Re: Muon paradox

Den 01.04.2025 23:42, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:

On Tue, 1 Apr 2025 18:44:39 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
 

Den 01.04.2025 19:56, skrev Paul.B.Andersen:

Den 31.03.2025 22:40, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:

Do muons move at a different velocity in the laboratory than in the
atmosphere?
>
"No, muons generally do not move at a different velocity in a laboratory
setting compared to their velocity in the atmosphere; they both travel
at speeds very close to the speed of light, typically around 99.8% of
the speed of light" - Google search AI.
>
Then why would they "time dilate" in the atmosphere?

>
The speed of muons is v = ~ 0.999668⋅c through the atmosphere
which also is within the laboratory with open roof.
γ = 38.8.
>
The mean proper lifetime of a muon is t₀ = 2.2 μs.
But measured in the Earth's rest frame the lifetime of the muon
is  tₑ = 2.2e-6⋅γ s = 85.36 μs (time dilation!).
>
Since muons are created at a height ~15 km, and the time for
a muon to reach the earth is t = 15e3/v = 5.005 s,
then the part of the muon flux that will reach the Earth is
  N/N₀ = exp(-t/tₑ) = 0.556, so 55.6% of the muons would reach the
Earth.
>
If the lifetime of the muons had been 2.2 μs,

>
If the lifetime of the muons had been 2.2 μs in the Earth frame
>

then the part of
the muon flux that will reach the Earth would be:
  N/N₀ = exp(-t/t₀) = 1.32e-10.
So only 0.0000000132% of the muons would reach the Earth.
>
Can toy guess which of them is closest to what is observed?

>
Can you guess which of them is closest to what is observed?

>

>

"Mathematically and logically, the notion that a theory that has made
many correct predictions must necessarily be true is untenable.
Scientific models can produce arbitrarily many, arbitrarily good
predictions and still be flawed, as the historical example of the
Ptolemaic (geocentric) model of the solar system shows. It does not
matter how many observations are consistent with a theory if there is
only one observation that is not." - "The Suppression of Inconvenient
Facts in Physics" by Rochus Boerner

Quite.
But NO prediction of SR is inconsistent with measurement
or observation.
SR is thoroughly tested and never falsified.
Above I explained why there is time dilation, and you have no comment.
You seem to be too ignorant to understand anything at all.
Why do you think you are qualified to criticise SR when you have
no clue of what it is?
--
Paul
https://paulba.no/