🚀 go-pugleaf

PD <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
  4ad5534c-c6d5-4ac0-ab27-660bb49d5a04@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com
> On May 30, 8:53 am, Poncho Valve <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On May 30, 2:51 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On May 30, 5:16 am, Poncho Valve <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>> On May 30, 10:42 am, "Dirk Van de moortel" wrote in sci.
>>>> physics.relativity:
>> 
>>>>> 1) There are no space muons.
>>>>> Muons are created when cosmic rays or particles hit the
>>>>> upper parts of the atmosphere.
>> 
>>>>> 2) Time dilation is not a cause of anything. It is a description
>>>>> of something.
>> 
>>>>> 3) Special relativity asserts nothing. It models the behaviour
>>>>> of particles, based on precise measurements and on the
>>>>> way properties of particles are defined. Muons at rest
>>>>> live a certain amount of time. Moving muons live longer...
>> 
>>>> Bravo Moortel Moortel! Clever zombie! But how exactly do you measure
>>>> the lifetime of "muons at rest"?
>> 
>>> Muons are quite easy to make in the laboratory, and you don't need to
>>> harvest them from cosmic rays.
>> 
>> You want Einstein zombie world to forget the original hoax and
>> concentrate on new stories your Masters have prepared?
> 
> Well, see, here's the thing. Muons are muons. They behave the way they
> ALWAYS have. It's not like their behavior has changed because of what
> we believe.

But they *have* changed.
They were first invented to confuse the Russians.
Nowadays they seem to mainly confuse the Bulgarians.

> So what we learn *later* about how muons have ALWAYS
> behaved is still relevant to the understanding of the theory.
> 
> You are intent on focusing on the past, and on the smart guesses that
> were based on a veiled view decades ago. You insist that the ideas
> must be evaluated on the veiled view only, without the benefit of any
> confirming information later.
> 
> It's like there is a plate on the table with an object or two on it,
> but the objects are covered with a cloth. Someone looks carefully at
> the bumps on the cloth and the way the cloth is hanging over the
> objects and after a bit says, "It's an apple and a slice of cake." You
> look at the same cloth and say, "Don't be ridiculous, it could well be
> a telephone, or a sleeping cat," and you rant for three days about how
> ridiculous a notion it is that it could be an apple and a slice of
> cake. Then someone raises the cloth and it is indeed an apple and a
> slice of cake. In a huff, you grab the cloth and put it back over the
> plate and say, "That's not fair! Whether it is an apple and a piece of
> cake is an idea that must be judged with the cloth ON! Now look at it!
> It could well be a telephone, or a sleeping cat! An apple and a piece
> of cake indeed! Imagine such a foolish idea!"

VERY appropriate :-)

Dirk Vdm