Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<vtiebm$pp07$1@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Jared Vakulov Bian <arouj@rvove.ru>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Muon paradox
Followup-To: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 07:43:50 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <vtiebm$pp07$1@dont-email.me>
References: <d74079263e98ec581c4ccbdab5c5fa65@www.novabbs.com>
	<vsh92t$3mltr$1@dont-email.me> <vt97l2$3n9l0$1@tor.dont-email.me>
	<9sWdnW3IQO1JBGH6nZ2dnZfqlJydnZ2d@giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 09:43:51 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="4a755d7f0a66e6f6d690dafd96a5b1a8";
	logging-data="844807"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/m1TOQACOK9Q+S5fzggRsdb3IdU7ZwiQU="
User-Agent: Chrome/82.0.3496.87 Mobile Safari/632.24
Cancel-Lock: sha1:myRdB56atiKximhXYhSJroh0hko=
X-Face: #Ky\]=EW38UYNF=5Sr;]&QR:Nyur;ZbwbXBnp.X$+qjB$6{v/%i>mkJ@wl<e\_\&
 u*QT:^6A|qNVD9Dj4g]"9e-.!/:53^Ses>{YIY~!gE:y1*>`~xq|9h%MPy5jw,(i2|iOR~V
 lC_{N:{E"bc.zo5UF>rX"xCR^0(>$P.]zncF.+~TM2jdx^^kfP0Uf*?xc`^g:K|jYiWdKmF
 gcE[bo<ey|t`dox:X~z+zzvBHncN%!`OI9Utw+gP41",\6T/prZUX'e@gb$=6,m%PL2jFx9
 sIqu>[{oW/KjH7[t&r}/y3&]LSs2t`6M&
Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwAgMAAAAqbBEUAAAADFBMVEVcUT/cuJXf
 3d+anaPxDloQAAACAUlEQVQokTWSz2sTQRTHv7JEqCTm3JN/gwcvIRr/AUWQScj
 SuKcQsgEphBoshgVvet+UhhYE2Wz3hRJRRBBNAkFPVk/b0JCQm9LpJZc1ZEl8zq
 b0yzC8z/Ae836B14rLDpSWmQggDwAGkhEs5RdttQdoaz/Z47PsFYx6p/Yz8CWER
 GIX53wFO7uQ9mUMeaMmwmJF2URUNHWETd2NnMimPMKWrSzZbJE7R+g5OrWlqfs5
 xk0iveU+9S7YFApan49zXa8zzzoKHNrXHwqXgyLuEbX2T78Z+YkoRTGH5fJZLVs
 vd6ARNcpilAtKq2NoksyiUZ9O8uwC0skahQdcz74rAXfp/fLJd8sItqeqbOpWd2
 7MhbE1VYXS6+rzDV9Y4zFSRK+sYMN0jHkaYQT+dbJFYOEr0SdeZXAnL/ZwtPl4z
 sn+D98XFbRTb0/4BGmTRRmUevPTWuE2fRjmQeFRIldDyjkYCpwHi0F2WzV8mR7D
 /2tMxKNbCjBDENqH4v6UebpUSY8atkDU1PEKniQ7lwx4K/B0tH+XRS7GhUGRbLR
 l5c8sVmWtoDswQ/cCm30kPgpCTBINPEaiV2gi+a9BL9uz/rVfho44iLr0AslM1V
 cDdqmnBhDPDIZqLRbSUrlA01j9PV8w96NlURHCWvEMl7LJUyhqffZNjCiSMKODi
 bqosH6h/52JVgFJe6uGAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC
Bytes: 3035

Tom Roberts wrote:

> So consider other experiments that ARE "convincing" (in the sense you
> mean). In particular, Bailey et al. They put muons into a storage ring
> with a kinetic energy of 3.1 GeV. They measured the muons' kinetic
> energy, their momentum, their speed around the ring, and their rate of
> decay. All measurements are fully consistent with the predictions of SR.
> (They also measured the muon g-2, which was the primary purpose of the
> experiment; confirming SR was just a side issue.)
> 
> 	Bailey et al, Phys. Lett. B 55 (1975) 420-424

this is blatantly incorrectuous. They never know how many muons are there, 
due quantum probability distribution. So your assumed energy makes no 
sense. Not even for detection.