

The Standard Model isn't the Bible, where some minister says "This is
the unalterable Word of God, it is 100% true and if you don't believe,
you'll burn in hell forever!" No, science states that the standard model >> is how the universe works TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE, we're always
testing it to see how good it is, and if we find surprises (and we hope >> we do), we try to understand what's going on to make the model even better.

This g-2 test is relatively minor compared with what's known how the
muon behaves so there won't be anything major like tossing out the
cosmic muon time dilation experiments. But there are predictions that
aren't quite right. And scientists love that stuff.

If I recall there's another puzzle, how the effective radius of the
proton measured using electrons is a bit different from that measured
using muons. I'm not sure if this is from the same cause but who knows.

Whether you like it or not, this NEW FORCE influences in the SACRED STATISTICAL MEAN DECAY TIME of muons.
And how is that? The decay of muons is measured, and regardless of any

And do you still believe that 9 192 631 770 ISO idiocy
is some "Newton mode"? You're such an agnorant idiot,
stupid Mike, even considering the standards of your
moronic religion.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Richard Hertz on Thu Aug 31 11:23:49 2023
Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 1:17:45?AM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:
[press release hype]
In an experiment with the catchy name 'g minus two (g-2)' the researchers accelerate the sub-atomic particles called muons around a 15m-diameter
ring, where they are circulated about 1,000 times at nearly the speed of light. The researchers found that they might be behaving in a way that
can't be explained by the current theory, which is called the Standard
Model, because of the influence of a new force of nature.

Relativity in action, for the nutters.
Rough round numbers: 15m diameter is 50m cicumference,
times thousand times round makes 50 kilometers.
At lightspeed that takes over 15 milliseconds.
And yes, they are at 3GeV, with a rest mass of 100 MeV,
so it all checks.

Scientists speculate that muons might gyrate differently because they're interacting with a short-lived quantum foam that blinks in and out of existence. Knowing the exact value of g could point the way to the "dance partner" particles affecting it.The latest round of results were very precise, corresponding to an error of 0.20 parts per million.

Yes, and that is for g-2.
For g itself it is three orders of magnitude better.

https://www.livescience.com/physics-mathematics/wobbling-muon-experiment-c ould-reveal-a-5th-force-of-nature-if-the-results-hold-up Wobbling muon experiment could reveal a 5th force of nature — if the results hold up

FYI, all this 'wobbling' talk (is if the muon is behaving erratically)
is baby talk for people with at most a third-hand understanding of it.
Those in the know will know that is just precession.
(like Mercury's perihelion)

By looking at how muons wobbled as they made thousands of laps around the 50-foot-diameter (15 meters) ring, the physicists compiled data suggesting that the muon was wobbling far more than it should be.

Yes 'far more', all of less than one part in 10^-9

The explanation, the study scientists say, is the existence of something
not yet accounted for by the Standard Model — the set of equations that explain all subatomic particles, which has remained unchanged since the mid-1970s.

This mysterious something could be a completely unknown force of nature
(the known four are gravitational, electromagnetic and the strong and weak nuclear forces). Alternatively, it could be an unknown exotic particle, or evidence of a new dimension or an undiscovered aspect of space-time.

But whichever way they slice it, the physicists' data suggests that
something unknown is nudging and tugging at the muons inside the ring.

Yes, and that is all it is. It is a meaningless number that doesn't tell
you anything at all, beyond something being not quite right.

We just have no idea at all of what that 'something' may be,
(wait for a theory that produced it 'naturally')

Jan

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Thu Aug 31 02:58:33 2023
On Thursday, 31 August 2023 at 11:23:53 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 1:17:45?AM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:
[press release hype]
In an experiment with the catchy name 'g minus two (g-2)' the researchers accelerate the sub-atomic particles called muons around a 15m-diameter ring, where they are circulated about 1,000 times at nearly the speed of light. The researchers found that they might be behaving in a way that can't be explained by the current theory, which is called the Standard Model, because of the influence of a new force of nature.

Relativity in action, for the nutters.

For innocent kiddies: for a fanatic idiot of
any domain everything is supporting his
idiocies; poor JJ is not any exception. But
apart of the logic of a fanatic idiot there is no
reason to believe that muons are assuming
The Holiest Postulate together like him.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Richard Hertz@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Thu Aug 31 07:54:03 2023
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 6:23:53 AM UTC-3, J. J. Lodder wrote:
Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 1:17:45?AM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:
[press release hype]
In an experiment with the catchy name 'g minus two (g-2)' the researchers accelerate the sub-atomic particles called muons around a 15m-diameter ring, where they are circulated about 1,000 times at nearly the speed of light. The researchers found that they might be behaving in a way that can't be explained by the current theory, which is called the Standard Model, because of the influence of a new force of nature.

Relativity in action, for the nutters.
Rough round numbers: 15m diameter is 50m cicumference,
times thousand times round makes 50 kilometers.
At lightspeed that takes over 15 milliseconds.
And yes, they are at 3GeV, with a rest mass of 100 MeV,
so it all checks.

Scientists speculate that muons might gyrate differently because they're interacting with a short-lived quantum foam that blinks in and out of existence. Knowing the exact value of g could point the way to the "dance partner" particles affecting it.The latest round of results were very precise, corresponding to an error of 0.20 parts per million.

Yes, and that is for g-2.
For g itself it is three orders of magnitude better.

https://www.livescience.com/physics-mathematics/wobbling-muon-experiment-c ould-reveal-a-5th-force-of-nature-if-the-results-hold-up Wobbling muon experiment could reveal a 5th force of nature — if the results hold up

FYI, all this 'wobbling' talk (is if the muon is behaving erratically)
is baby talk for people with at most a third-hand understanding of it.
Those in the know will know that is just precession.
(like Mercury's perihelion)

By looking at how muons wobbled as they made thousands of laps around the 50-foot-diameter (15 meters) ring, the physicists compiled data suggesting that the muon was wobbling far more than it should be.

Yes 'far more', all of less than one part in 10^-9

The explanation, the study scientists say, is the existence of something not yet accounted for by the Standard Model — the set of equations that explain all subatomic particles, which has remained unchanged since the mid-1970s.

This mysterious something could be a completely unknown force of nature (the known four are gravitational, electromagnetic and the strong and weak nuclear forces). Alternatively, it could be an unknown exotic particle, or evidence of a new dimension or an undiscovered aspect of space-time.

But whichever way they slice it, the physicists' data suggests that something unknown is nudging and tugging at the muons inside the ring.
Yes, and that is all it is. It is a meaningless number that doesn't tell
you anything at all, beyond something being not quite right.

We just have no idea at all of what that 'something' may be,
(wait for a theory that produced it 'naturally')

Jan

1) This is what was allowed to be published, in order to not spread panic among idiot relativists like you.

2) You missed THE ENTIRE ISSUE BENEATH THIS NEWS: THERE IS NO VACUUM, HENCE THE CONSTANCY OF c IS FALSE.

3) The rather old theory, that goes back to Dirac's time, about unknown particles popping in and out of existence in a quantum
field, is becoming a reality. These mysterious, unnamed particles, interact with matter (and energy), breaking into bits ALL the
theories accumulated since the dawn of relativity, 110 years ago.

4) Light CAN'T (with this) follows a straight trajectory in "vacuum", hence all the theories in astronomy and cosmology COLLAPSE.

5) There is an unknown side effect that affect baryonic matter, which makes any calculation about timing, trajectories and
life span INVALID. For instance, the statistical average decay time of EVERY elementary particle is UNDER FIRE.

6) I insist: You can't prove a deterministic theory (like Lorentz's SR) by using statistical averages. This is CHEATING.

7) No proof emerge about that Lorentz transforms are INVARIANT under a 5th. dimensional space (put this unknown force
as the fifth dimension).

8) Scientists will soon realize that the quantum world CAN'T BE MODELED by generations of imbeciles pretenders, like Feynman,
Gell-Mann, Guth and many other famous cretins. This world is beyond human comprehension (forever).

9) The current LCDM of the universe is as false as relativity itself. Also the general theories about BB, BH and GW.

10) Relativity always has been a subjective perception of reality, weaponized through mathemagics to have a facade of serious shit.

But relativity, and ANY derivation of it is A PILE OF CRAP. It only takes time and courage to expose its falsehood.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From JanPB@21:1/5 to Richard Hertz on Thu Aug 31 10:01:01 2023
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 7:54:06 AM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 6:23:53 AM UTC-3, J. J. Lodder wrote:
Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 1:17:45?AM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:
[press release hype]
In an experiment with the catchy name 'g minus two (g-2)' the researchers
accelerate the sub-atomic particles called muons around a 15m-diameter ring, where they are circulated about 1,000 times at nearly the speed of light. The researchers found that they might be behaving in a way that can't be explained by the current theory, which is called the Standard Model, because of the influence of a new force of nature.

Relativity in action, for the nutters.
Rough round numbers: 15m diameter is 50m cicumference,
times thousand times round makes 50 kilometers.
At lightspeed that takes over 15 milliseconds.
And yes, they are at 3GeV, with a rest mass of 100 MeV,
so it all checks.

Scientists speculate that muons might gyrate differently because they're interacting with a short-lived quantum foam that blinks in and out of existence. Knowing the exact value of g could point the way to the "dance
partner" particles affecting it.The latest round of results were very precise, corresponding to an error of 0.20 parts per million.

Yes, and that is for g-2.
For g itself it is three orders of magnitude better.

https://www.livescience.com/physics-mathematics/wobbling-muon-experiment-c
ould-reveal-a-5th-force-of-nature-if-the-results-hold-up Wobbling muon experiment could reveal a 5th force of nature — if the results hold up

FYI, all this 'wobbling' talk (is if the muon is behaving erratically)
is baby talk for people with at most a third-hand understanding of it. Those in the know will know that is just precession.
(like Mercury's perihelion)

By looking at how muons wobbled as they made thousands of laps around the
50-foot-diameter (15 meters) ring, the physicists compiled data suggesting
that the muon was wobbling far more than it should be.

Yes 'far more', all of less than one part in 10^-9

The explanation, the study scientists say, is the existence of something not yet accounted for by the Standard Model — the set of equations that
explain all subatomic particles, which has remained unchanged since the mid-1970s.

This mysterious something could be a completely unknown force of nature (the known four are gravitational, electromagnetic and the strong and weak
nuclear forces). Alternatively, it could be an unknown exotic particle, or
evidence of a new dimension or an undiscovered aspect of space-time.

But whichever way they slice it, the physicists' data suggests that something unknown is nudging and tugging at the muons inside the ring.
Yes, and that is all it is. It is a meaningless number that doesn't tell you anything at all, beyond something being not quite right.

We just have no idea at all of what that 'something' may be,
(wait for a theory that produced it 'naturally')

Jan
1) This is what was allowed to be published, in order to not spread panic among idiot relativists like you.

Why do you assume that negating relativity experimentally would "spread panic" among physicists? Why do you assume this silly James-Bond-like scenario?
It's called "dream factory" for a reason.

--
Jan

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to JanPB on Thu Aug 31 21:50:37 2023
JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 7:54:06?AM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 6:23:53?AM UTC-3, J. J. Lodder wrote:
Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 1:17:45?AM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:
[press release hype]
In an experiment with the catchy name 'g minus two (g-2)' the researchers accelerate the sub-atomic particles called muons around
a 15m-diameter ring, where they are circulated about 1,000 times at nearly the speed of light. The researchers found that they might be behaving in a way that can't be explained by the current theory,
which is called the Standard Model, because of the influence of a
new force of nature.

Relativity in action, for the nutters.
Rough round numbers: 15m diameter is 50m cicumference,
times thousand times round makes 50 kilometers.
At lightspeed that takes over 15 milliseconds.
And yes, they are at 3GeV, with a rest mass of 100 MeV,
so it all checks.

Scientists speculate that muons might gyrate differently because they're interacting with a short-lived quantum foam that blinks in
and out of existence. Knowing the exact value of g could point the
way to the "dance partner" particles affecting it.The latest round
of results were very precise, corresponding to an error of 0.20
parts per million.

Yes, and that is for g-2.
For g itself it is three orders of magnitude better.

https://www.livescience.com/physics-mathematics/wobbling-muon-experiment
-c
ould-reveal-a-5th-force-of-nature-if-the-results-hold-up Wobbling muon experiment could reveal a 5th force of nature — if the results hold up

FYI, all this 'wobbling' talk (is if the muon is behaving erratically)
is baby talk for people with at most a third-hand understanding of it. Those in the know will know that is just precession.
(like Mercury's perihelion)

By looking at how muons wobbled as they made thousands of laps
around the 50-foot-diameter (15 meters) ring, the physicists
compiled data suggesting that the muon was wobbling far more than it should be.

Yes 'far more', all of less than one part in 10^-9

The explanation, the study scientists say, is the existence of
something > not yet accounted for by the Standard Model — the set of equations that > explain all subatomic particles, which has remained unchanged since the > mid-1970s. > > This mysterious something could
be a completely unknown force of nature > (the known four are gravitational, electromagnetic and the strong and weak > nuclear
forces). Alternatively, it could be an unknown exotic particle, or > evidence of a new dimension or an undiscovered aspect of space-time. >
But whichever way they slice it, the physicists' data suggests that something unknown is nudging and tugging at the muons inside the
ring. Yes, and that is all it is. It is a meaningless number that
doesn't tell you anything at all, beyond something being not quite
right.

We just have no idea at all of what that 'something' may be,
(wait for a theory that produced it 'naturally')

Jan
1) This is what was allowed to be published, in order to not spread
panic among idiot relativists like you.

Why do you assume that negating relativity experimentally would "spread panic"
among physicists? Why do you assume this silly James-Bond-like scenario?
It's called "dream factory" for a reason.

A forteriori, it escapes me completely why our resident nutter
would think that a slightly larger or smaller value
for the muon g-factor would have any impact at all on relatvity,

Jan

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Richard Hertz@21:1/5 to All on Thu Aug 31 14:37:56 2023
An imbecile wrote that he don't get the impact of the fifth force on the stupid relativistic kinematics.

Having used "ad-nauseaum" the concepts of trajectories and kinetic energy of charged particles for one century,
abusing of the model like if particles behave as newtonian billard balls, now scientists will have to face the fact
that kinematics is an obsolete model, and will have to use new concepts in what will be magnetodynamics.

It's about to be proven that VACUUM is an abstraction, and doesn't exist as such in the entire universe.

Trajectories of charged particles, light and some inventions to save face, like neutrinos, will have to be redefined
because in magnetodynamics the influence of magnetism at any level (lab, Earth, galaxies) can't be dismissed anymore.

It will be learnt that linear trajectories, as thought in kinematics, are a fiction and that MUCH MORE COMPLEX trajectories
(like long spirals) are the real deal.

Only with the above, as particles and light interact with the fifth force, makes ridiculous assertions like the speed of light in vacuum.

And Lorentz transforms go down with the above concepts alone. As relativity is just Lorentz transforms, it will go down too.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Volney@21:1/5 to Richard Hertz on Thu Aug 31 19:01:49 2023
On 8/31/2023 12:22 AM, Richard Hertz wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 11:51:48 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote:
On 8/30/2023 9:58 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:18:43 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote:
On 8/30/2023 7:06 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:

Prove me wrong, "Bodkin".

It's your claim, it's up to you to prove it's correct.

These links, from the Universidad de La Plata (Buenos Aires), may teach something to you about how
the statistical mean decay value is measured. ALSO, it will teach you about the COMPLETE DISCONNECTION
between muon's proper time and measurements, because IT CAN'T BE MEASURED. >> I said prove your claim to be correct. All you did is babble nonsense
and link to a site that has nothing to do with your claim.

[snip nonsense]

You can't interpret text and graphics (Uni. La Plata), nor decode the breaking news about the mystery of muon behavior

There is nothing there that disproves relativity or the measured

moving at almost c for 10 Km, even when passing through layers of attenuation of its energy.

And the muons of interest are moving at betweem .990c and .995c upon arrival

Keep waiting for the confirmation, then, in the next months.

Typical crank response. "Just you wait!! I WILL be proven correct!! I
will, I will, I will!!!" [stamps feet] All with no reason for this to
actually happen.

Nothing that was known about muons is true, and it breaks the SMEP and the fake proves of SR time dilation.

Nope. The measurement and predicted values differ by 10^-9. It is a
small but interesting effect. It doesn't change what was previously

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to Volney on Thu Aug 31 22:08:41 2023
On Friday, 1 September 2023 at 01:01:55 UTC+2, Volney wrote:
On 8/31/2023 12:22 AM, Richard Hertz wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 11:51:48 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote:
On 8/30/2023 9:58 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:18:43 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote:
On 8/30/2023 7:06 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:

Prove me wrong, "Bodkin".

It's your claim, it's up to you to prove it's correct.

These links, from the Universidad de La Plata (Buenos Aires), may teach something to you about how
the statistical mean decay value is measured. ALSO, it will teach you about the COMPLETE DISCONNECTION
between muon's proper time and measurements, because IT CAN'T BE MEASURED.
I said prove your claim to be correct. All you did is babble nonsense
and link to a site that has nothing to do with your claim.

[snip nonsense]

You can't interpret text and graphics (Uni. La Plata), nor decode the breaking news about the mystery of muon behavior
There is nothing there that disproves relativity or the measured

Stupid Mike, poor halfbrain, if the muon's lifetime
was as your idiot gurus have asserted - they couldn't
travel as far as they do.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to All on Fri Sep 1 10:13:46 2023
Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote: