Re: TIME DILATION


"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4mpjr3-can.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| In sci.physics.relativity, Sorcerer
| <Headmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
| wrote
| on Fri, 18 Aug 2006 16:34:15 GMT
| <b_lFg.112613$F8.6569@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
| >
| > "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message
| > news:od4hr3-sga.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | In sci.physics.relativity, Sorcerer
| > | <Headmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
| > | wrote
| > | on Fri, 18 Aug 2006 10:03:44 GMT
| > | <4ggFg.109209$F8.37454@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
| > | >
| > | > "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
| > message
| > | > news:s4vfr3-esj.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > | In sci.physics.relativity, Sorcerer
| > | > | <Headmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
| > | > | wrote
| > | > | on Thu, 17 Aug 2006 22:01:55 GMT
| > | > | <nH5Fg.4632$fV1.3827@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
| > | > | >
| > | > | > "Dirk Van de moortel"
<dirkvandemoortel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
| > | > wrote
| > | > | > in message news:oP4Fg.27115$Hn3.459807@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | "Stamenin" <tasko.s@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > | > | > news:1155690017.627763.167180@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | [snip]
| > | > | > |
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Ok, snip .. I thought it was [anip].
| > | > | >
| > | > | > x', xi?
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Androcles
| > | > | >
| > | > |
| > | > | This is all mathematical crap anyway. You want *physical* proof.
| > | >
| > | > I already have all the physical proof I need.
| > | > Sagnac and V 1493 Aql will do very nicely.
| > |
| > | OK. Write a paper and submit it to _Nature_. That's about all that's
| > | required, really.
| >
| >
| > I don't subscribe to Nature, nor am I required to do so.
| > You write a paper instead.
|
| Why would *I* want to do so? It's your fame.
|
| >
| >
| > |
| > | >
| > | > If a $7 greenback were a blankback, it woud be an invalid banknote
| > | > that any American would recognise even without President Einstein's
| > | > portrait on the front.
| > | >
| > | > Half the analysis of
| > | > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Rocket/eq22.A.GIF
| > | > is missing, so as you say, mathematical crap.
| > | > If these so-called physicists are so darned clever, how come they
| > | > are blind?
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > |
| > | > | The best I can do is an experimental cite such as:
| > | > |
| > | > | * Herbert E. Ives and G.R. Stilwell, "An experimental study of
| > | > | the rate of a moving clock"
| > | > |
| > | > | J. Opt. Soc. Am 28 215-226 (1938) and part II. J.
Opt.
| > | > | Soc. Am. 31, 369-374 (1941)
| > | > |
| > | > | Unfortunately, throwing this at Google just returned me back to
| > | > |
| > | > | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transverse_Doppler_effect
| > | > |
| > | > | (where I got this from), which isn't all that good an explanation
IMO.
| > | > |
| > | > | (I'm not sure how to better it without throwing in a lot of what
might
| > | > | be considered irrelevant calculations, though, leading to the
other
| > | > | formula sqrt(1+v/c)/sqrt(1-v/c) or its reciprocal.)
| > | >
| > | > You should look at the transverse mass effect.
| > | >
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img155.gif
| > | > All this crap should tell a sane man something is seriously wrong
with
| > | > Einstein's math. Any normal mathematical investigator (not a genius)
| > | > should be able to trace it.
| > |
| > | That's easy. Einstein made the fundamental mistake that lightspeed is
| > | constant.
| >
| > It should have been easy, but you missed it for years until I rubbed
| > your nose in it and you are still blabbing away about how to measure
| > fundamental particle energy as if you had a clue. Isn't it time you
wised
| > up?
|
| No.

Ok. Remain ignorant, it's no skin off my nose.


| In any event you have yet to submit experimental
| results consistent with the hypothesis. So far, as far
| as I can tell, your hypothesis/results are that:
|
| - ground level muons are measured at 2 GeV

Electron volt is a measure of charge, 1.0000 eV per electron by definition.
Why are you trying to hoodwink me into thinking charge is energy?
Isn't it time you wised up?

| - they are created 100 km up

So it is claimed by shitheaded relativists. I see no reason why I
shouldn't use their data against them, its a fair fight that way.
If you prefer, muons are created 600 metres up.
Isn't it time you wised up?


| - therefore, muons are 200 keV at rest

Electron volt is a measure of charge, 1.0000 eV per electron by definition.
Why are you trying to hoodwink me into thinking charge is energy?
Isn't it time you wised up?

| - and are superluminal

They originate 600 metres up. Definitely subluminal.
Isn't it time you wised up?


| Muons are reasily enough created in the lab, and can be
| measured therein. The third should be easy to verify.


Those are domesticated muons. I'm talking about wild, feral muons
that originate 600 metres up and drop dead after 2.2 usec because
they are subluminal, same as domestic muons.


| The second will probably require a balloon and an
| instrumentation package.

Hmm... well, there are domesticated muons that originate 600 meters
above the balloon, but they are dead before the hit the ground and
don't trigger scintillators. It's the wild muons that make it to sea level,
or so the shithead relativists tell me.
Still, you go play with your balloon, I'm not buying your ***.

| As for the fourth, you'll probably need to build a particle
| accelerator and try to accelerate a particle. The LHC,
| Bevatron, and a few other accelerators all have the same
| fundamental problem: they make the assumption that their
| beam bunches are slower than lightspeed. This can be
| attributed either to Einstein's theory (the traditional
| explanation) or to the simple fact of brehmsstrahlung,
| or synchrotron radiation, leaking away sufficient energy
| to slow down the particle. I don't know, and have not
| computed the latter.

But you are wising up slowly. Sorry to hasten it, play with
a balloon instead. See if you can spend taxpayers money on
your ride. As you've seen, it cannot be Einstein's crackpottery.



|
| >
| > He did much worse than make a fundamental blunder, he built a theory
| > on it to fold in his crackpot ideas about time, too. Researchers have
| > missed finding information in astronomy and particle physics for 100
| > years because of the arrogant ***.
| >
| > The very least you could do is spread the word around the newsgroups,
| > you were certainly sarcastic enough before.
|
| I am not a physicist.

That statement was redundant by its obviousness. You are not a
mathematician, either. See, even a car speedometer reads distance/time,
and 100km/2.2 usec = 15* speed of photons. That's a little difficult
to grasp, but you'll get there slowly. Now say "baaa" like a good sheep.
Androcles.

|
| > You lot are like a bunch a sheep, all bleating the same baaaa, all
eating
| > the same grass and all swallowing each other's ***.
| > If I've woken just one of you up I've achieved something.
| >
| >
| > | > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/DominoEffect.GIF
| > | > Make one error, it propagates. Einstein made many. There can be
| > | > no relationship between reality and the ravings of a lunatic.
| > | >
| > | > Androcles.
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| > | --
| > | #191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | Windows Vista. Because it's time to refresh your hardware. Trust us.
| >
| >
|
|
| --
| #191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
| Windows Vista. Because it's time to refresh your hardware. Trust us.


.

Loading