To MacM
Fortunately what I had to do today got canalled, so I can respond.
First let me remind you that my prior response, in which I first said “I won’t bite,” clearly stated that I did not think it was your intent to drag the discussion off topic into a discussion about singularities.
I also agree with your point that everything is to some extent connected to everything else, so if you think the singularities are on topic and important, you have a right to explore them with anyone who shares this view. - I don’t, and that is my right, so I still “won’t bite.” Even though I know (because I know you have been to my site – DarkVisitor.com) that you know how intensely interested I am in black holes.)
I also note that I did not claim “victory” – quite the contrary. I admitted that you now have a perfectly defensible position, immune from my further attack with muons.
Thus if you re-read my post, I think you will agree all of your post is irrelevant to our amiable discussion, except possibly the last paragraph, which I will “bite on.”
I recall reading a post of yours about a week ago, in which you asked people to focus on the symmetric problem of two oppositely directed travelers (with identical, initially synchronized clocks) separating symmetrically from Earth who, when they note the same pre-agreed Doppler shift of signal transmitted by the other, turn off their rockets and coast. I think this is you request in the last paragraph, but in any case, my comments that follow are about it.
I believe (and would appreciate confirmation or correction, especially by Pete or James R):
1) That when an observer on Earth, one of three equally-old triplets, two of whom are the traveling astronauts, looks (with a telescope looking through half silvered mirrors etc. so he can see superposed images of the traveling clocks) he always observes the two traveling clocks showing the same time. (I think we all agree the symmetry forces this.)
Note (A): I want each traveler to have an accelerometer and equipment to continuously broadcast (as some modulation) his acceleration, not so that the earth based observer can confirm the symmetry of their trips, but so he can compute how far away the clocks were when the image of them he is currently viewing began its journey back to him. (He has all the acceleration data needed, even that which left just nano-seconds before the clock image did.)
2) AFTER making use (correctly – and there may be some dispute here, but I think not, as all agree the clock image traveled at c.) of “note A signals” to adjust for the image travel delay, the Earth observer (we SR / TD people think) always notes that the two clocks agree, but have not been keeping up with his local clock. (I think you will disagree, but am not absolutely sure – please state you opinion.)
Note (B) Both travelers also have been integrating their accelerations plus drift time, if any, and thus know their distance from Earth. Both agree that the separation between themselves and the opposite going traveler is always just twice their correctly computed distance from Earth. (Not absolutely sure of this “exactly twice” and will yield to either Pete or James R’s correction, especially if they agree on it.) Both astronauts have telescopes and with field-of-view large enough to see both the Earth based and other traveler’s clock.
3) Both correct for travel time delays (one or two computed “distance from Earth” / c) and note that the Earth clock is running too slowly, each writing in his log the same % “error” for the Earth clock, but each traveler also notes in the log that Earth clock error is not “off” as badly as the other traveler’s clock is, all these comparisons made with their local clock. (I expect MacM disagree with much of this but again am not sure of your view, mainly as it is not he standard one.)
Note (C) Also by prior agreement when their own computation of the distance from Earth reaches a particular value (perhaps 1 light year) they execute identical de-acceleration / re-acceleration burns with their identical rockets and when the Doppler up-shifted frequency from the other traveler hits the pre-agreed value, shut off rockets and coast. Likewise, when their computed separation from Earth again reaches the pre-agreed value, they begin the identical de-acceleration burns and soft land side by side, next to their brother who has been waiting for them on Earth.
4) We SR / TD people think that the two astronauts brothers are both identical in appearance, but sad to see that their brother who stayed on Earth is old and wrinkled. – I sure you disagree.
Note (D) I went through this scenario, in even more detail than you requested, but without any math, to clearly state what at least I think will happen, but I think it is not very useful to resolving the “TD-is-real-or-perception” question. For this, I still think TD / SR people need to focus more on trying to CONVENCE you of at least one error they have found in your “proof” that TD can’t. (Pick just one error and focus on it as concentratedly as I did no muons.) MacM, I still recommend to you that you keep the focus on your “proof” and be directly responsive to the TD team’s comments on what they think is your “error.” (Again no offense intended by the quotes to either side.)
I know from personal experience with MacM that he can be persuaded by logic, kind consideration, commonly accepted facts, Etc. to change his view, but perhaps not in this more central than “muon getting to Earth” TD question because MacM did so three times. This “reaching of agreement about muons”, BTW, IMHO, is a “victory” to be equally shared by both of us, not mine alone. The best I could do with muons was to force MacM to admit that he had no explanation of how they live long enough to reach the surface, only the hope that someday, when we know more physics, this mystery can be explained.
MacM said:
I would point out that your muon decay issue is not a stand alone topic. It infact may not be resolvable if one puts on blinders to the balance of the physics required.
I do object therefore to your attempt to produce claims of victory in that the issue may not have a provable alternative at this juncture in absence of the assumptions of SRT.
For in the final analysis it is my opinion that the basic issue of time dilation is the controlling issue. What you call "Baiting" is not baiting, it is looking at the underlying physics in it's complete formal relationship.
That is muon decay alone cannot prove time dilation, if it is shown that time dilation cannot be a real shift in physical time. Muon decay then becomes merely another process which requires further investigation.
Your approach is not dis-simular to timing the tortoise and hare and declaring the tortoise won without verifying that the measuring equipment was calibrated and functioning properly.
Be advised therefore that I will not be bound to any results which do not address the primary issue of time dilation itself.
Please address therefore the issue of reciprocity and symmetrical relavistic affects which mandates that physical clocks must display multiple accumulated times simultaneously to satisfy multiple observers views should TD be claimed a physical reality vs merely perception of distorted observational results.
