On Tuesday, June 3, 2025 at 1:22:04 PM UTC-6 Brent Meeker wrote:
On 6/2/2025 8:50 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: On Monday, June 2, 2025 at 9:14:49 PM UTC-6 Brent Meeker wrote: On 6/2/2025 6:48 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: On Monday, June 2, 2025 at 7:14:47 PM UTC-6 Brent Meeker wrote: And you are too susceptible to casually assuming you understand the familiar just because it's familiar. Your alarm clock measures time by the oscillations of a wheel, which depend on the inertia of the wheel. Do you understand "the reality of that inertia"? Brent You'd be in a much better position to defend Clark if either of you could define the clock inherent in a muon, but you don't seem able to meet that challenge. AG I think John can take care of himself. If muon's don't have an inherent clock, how do they know when to decay? Brent You're assuming they have a clock, NO. *I'm inferring* they have a clock. Just as if you had a friend that came to your house ever 44hrs. You'd infer he had a clock. but avoid describing its form, or how it reads the time, if it reads the time. So many things assumed but no answers in sight. AG NOT assumed. Inferred. If you don't know the difference consult your dictionary. Brent *OK, let's split hairs. If "assumed" means zero evidence for a muon's clock, then "inferred" is better IF you believe a muon has some structure for defining a clock. OTOH, if a muon has no such structure, then it's OK to "assume" the existence of the clock. But instead of splitting hairs, how about a description of the structure of a muon's clock? And if that clock shows no time dilation within the muon's frame of reference, how would that FACT effect its half-life? AG* -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/2ba7e38c-69aa-4caa-b8e3-465e5fc2c7d2n%40googlegroups.com.
