Re: Muon paradox

On 4/14/25 2:01 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:

Jared Vakulov Bian <arouj@rvove.ru> wrote:
 

Tom Roberts wrote:
>

So consider other experiments that ARE "convincing" (in the sense you
mean). In particular, Bailey et al. They put muons into a storage ring
with a kinetic energy of 3.1 GeV. They measured the muons' kinetic
energy, their momentum, their speed around the ring, and their rate of
decay. All measurements are fully consistent with the predictions of SR.
(They also measured the muon g-2, which was the primary purpose of the
experiment; confirming SR was just a side issue.)
>
     Bailey et al, Phys. Lett. B 55 (1975) 420-424

>
this is blatantly incorrectuous. They never know how many muons are there,
due quantum probability distribution. So your assumed energy makes no
sense. Not even for detection.

 Au contraire, it is you who are 'blatantly incorrectuous', [sic]
and you obviously have no idea of what you are talking about.
 It is easy to measure how many muons there are
in the storage ring at any given moment,
by picking up their electromagnetic fields,

Yes.
Moreover, to measure the RATE of decay, one need not know the number of muons circulating, one merely needs to measure the number of decays as a function of time. Bailey et al naturally do that, as part of their measurement of g-2.
Tom Roberts