Re: 1c+1c Closing Velocity of Light and Matter

From: Tom Capizzi (tom.capizzi_at_verizon.net)
Date: 01/11/05 

Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 15:42:52 GMT

"Henri Wilson" <H@..> wrote in message
news:ad57u09nbsccl6hp2c8gr0eqmkudtvckb7@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 04:24:12 GMT, "Tom Capizzi" <tom.capizzi@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Henri Wilson" <H@..> wrote in message
>>news:agh6u0ldtik6ugtnqe7iq5lolktnoeri5t@4ax.com...
>>> On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 00:48:07 GMT, "Tom Capizzi"
>>> <tom.capizzi@verizon.net>
>>> wrote:
>
>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Let's see. SR works and you ignore all experiments where ballistic
>>>>>>theory
>>>>>>fails.
>>>>>>You present no data or analysis, assert falsehoods and reject credible
>>>>>>results
>>>>>>from other scientists. Talking to a brick wall would be more
>>>>>>productive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> SR doesn't work. It flukes a few likely results with charged
>>>>> particles.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you really believe that muons vary their decay rates to suit every
>>>>> differently moving observer?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>The experiments referred to in the web sites we both cited involved
>>>>stationary observers in stationary labs. You are merely dressing up
>>>>the twin paradox in another disguise as a way of dodging the question.
>>>>I know you make the ludicrous claim that muons move faster than c.
>>>>Not just faster, but maybe twenty times faster to account for the
>>>>observed survival rate. Sorry Henri, that dog don't hunt.
>>>
>>> The muon doesn't know it is moving because as far as it's concerned, it
>>> ain't.
>>> Nothing is 'moving' . It can only be moving relative to something else.
>>>
>>> It will decay at the same rate no matter what.
>>
>>Still ducking the specifics.
>>
>>You have just described Relativity. Every particle's own coordinate
>>system is stationary relative to it. And this is exactly what the muon
>>experiment confirms. You neglected to mention that the muon sees
>>the rest of the universe flashing by relativistically contracted. In the
>>frame of the muon, the mountain is not 10000 meters tall. It is about
>>500 meters, and at the subluminal speed of the muon, that distance
>>takes about 1 half-life instead of 20. But you refuse to accept length
>>contraction either. So, tell me this: where is the Cerenkov radiation
>>from all your alleged superluminal muons?
>
> The height of the mountain doesn't change just because a muon approaches
> it at
> 2c! Length and time contractions are an illusion....and Einstein got the
> equations wrong anyway. 'v'' has to appear linearly not as quadratic.
>

There you go again. Of course the height of the mountain doesn't change in
its own frame of reference. In the muon's frame of reference, the mountain
is approaching it! It appears contracted to the muon. That's relativity.
And 2c is not enough to account for the observed rate of survival of muons
at ground level in your fantasy physics. For the record, which equations did
Einstein "get wrong" and why does 'v' have to appear linear (it isn't really
quadratic anyway since it is also under a radical).

>>
>>The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition, 2001
>>Cerenkov Radiation - light emitted by a transparent medium when
>>charged particles pass through it at a speed greater than the speed
>>of light in the medium. Let's see. Muons are charged particles. The
>>atmosphere is a transparent medium. You claim muons at huge
>>superluminal velocities are being slowed down mainly by passage
>>through the lower atmosphere. Where's the Cerenkov radiation?
>>
>
> It's there...but it is a bit hard to follow a muon as it passes through
> 80kms
> of air.
>

Another dodge. Who said anything about a single muon besides you?
To account for the actual data, your muons must move nearly twenty
times light speed so that they travel a single half-life getting to the
ground. Since the detection rate is of the order of millions of times the
expected rate, there must be millions of times as many fast muons as
slow ones. You make ridiculous claims but fail to provide any data.
How much muon flux is there at ground level? According to you, most
of the observed muons started faster than light and did most of their
slowing down in the lower atmosphere. They are present everywhere
but nowhere is the Cerenkov radiation observed. Give us another
chuckle - what happened to it?

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Cosmic Muons Paradox
    ... It is clear that in its short lifetime a muon ... Let there be a clock at the ground showing coordinate time of the ... object is moving towards the other, ... of relativity. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity.
    ... |> |> Muons are the proof that relativity is hopelessly wrong. ... By moving away from one and toward the other with velocity ... been a measurement of the lifespan of any muon to be more than 5 ...
    (sci.physics.particle)
  • Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity.
    ... |> |> Muons are the proof that relativity is hopelessly wrong. ... By moving away from one and toward the other with velocity ... been a measurement of the lifespan of any muon to be more than 5 ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity.
    ... |> |> Muons are the proof that relativity is hopelessly wrong. ... By moving away from one and toward the other with velocity ... been a measurement of the lifespan of any muon to be more than 5 ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The Cosmic Muons Paradox
    ... It is clear that in its short lifetime a muon ... Let there be a clock at the ground showing coordinate time of the ... And in classical Galilean relativity ... where v = 50 km/h. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Quantcast