| General > General Technical Chat |
| "Veritasium" (YT) - "The Big Misconception About Electricity" ? |
| << < (317/396) > >> |
| HuronKing:
--- Quote from: aetherist on March 16, 2022, 08:29:46 pm ---Yes but the point that i was making was that an experiment confirms every theory that would give that result. And there are an infinite number of such theories, some not yet written. In the case of the muon time dilation experiments, all of them also confirm neoLorentz Relativity (which is an aether theory). But Einsteinists seem to think that Einsteinian time dilation is the only ticking dilation in town. --- End quote --- Krapp. That is not the point you're making. You wrote this, --- Quote ---That’s the beautiful thing about Einsteinist's when they proudly crow about another proof of Einsteinian stuff. They love to assert that the new experiment proves or confirms STR or GTR to well within the margin for error. Not realizing that when aetherists show that the experiment has an error then that same experiment has to then be seen to be a disproof of STR or GTR. The muon experiment is one such disproof, within the margin for error. --- End quote --- So, when shown that the experiments are not only valid, but done EVERY SINGLE DAY all over the world (and you still have a self-admitted ignorance of how they're performed), and are in accordance with the predictions of STR, you are now switching to claiming they verify your pet theory you're making up from one post to the next... when mere hours ago you were CERTAIN the experiments were all bunk. Again, "krapp." |
| aetherist:
--- Quote from: HuronKing on March 16, 2022, 04:33:24 pm --- --- Quote from: aetherist on March 16, 2022, 09:08:04 am ---I don’t understand the undergraduate muon Xs. --- End quote --- Color me shocked. ::) --- Quote ---But it appears to me that all of them (most of them) involve measurement of the lifetime of muons, the Xs do not involve the more complicated confirmation of time dilation. --- End quote --- Can you read? https://www.ictp-saifr.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Lab_MuonLifetime_2018.pdf --- Quote ---Let us solve a quick exercise to understand how the cosmic muons created high in the atmosphere could reach the Earth's surface, given their lifetime is so short. Consider a muon of 2 GeV, which is a typical energy, produced at an altitude of 15 km above the sea level. How far will it travel before decaying? Consider first a non-relativistic muon, and compare it to the relativistic case. --- End quote --- http://www.princeton.edu/~romalis/PHYS312/Muon_lifetime.pdf --- Quote ---Questions to ponder • What are cosmic rays primarily composed of? How are muons formed in the earth’s atmosphere? Given the short muon decay time, why do so many make it to the earth’s surface? --- End quote --- https://www2.ph.ed.ac.uk/~muheim/teaching/projects/muon-lifetime.pdf --- Quote ---The muon has a lifetime of τµ = 2.197 µs. According to classical physics, what is the distance that a muon would travel at the speed of light during its lifetime? Why do muons produced in the upper atmosphere, say at 10 km, reach the sea level before they decay? What is the speed β = v/c of a muon with an energy of 2 GeV? How far will the muon travel before disintegrating? --- End quote --- These are classroom exercises for the students to explain why way more muons can hit the Earth's surface than would be expected under classical physics. That's how trivial this is and how ridiculous it is you and the other cranks waste time going after one experiment from the 1960s. This experiment is repeated every semester by juniors in classrooms all over the world. --- Quote ---I think that i am ok with the existence of muons (massive electrons), & (perhaps) with the measurement of their lifetimes (i think that their lifetimes depend on where they come to rest)(are some orbiting a nucleus?). But i am not ok with the standard Einsteinian time dilation explanation for the overly high number of muons hitting Earth. --- End quote --- Stay far away from a junior undergraduate physics laboratory then. --- End quote --- The 1962 experiment was (as i said) fortunate that they used 6" less Fe cover than they should have (the Fe is meant to compensate for the mass of the atmosphere tween the 2 levels for the 2 tests). This was a peer review (i showed a link), albeit only a few years ago. It was possibly the only peer review that the 1962 X ever got. Anyhow the missing 6" of Fe resulted in Einsteinian time dilation being confirmed to within the margin for error. Funny that. Whereas with the 6" of Fe being properly in place the peer review said that the Einsteinian time dilation would have given an error of (i think) 50%. Aetherists i think are happy with ticking dilation explaining the longer lifetime of muons. But aetherists (or at least me myself) do not insist that the standard gamma equation applies exactly (Einsteinist's insist that it duz apply exactly). And aetherists of course insist that V is the aetherwind (Einsteinist's insist that V is the STR relative velocity). So, there are at least 2 differences tween an aetherist's explanation of the muon X & an Einsteinist explanation, one is minor (possibly involving up to c/600 difference in the V), & one might be minor or major (re the exact form of the equation for gamma). So, i like the muon X (if it includes a true allowance for the mass of the atmosphere), but i don’t like the adoration of the silly Einsteinian dogma. |
| aetherist:
--- Quote from: HuronKing on March 16, 2022, 08:40:05 pm --- --- Quote from: aetherist on March 16, 2022, 08:29:46 pm ---Yes but the point that i was making was that an experiment confirms every theory that would give that result. And there are an infinite number of such theories, some not yet written. In the case of the muon time dilation experiments, all of them also confirm neoLorentz Relativity (which is an aether theory). But Einsteinists seem to think that Einsteinian time dilation is the only ticking dilation in town. --- End quote --- Krapp. That is not the point you're making. You wrote this, --- Quote ---That’s the beautiful thing about Einsteinist's when they proudly crow about another proof of Einsteinian stuff. They love to assert that the new experiment proves or confirms STR or GTR to well within the margin for error. Not realizing that when aetherists show that the experiment has an error then that same experiment has to then be seen to be a disproof of STR or GTR. The muon experiment is one such disproof, within the margin for error. --- End quote --- So, when shown that the experiments are not only valid, but done EVERY SINGLE DAY all over the world (and you still have a self-admitted ignorance of how they're performed), and are in accordance with the predictions of STR, you are now switching to claiming they verify your pet theory you're making up from one post to the next... when mere hours ago you were CERTAIN the experiments were all bunk. Again, "krapp." --- End quote --- I said that the muon X disproved Einstein's STR. Meaning that it disproved Einstein's equation for his gamma. The 1962 muon X confirmed that Einstein's gamma was ok within the margin for error. But had they used the proper extra 6" of Fe cover then Einstein's gamma would have been 50% out. And the Lorentz gamma would have been 50% out. And the neoLorentz gamma would have been 50% out. Me myself i have my own version of neoLorentz Relativity. I doubt that the standard gamma applies to every subatomic or atomic process (especially re decay & lifetime). Hence i would firstly believe the muon X results, & i would then modify the gamma to suit the results, & i would write a paper, & i might get a Nobel. But Einsteinist's will do their usual – fudge push cherry-pick bluff lie cheat bully censor deny. Re the muon X (time dilation) being done every day, & re me being ignorant ovem, i thort that any such experiment had to be done in 2 parts, one at high altitude, & one at low altitude. Do undergrads ever take their equipment to the top of a hill? |
| TimFox:
And no one ever, after 1962, repeated the muon lifetime experiment? Many early experiments for any theory needed improvement after criticism from other scientists, but no one thought to repeat this one? |
| aetherist:
--- Quote from: TimFox on March 16, 2022, 09:38:47 pm ---And no one ever, after 1962, repeated the muon lifetime experiment? Many early experiments for any theory needed improvement after criticism from other scientists, but no one thought to repeat this one? --- End quote --- The modern peer review of the 1962 muon X criticized the calculation of the effect of the slowing & loss of energy of muons arising from the mass of the atmosphere tween the altitudes of the 2 tests (1 on Mt Washington)(one near sea level), the density was i think underestimated, plus the gradation of the change of density with altitude was underestimated, resulting in an (accidental) shortfall of 6" of Fe being used to cover the detector. I dont know whether the modern muon Xs use the same faulty calc/allowance. Or perhaps they use a different method entirely. And i might find some other (aetheric) criticisms of muon Xs. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |