Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Albert in Relativityland
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2025 21:20:55 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <b68b786497f9cffecb3afeb559378aeb@www.novabbs.com>
References: <3ce0bf632f46843f8cc0a3f45fdc0acd@www.novabbs.com> <vshcgq$3ojsg$3@dont-email.me> <795a3195162645246d7e9e786d2036ff@www.novabbs.com> <vsiuqq$1bsmo$2@dont-email.me> <d0be5ca5054bb07de26f5d86274ce629@www.novabbs.com> <vsliu4$52m4$4@dont-email.me> <67ef8f58$0$28076$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3148259"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="HcQFdl4zp4UQRQ9N18ivMn6Fl9V8n4SPkK4oZHLgYdQ";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Rslight-Posting-User: a2f761a7401f13abeefca3440f16b2f27b708180
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$UHr9S/U5hyJ4f6V/wuk7JudY4Fj3ndRaUcLR1fqQfcD9RnZbXb4dW
Bytes: 3233
Lines: 60

On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 7:50:48 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

> Paul.B.Andersen <relativity@paulba.no> wrote:
>
>> Den 02.04.2025 20:25, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:
>>> On Wed, 2 Apr 2025 9:13:22 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
>>>
>>>> Den 01.04.2025 21:28, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:
>>>>> Relativity is so fallacious that a person with only knowledge of
>>>>> elementary logic and an 85 I.Q. is qualified to refute it.
>>
>>>>
>>>> Is it because of your  85 I.Q. and knowledge of elementary
>>>> logic that your comment to my statement:
>>>>
>>>> "The speed of muons is v = ~ 0.999668?c through the atmosphere
>>>>   which also is within the laboratory with open roof."
>>>>
>>>> was:
>>>>
>>>>   "THEN, the time dilation must be the same." ?
>>
>> How slow is it possible to be? :-D
>>
>> My statement was:
>> "There is but one speed v = ~ 0.999668?c"
>>
>> your response was:
>>   "THEN, the time dilation must be the same."
>>
>> GET this: The statement:
>> "When an object has a speed v, then time dilation must be the same"
>>
>> is an idiotic, nonsensical, meaningless, stupid response.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Paul, the math does not cause time dilation. When the speed is the same
>>> in both places, what is the cause? You have no idea
>>
>> And you repeat your nonsensical statement yet again!
>>
>>
>> The measured mean lifetime of a stationary muon is 2.2 ?s
>> The measured mean lifetime of a muon moving at 0.999668?c is 85.36 ?s.
>>
>> These are measured facts, not math.
>>
>> Can you give another interpretation of the facts than "time dilation"?
>
> Indeed. The mere existence of muon storage rings
> already proves time dilatatation.
> The things would be practically impossible
> if the relativistic circulating muons
> were to decay at their rest rate,
>
> Jan
Thank you for acknowledging they decay at a different rate as that is a
different lifetime and not time dilation. That is extraordinarily
reasonable of you! What causes this different rate according to
relativity?