Re: Consistancy of the speed of light.


"Greg Neill" <gneillREM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ansFf.2394$1e5.70364@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| "Spaceman" <Realspace@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:i-SdnYWNcIZ30HveRVn-qw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| >
| > "Greg Neill" <gneillREM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:PBrFf.1733$1e5.58582@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | Gaaack! Bite your tongue!!! In physics if you have
| > | something to say you write an equation. If you
| > | have nothing to say you write an essay.
| >
| > No,
| > writing math that is already available is a waste of time
| > and if not available is new mathematical physics.
| >
| > Stating cause and effects using everyday words
| > for the layman is basic physics.
| > You seem to be lost and think physics does
| > not have to use words.
|
| You continue to apply your own definitions to
| everything, despite the fact that just about
| everyone on the planet disagrees with you.
| Go figure. No, really. Go figure!

My own definitions?
Mathematical physics is not a definition
it is type of physics. (your prefered type)
Basci physics is simply everday wording of the
physical properties of the universe.
without basic wordings your math
can not even relate to reality.
You are the one that ignores basic definitions.


| > What?
| > math is not a model, it is a map.
| > a model represents reality in a different scale.
| > a map represents reality on paper.
| > you merely have a map with math, not a model.
| > You don't even know what a model is huh?
|
| Like just about everything else, your definition
| differs from that of people actually in the field.

what is a model?
what is a map?
I am not making these definitions up at all.


|
| Hey James, not only toy store plastic models are
| models, you know.

No *** Greg,
but models are physicalobjects,
not words and math on paper.

| GR contains SR. It is a superset.

Yup,
flat spacetime of SR is needed so GR can
curve it for the bull*** it uses as a cause for gravity.

| 1. We know that they are created in the upper atmosphere
| as a result of collisions with cosmic rays. How?
| because there are no muon showers that start above the
| atmosphere (empirical fact).

Yup,
So one muon is created along with bunches of others
Rain does that too.
Do you ever follow a single drop of rain
all the way down?
(did you follow the muon path also)

| 2. Muons come down in showers of a certain size that all
| come from a single collision. This "umbrella" of
| particles has been measured.

Yup,
so you measured the rain.
you still did not follow one single unit
to prove it's own lifetime.


| 3. The kinetic energy of the muons is measured when they
| reach the ground, so we know how far they have
| travelled over a given timespan. The lifetime of
| the muon puts limits on the maximum distance of their
| origin, even allowing for time dilation.

No,
you know that a muon made it.
you don't have any clue if it is the same muon
at all.
You are in physical-less proof land with such crap.
No physical proof at all about the muon being
the same muon that was further up.

Do you even know what "physical" proof is anymore?


.

Loading