[Bored chemist]

Time dilation has been observationally supported many times

which; how???

Do you think you should have known about that before you told everybody it was a fantasy?

[xersanozgen (OP)]

which; how???

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_testing_of_time_dilation

 LIFETIME OF MUONS

I know this argument and I had explained  the crux of it at my another topic.

There are natural muons (N) that come from atmosphere and there are artificial muons (A)  that are producted in CERN lab.

Naked results of similar experiments:

The lifetimes of N and A are different. The lifetime of muons are measured by statistical method (specifed number of amount). The amount of lab muons is find at theheight 2000 m of mountains for natural muons.

The scientists dress up this naked results by using SR on  the conclusion / interpretation  section of their papers:
 
They say that the speed of N requires ~0.95 c  for linking to SR. And BİNGO.

But there is a serious defect: The speed of lab muons (A) is also a high value. If the comparion of lifetimes between N and A; the difference of their speeds must be considered.   

[Kryptid]

They say that the speed of N requires ~0.95 c  for linking to SR. And BİNGO.

Physicists don't need to assume the speed of a particle based on the time dilation factor. It can be measured directly. An experiment done some years ago using lithium ions in a particle accelerator measured the velocity of the ions at 33.8% the speed of light (determined using optical-optical double resonance spectroscopy) and measured the resulting time dilation factor using redshift. The result of the experiment was that relativistic time dilation was found to be accurate to within an uncertainty of +0.0000000023: https://arstechnica.com/science/2014/09/time-dilation-measured-at-40-percent-of-the-speed-of-lightin-the-lab/ and https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.120405

[xersanozgen (OP)]

They say that the speed of N requires ~0.95 c  for linking to SR. And BİNGO.

Physicists don't need to assume the speed of a particle based on the time dilation factor. It can be measured directly. An experiment done some years ago using lithium ions in a particle accelerator measured the velocity of the ions at 33.8% the speed of light (determined using optical-optical double resonance spectroscopy) and measured the resulting time dilation factor using redshift. The result of the experiment was that relativistic time dilation was found to be accurate to within an uncertainty of +0.0000000023: 1- https://arstechnica.com/science/2014/09/time-dilation-measured-at-40-percent-of-the-speed-of-lightin-the-lab/ and 2- https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.120405

1- Yes, it says something (*) and than it needs an insurance by saying: "But there are competing models that may have much stronger deviations from Lorentz invariance." (at two final paragraph)

(*) For example time contraction (faster tempo) for approaching status (Doppler effect); SR does not claim/project this option.

2- In Lorentz transformations, there are a value of γ for any 'v'.Or  I cannot understand this abstract.

[Bored chemist]

The lifetimes of N and A are different.

How do the muons "know" which sort they are?

There are natural muons (N) that come from atmosphere and there are artificial muons (A)  that are producted in CERN lab.

How do the reactions "know" if they are in Cern's lab or in the upper atmosphere?

This idea of two sorts of muons is  just plain silly.
And it's something you made up with no actual evidence.

Do you think what you are doing is science?

[Kryptid]

1- Yes, it says something (*) and than it needs an insurance by saying: "But there are competing models that may have much stronger deviations from Lorentz invariance." (at two final paragraph)

Those "competing models" are for the Standard Model, not relativity.

(*) For example time contraction (faster tempo) for approaching status (Doppler effect); SR does not claim/project this option.

What is that and how is it observationally any different from time dilation? More importantly, what is the predicted value for this "faster tempo" for a given speed?

2- In Lorentz transformations, there are a value of γ for any 'v'.Or  I cannot understand this abstract.

Yes, and the experiment confirmed that the value for gamma predicted by relativity is accurate to over one part in a billion. That's strong evidence in favor of relativity.

[xersanozgen (OP)]

1- This idea of two sorts of muons is  just plain silly.
And it's something you made up with no actual evidence


2- Do you think what you are doing is science?
.

 1- To determine the increasing of muon's lifetime we need the reference muons. In articles they are called rest muons;  they are the muons that are producted in lab and they have high speed. In some articles, this speed is accepted zero by manipulating (consciously or unconsciously). I prefer to question the  papers as if I personally set/realize the experiments. 

2- Someones will say this for every new idea.   

[xersanozgen (OP)]

What is that and how is it observationally any different from time dilation? More importantly, what is the predicted value for this "faster tempo" for a given speed?

The both of them are illusions because of limited/finite velocity of light like space-time illusion. Perhaps, we must analyze the cosmos without the actor/factor role of observer.

[Kryptid]

The both of them are illusions because of limited/finite velocity of light like space-time illusion.

How is a finite speed of light going to make those measurements be an illusion?

[xersanozgen (OP)]

The both of them are illusions because of limited/finite velocity of light like space-time illusion.

How is a finite speed of light going to make those measurements be an illusion?

An observer and a clock; the distance of them =  L.

If the clock does not move; he see the clock  a little delayed (L/c)  according to his watch.

If the clock move away by the speed v; singals of seconds will come to obsever with more delay (L/c + 1.v/c )

If the clock approach to him by speed v; signals of seconds will arrive to obsever earlier than a proper second. (L/c - v/c).

These illusions (wrong perceptions) may be called  "natural visual error" (NVE). The moving clock works always fixed tempo like observer's watch. But, observer will see different times according to his watch because of changing the distance and finite value of light's velocity.

Besides there are mental illusions in SR and GR.

to be continued...

 

[Kryptid]

If the clock does not move; he see the clock  a little delayed (L/c)  according to his watch.

If the clock move away by the speed v; singals of seconds will come to obsever with more delay (L/c + 1.v/c )

If the clock approach to him by speed v; signals of seconds will arrive to obsever earlier than a proper second. (L/c - v/c).

Thank you for providing falsifiable predictions. In your scenario, you assume a Doppler effect without time dilation. This provides a different predicted measurement than a Doppler effect that does include time dilation. The equation for the relativistic longitudinal Doppler effect is:

f_r = (√((1 - β)/(1 + β)))f_s, where

"f_r" is the measured Doppler shift
"β" is the ratio v/c, and
"f_s" is frequency of the light in the source's rest frame

Since this equation and your equations are different, this means that an experiment can tell the difference between the two. The relativistic equation is the one that was supported.

[Bored chemist]

2- Someones will say this for every new idea.

And they are usually right.

But saying "they always say that" does not in any way detract from the fact that you are totally wrong.

[xersanozgen (OP)]

According to my LCS concept, the photons (of the picture of moving clock) are marked on LCS (or outer space). And the observer has also a speed according to LCS. Doppler effect may consider this position but the value V_u must be used instead of v ( V_u is universal speed according to LCS).

[Bored chemist]

Besides there are mental illusions in SR and GR.

Like what?

[Kryptid]

According to my LCS concept, the photons (of the picture of moving clock) are marked on LCS (or outer space). And the observer has also a speed according to LCS. Doppler effect may consider this position but the value Vu must be used instead of v ( Vu is universal speed according to LCS).

This is known as "moving the goalposts": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts

In order for you to be correct, your equation would have to give the same answer as relativity (at least to within the measured precision, since the observations so far have supported the accuracy of relativistic equations). So how about working out your equations and giving us some numbers that we can compare against experimental results?

[xersanozgen (OP)]

Logical illusion in SR

there is a common-known mental experiment to support time dilation (Fig. 1).

When the train does not move,  a photon travel between the points B and E ( t: proper time)

If the train moves by the speed v, the way of this photon becomes AE, ED...etc because of mirrors. Thus, time dilation is realized and its formula is got by Pythagoras relation.

[xersanozgen (OP)]

In order for you to be correct, your equation would have to give the same answer as relativity (at least to within the measured precision, since the observations so far have supported the accuracy of relativistic equations). So how about working out your equations and giving us some numbers that we can compare against experimental results?

LCS concept considers limited value of light's velocity. It is useful for cosmological analyses. My example (train-peron) was for explanation the visual illusion about time dilation. And I had neglected universal motion of observer for first stage.

[Kryptid]

Logical illusion in SR

And how is that an illusion?

LCS concept considers limited value of light's velocity. It is useful for cosmological analyses. My example (train-peron) was for explanation the visual illusion about time dilation. And I had neglected universal motion of observer for first stage.

So how about working out your equations and giving us some numbers that we can compare against experimental results?

[Bored chemist]

Logical illusion in SR

there is a common-known mental experiment to support time dilation (Fig. 1).

When the train does not move,  a photon travel between the points B and E ( t: proper time)

If the train moves by the speed v, the way of this photon becomes AE, ED...etc because of mirrors. Thus, time dilation is realized and its formula is got by Pythagoras relation.

And if you do the (analogous) experiment, you find out that time dilation is real, and the value measured is that predicted by SR.

The "mental delusion" is thinking that time dilation is not real.

[xersanozgen (OP)]

Logical illusion in SR

there is a common-known mental experiment to support time dilation (Fig. 1).

When the train does not move,  a photon travel between the points B and E ( t: proper time)

If the train moves by the speed v, the way of this photon becomes AE, ED...etc because of mirrors. Thus, time dilation is realized and its formula is got by Pythagoras relation.

On Fig. 1 we sent the photon from the point B to perpendicular path (BE); but the path became diagonal. The tempo gets lower.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, Fig.2

When the train moves with its speed  v, we directed our photon on the way FK ( the angles KFH = EDB). So, we sent the photon to diagonal path; but this time its path became perpendicular way (KH). The tempo gets faster.

Both of two option can be considered simultaneously; which tempo is indicated by train's clock?

Please look at this article for confusing:
https://www.academia.edu/36057326/The_Path_of_Light_on_a_Moving_Body