On 6/3/2025 11:00 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:


On Tuesday, June 3, 2025 at 11:33:26 PM UTC-6 Brent Meeker wrote:



    On 6/3/2025 10:05 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:


    On Tuesday, June 3, 2025 at 10:46:58 PM UTC-6 Brent Meeker wrote:



        On 6/3/2025 8:53 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:


        On Tuesday, June 3, 2025 at 9:42:30 PM UTC-6 Brent Meeker wrote:



            On 6/3/2025 3:25 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:
            *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. *
            *IF* you *assume* a clock requires some internal structure.
            *But instead of splitting hairs, how about a
            description of the structure of a muon's clock? *
            So you want to /*assume*/ that the muon can't keep time
            just by moving thru spacetime, but requires some
            structure.  Do you have a proof or is this mere surmise?

        *It's a surmise, not a mere surmise, based on clocks I am
        familiar with. You're the relativity expert. You teach the
        masses. What's your concept of time keeping by a muon? AG*

            *And if that clock shows no time dilation within the
            muon's frame of reference, how would that FACT effect
            its half-life? AG*
            I guess that would show that it wasn't /*the*/ clock
            that determines the muon's decay.


        *So what clock does it, if any? AG
        *
        *I don't know.  But it must that something to do with the
        mass of the muon, the electron, and neutrino and the coupling
        of the neutrino, muon, and electron fields since a muon
        decays into and electron and a anti-neutrino.

        Brent*


    *I don't see how those factors would effect the muon's half-life.
    I appreciate your honesty. I suspect the issue I have raised is
    unsolved, and this is what troubles me about Relativity. AG*
    *Why are you troubled by lack of a model.  Inertia is a farm more
    common phenomenon, but you're untroubled by it. Why...I suspect
    because you have lots of experience of inertia.  Well scientists,
    particularly particle physicists have lots of experience of
    relativistic time dilation.

    Brent*

*
*
*Why should I be troubled by inertia? It's easily understood. *
Then perhaps you can explain why a muon has about 200x the inertia of an electron?  And why inertia and gravity are always proportional?

Brent

*But the change in half-life of muons is hardly understood, and I am not going off on some wrong track here. You think it's OK to shut up and calculate, and sweep the real issue under the proverbial rug. 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/e906e6a3-0d36-461f-8c41-b2c99d3c558en%40googlegroups.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/e906e6a3-0d36-461f-8c41-b2c99d3c558en%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

--
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/fd58f94b-b0f8-4384-ab65-d7ecba5cc31c%40gmail.com.

Reply via email to