![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
| Tags: asymptotical, bars, error, incompleteness, its, prove |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
On May 14, 3:31 am, PD wrote:
On May 13, 5:51 am, Albertito wrote: On May 13, 11:24 am, PD wrote: [snipped] Of course you can. You didn't read what I wrote. You time a muon in flight the same way you could a car on the highway: you time its crossings on successive, spaced gates. (Note you don't have to follow the car all the way from the garage to do so.) You make a scintillator paddle triplet, with each paddle separated by some appreciable difference (say, 20m), and then the signals from each of the scintillators to an o'scope or a TDC by an equal length cable. 20 m would be about 60 ns if the speed were as high as c, trivial to measure by either of the devices mentioned. The presence of the MIP signal in all three paddles assures that you are seeing the passage of the muon. You measure the distance, and you measure the time it takes the muon to cover that distance. You have a direct measurement of the velocity. It does not exceed c. *Measured*. It might do you good to go into the laboratory to see for yourself, rather than just jacking around with piddly little ideas. PD That only proves those experiments are biased by relativistic formulas. Uh-huh. Congratulations, you've just fell face-first into Swamp Henri, where one emerges from the muck with the belief that if simple experiments show that one's ideas are hooey, then there is obviously something wrong with the experiments and a cover-up to boot. Time dilation is not an observable by definition, What on Earth gave you that ridiculous idea? it is just an interpretation to explain an observable. You can't label single muons to keep track of them, Why not? I produce them one at a time and I watch them leave little energy deposits in plates of PVT I put in their path. It's not rocket science. You're predefining the path the muons must follow. By putting plates of PVT along the path you assumed those muons will follow, and by those muons leaving little energy deposits in the plates. you are perturbing the motion of those muons is such a way that the outcome of the experiment will be biased. Why don't you put those plates of PVT along an arbitrary curved path, and test whether those muons could then travel a longer distance in the same time?. It is clear that when muons are not observed through intermediate detectors they behave differently. Is that the kind of experiments you perform to test SR with success? |
| Ads |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Asymptotical error bars in SR prove its incompleteness | Albertito | The Theory of Relativity | 51 | May 15th 08 01:14 AM |
| Zero particle-count-error-bars.!! (i.e. in-vacu) by Uncle Tom. | brian a m stuckless | Physics - General Discussion | 2 | December 13th 05 11:34 AM |
| reliability of error bars for fundamental constants | Jonathan Thornburg [remove -animal to reply] | Current Physics Research (Moderated) | 2 | February 18th 05 05:44 PM |
| Error bars for the error bars | Joe | Current Physics Research (Moderated) | 10 | October 15th 04 07:55 PM |
| Student's Error Bars | Gregory L. Hansen | Physics - General Discussion | 7 | August 14th 04 03:46 PM |