🚀 go-pugleaf

On 19 Oct, 02:20, Tom Roberts <tjroberts...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
sci.physics.relativity:
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > On Oct 17, 4:18 pm, Tom Roberts wrote:
> >> Yes. The FAQ has several direct measurements of the "twin paradox", and
> >> others of "time dilation":
> >>http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
>
> > Your references do not contain any experimental support of the twin's
> > paradox.
>
> Sure they do! The best is the measurement of Bailey et al of the muon
> lifetime in a storage ring -- the muons lived considerably longer than
> does a muon at rest in the lab, meaning that the moving muons' internal
> "clock" ticks slower when measured in the lab. That is PRECISELY the
> twin scenario, because those stored muons return to a given point of the
> ring having "ticked" less than a corresponding muon sitting at rest at
> that point.

Roberts Roberts that would be nice if the so-called lifetime "at rest"
were not one of the great frauds devised by Einstein criminal cult:

http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.physics.relativity/browse_frm/thread/69ad1af61851c041?

When the lifetime "at rest" is measured, by "at rest" Einstein
criminal cult mean a crash undergone by the muon in which its speed
changes from about 300000km/s to zero. That crash is so terrible that
the muon "dies" quickly, much more quickly than muons that have not
undergone the crash:

http://web.mit.edu/c_hill/www/muons_paper.pdf
"In this experiment, we measure two of the basic properties of the
muon, namely, its mean lifetime and mass in its rest frame. We measure
the decay curve of cosmic-ray muons that have come to rest in a
plastic scintillator by looking for electrons produced in their
decay."

Pentcho Valev