No one here has entertained the idea that along with gravity (remember, all gravity is, is the curvature of space according to GR - not some force as described by Newton), massive bodies produce a local ether in space. There are no experiments that I know of that conclude this assumption cannot be true. If we entertain the idea of the local ether - we see that length contraction does not occur as neither does mutually observed time dilation. But it does offer an explaination for the time dilation that we've seen. And not only that, but it offers the explaination on the quantum level - not just some mumble jumble of relative velocities of macroscopic bodies.
If a muon with rest lifetime of 2.2us is observed to live (by the earth), say, 100us, then we have seen one-way dilation. Yes? But we know the muon, in it's frame, can ONLY live 2.2us. Therefore, the distance it sees to the earth must appear contracted. No "reciprocity" is mentioned. Nowhere do I mention what the muon sees of the earth clocks.
This is stupid, just because you didn't mention it, doesn't mean it's not there. By assuming the length did contract, you are assuming reciprocity!
Yes, the conclusion does follow from math. But that is not my interest as the math is useless unless local ether is proven or disproven.
And you should know quite well by now of my attitude towards promoting a theory built upon unsupported claims or unsupported results Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The local ether is unsupported - but nevertheless offers an interesting prediction.
Stupid? Show me where it assumes time reciprocity? Analyze it and show me. How the hell does assuming the length contracts mean I assumed time dilation. Are the two intimately connected somehow? Maybe by the symmetry of relativity? Huh? And maybe you just contradicted yourself. Huh?
OK Yep According to SR. If we assume time literally slowed down for the muon because of its motion through a local ether (this is a non-SR explaination), then there would be no length contraction. But time-dilation as explained by SR is assumed, thus reciprocity is assumed. There done.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! SR anyone? yes? Ding ding ding! Huh? I wish - I mean, you wish.
Aer, you are arguing circularly. You always say "if we assume SR is correct...". How do we know the time dilation that we observe is not some other effect and just stop mentioning SR altogether? It's only proof "if we assume SR is correct..." right? I tire of this.
Do you accept that muons in their rest frame only live 2.2us on average? You do know what I mean by rest frame, right?
Agreed. It is a pointless exercise. You and others are much too intimate with SR and I am not willing to accept it just because it was handed down by the Lord Einstein himself. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Einstein spent his dying days trying to reconsile Relativity into a theory of everything. If he couldn't do it - it probably can't be done Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! - but who knows, perhaps some genius will one day figure out the missing link.
My point exactly with added emphasis on it can never be emperically demonstrated because it is based on false assumptions, disregards alternative assumptions and requires disregarding emperically derived data showing other aspects of relativity such as time dilation (tick rate) when calculating distance using a moving clock.
Woah there! I've never said SR is based on false assumptions! In fact, all the assumptions of SR are used. The only detail is: The assumptions are incomplete. What if one was to assume a local ether? We find a totally different explaination for time dilation to start with.
Sorry SL but this simply is not true. Tick rate (time dilation of clocks and muons) has been emperically demonstrated. With the muon internal clock dilated the delayed decay accounts for it making it to the surface; not a spatial contraction of distance. Please do not disregard time dilation when computing distance. d = v * t. "d" is only valid when you compute using a clock at rest to measure time of a photon to travel the distance for example. For anyother moving clock (even a muon) you must retain the dilated tick rate when computing distance. i.e. At 0.866c tick rate (tr) = 0.5 compared to the clock at rest. Therefore: d = v * t / tr and it can be seen if you retain the known physical condition of the muon internal clock that distance DID NOT CHANGE.
Aer, Well, discussing SR at all with you is pointless, isn't it? Since one SR result leads to another and so on, it's not valid because SR is unproven and so on... round and round we go. Clearly you have a chip on your shoulder. Old Albert is tested all the time by better men than you or I to find chinks that may lead to some new physics. Good luck with your "local ether" theories.
people have done all kinds of test for ether, and last I checked, they were not in deep space when they did them. and perhaps we will never fully unravel the mysteries of the universe, afterall we don't expect cows to understand electromagnetism, why should humans be able to know everything? I don't agree with that statement, but it is something to think about.
In the muons rest frame it lives 2.2us. I order for it to make it to the earths surface, it must percieve the distance (that we measure to be 6 to 10km) as vastly shortened. You are so confused about SRT that I don't know how you even function.
