### Author Topic: Time Dilation  (Read 3513 times)

#### Jason78

##### Re: Time Dilation
« Reply #15 on: July 15, 2013, 11:10:20 AM »
[spoil:2iw2jlnv]
Quote from: "Solitary"
I don't like to copy and paste from the internet unless I'm not believed and have no other way to show I'm correct.

I never said the theory was wrong. And I never said the "measurement" was wrong.

What I said was that a clock on a muon would show a different time than on a clock that measured its time in a lab.

As I said above I don't like having to do this, but this is from the internet with references who agree with me:

A comparison of muon lifetimes at different speeds is possible. In the laboratory, slow muons are produced, and in the atmosphere very fast moving muons are introduced by cosmic rays. Taking the muon lifetime at rest as the laboratory value of 2.22 ?s, the lifetime of a cosmic ray produced muon traveling at 98% of the speed of light is about five times longer, in agreement with observations. In this experiment the "clock" is the time taken by processes leading to muon decay, and these processes take place in the moving muon at its own "clock rate", which is much slower than the laboratory clock.

This is what I said and you disagree with it"

What more can I do?

Quote
If you were riding on a muon your clock would measure a different time that would be longer according to relativity because the faster an object goes time slows down, thus it's half life would be longer as measured, and if you were watching the clock of the observer of the muon the observers clock would show the speed and half life of the muon as being longer as produced in the lab by measurement.
^ JV Stewart (2001). Intermediate electromagnetic theory. Singapore: World Scientific. p. 705. ISBN 981-02-4470-3
[/spoil:2iw2jlnv]

Edit: Formatting.
Winner of WitchSabrinas Best Advice Award 2012

We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real
tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. -Plato

#### Solitary

##### Re: Time Dilation
« Reply #16 on: July 15, 2013, 11:14:33 AM »
Quote from: "Jason78"
[spoil:nmoy9lqu]
Quote from: "Solitary"
I don't like to copy and paste from the internet unless I'm not believed and have no other way to show I'm correct.

I never said the theory was wrong. And I never said the "measurement" was wrong.

What I said was that a clock on a muon would show a different time than on a clock that measured its time in a lab.

As I said above I don't like having to do this, but this is from the internet with references who agree with me:

A comparison of muon lifetimes at different speeds is possible. In the laboratory, slow muons are produced, and in the atmosphere very fast moving muons are introduced by cosmic rays. Taking the muon lifetime at rest as the laboratory value of 2.22 ?s, the lifetime of a cosmic ray produced muon traveling at 98% of the speed of light is about five times longer, in agreement with observations. In this experiment the "clock" is the time taken by processes leading to muon decay, and these processes take place in the moving muon at its own "clock rate", which is much slower than the laboratory clock.

This is what I said and you disagree with it"

What more can I do?

Quote
If you were riding on a muon your clock would measure a different time that would be longer according to relativity because the faster an object goes time slows down, thus it's half life would be longer as measured, and if you were watching the clock of the observer of the muon the observers clock would show the speed and half life of the muon as being longer as produced in the lab by measurement.
^ JV Stewart (2001). Intermediate electromagnetic theory. Singapore: World Scientific. p. 705. ISBN 981-02-4470-3
[/spoil:nmoy9lqu]

Edit: Formatting.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login ... irtim.html
^ JV Stewart (2001). Intermediate electromagnetic theory. Singapore: World Scientific. p. 705. ISBN 981-02-4470-3
There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action.

#### Colanth

##### Re: Time Dilation
« Reply #17 on: July 15, 2013, 05:58:08 PM »
Quote from: "Solitary"
References
The fact that an article has relevant references (not all references are relevant - or even valid) doesn't automatically mean that the author understood the references he used.  About.com and similar sites are VERY poor references for scientific matters.
Afflicting the comfortable for 70 years.
Science builds skyscrapers, faith flies planes into them.

#### josephpalazzo

##### Re: Time Dilation
« Reply #18 on: July 15, 2013, 09:09:22 PM »
Quote from: "Solitary"
I don't like to copy and paste from the internet unless I'm not believed and have no other way to show I'm correct.

I never said the theory was wrong. And I never said the "measurement" was wrong.

What I said was that a clock on a muon would show a different time than on a clock that measured its time in a lab.

As I said above I don't like having to do this, but this is from the internet with references who agree with me:

A comparison of muon lifetimes at different speeds is possible. In the laboratory, slow muons are produced, and in the atmosphere very fast moving muons are introduced by cosmic rays. Taking the muon lifetime at rest as the laboratory value of 2.22 ?s, the lifetime of a cosmic ray produced muon traveling at 98% of the speed of light is about five times longer, in agreement with observations. In this experiment the "clock" is the time taken by processes leading to muon decay, and these processes take place in the moving muon at its own "clock rate", which is much slower than the laboratory clock.

This is what I said and you disagree with it"

What more can I do?

Quote
If you were riding on a muon your clock would measure a different time that would be longer according to relativity because the faster an object goes time slows down, thus it's half life would be longer as measured, and if you were watching the clock of the observer of the muon the observers clock would show the speed and half life of the muon as being longer as produced in the lab by measurement.

That's not what was in contention. What was in contention is your belief that it was an illusion. You wrote: This is why Einstein said: " The answer can only be: Yes, it is an illusion. A Stubbornly Persistent Illusion in the words of Einstein. He's talking about measurement being real as you say, but that it is an illusion to think they actually do. You didn't answer my objection to that. Go back and read it.

#### Solitary

##### Re: Time Dilation
« Reply #19 on: July 15, 2013, 10:41:13 PM »
Quote from: "josephpalazzo"
Quote from: "Solitary"
I don't like to copy and paste from the internet unless I'm not believed and have no other way to show I'm correct.

I never said the theory was wrong. And I never said the "measurement" was wrong.

What I said was that a clock on a muon would show a different time than on a clock that measured its time in a lab.

As I said above I don't like having to do this, but this is from the internet with references who agree with me:

A comparison of muon lifetimes at different speeds is possible. In the laboratory, slow muons are produced, and in the atmosphere very fast moving muons are introduced by cosmic rays. Taking the muon lifetime at rest as the laboratory value of 2.22 ?s, the lifetime of a cosmic ray produced muon traveling at 98% of the speed of light is about five times longer, in agreement with observations. In this experiment the "clock" is the time taken by processes leading to muon decay, and these processes take place in the moving muon at its own "clock rate", which is much slower than the laboratory clock.

This is what I said and you disagree with it"

What more can I do?

Quote
If you were riding on a muon your clock would measure a different time that would be longer according to relativity because the faster an object goes time slows down, thus it's half life would be longer as measured, and if you were watching the clock of the observer of the muon the observers clock would show the speed and half life of the muon as being longer as produced in the lab by measurement.

That's not what was in contention. What was in contention is your belief that it was an illusion. You wrote: This is why Einstein said: " The answer can only be: Yes, it is an illusion. A Stubbornly Persistent Illusion in the words of Einstein. He's talking about measurement being real as you say, but that it is an illusion to think they actually do. You didn't answer my objection to that. Go back and read it.

Whatever!
There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action.

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk