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: References: <3ce0bf632f46843f8cc0a3f45fdc0acd@www.novabbs.com> <795a3195162645246d7e9e786d2036ff@www.novabbs.com> <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 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?