Re: Consistancy of the speed of light.


"Greg Neill" <gneillREM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:g4rFf.1404$1e5.49871@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| "Spaceman" <Realspace@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dvudnVKvYfI9pHveRVn-uA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| >
| > "Greg Neill" <gneillREM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:FsqFf.1022$1e5.43868@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| > |
| > | You are making unwarranted assumptions about the conditions
| > | of the particles and balls.
| >
| > No I am not.
| > I am stating relations that fit just fine.
|
| Please show (mathematically) how they fit.

Well,
this is not the math group.
it is the physics group where you should be using
words and such ..
but..
Just use SR math if you want the math.
It works great for such predictions.
treat the ball's like clocks or particles etc..
:)

| Quick test for James: What's the gravity differential
| across a 1cm diameter ball in Earth orbit? How about a
| muon which is a point particle?

Who cares,
again
you should be playing with all this crap in the math group.
I am not here to do math.
I am here to have fun with the physical aspects of
the universe. (not the mathematical predictions of theories)

| Huh? The one's created on the ground enjoy the same
| freedom from collisions.

It could not have,
It was in a higher gravitational field.

| You need to show *what* gravitational differences and
| how these differences effect the lifetime of muon.

SR shows this.
go play with SR some more.


| Empirical evidence suggests that in this case time dilation
| is due to their great velocities, not due to the gravity
| difference (its effect is far, far too small to account
| for the extended muon lifetimes).

So you are saying there is no gravitational difference
inside any SR math?
wow, that would be a problem for it..
lol
BTW: Muons could be traveling FTL so SR might
have that problem with them also.
(You have no physical tracking path of the muon.)
your so called proof, lack physical proof.



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Nutcases have destroyed this newsgroup
    ... >>> physics that is responsible for the math. ... > Physics is exclusively about particles, ... >>jump from one point on that lattice to the other. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Renormalization in QED
    ... > What this mean is that you need a new model for particles. ... The ideas sounded good, but the math said, 'no dice'. ... QFT math", ... > that the MM interpretations has a wider scope than the QFT interpretations. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Nutcases have destroyed this newsgroup
    ... >> physics that is responsible for the math. ... Physics is exclusively about particles, ... >jump from one point on that lattice to the other. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: OBarr: SR is a weak theory, it is only math!
    ... finding some kind of a math correlation. ... >Ether is invisible to human direct senses. ... >>> precisely how the math is not the physics. ... other ultra mundane particles would become trapped, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Loading