imatfaal

Yes. From Muon's Frame the atmosphere is contracted but its own clock time is unchanged - a clock with the muons would show that time. From the Earth's frame the atmosphere (ie same FoR) is unchanged and the time measured on an earth clock is 34 nanoseconds. 34 nanoseconds is 22 halflives of a muon and should result in 1/(2^22) in fewer than 3 out of ever 10 million muons reaching surface. BUT if we apply relativistic thinking we know that the muons clock is running slow when measured from the perspective of the Earth - slow enough for the correct percentage of muons to penetrate 10km. What is crucial is the number of muons which reach the earth's surface - this is measured and is an event which cannot vary. For the muons time passes as normal but the journey through the earth's atmosphere is shortened, for the earth-based scientist the journey remains the same but the time passes slower on the muon than for the earth-based clock. Each phenomenom happens in the other frame.

Sorry Alfred I was remembering your other thread - to wit I was assuming the two threads were connected and that the abbreiviation question was seeking to quantify potential errors with this method.

I have not decyphered your unreferenced graphs but surely the event described as LIGO as a black-hole merger and by you as a local event such as a lightning strike was observed at two detectors seperated by a far chunk of the continental USA? Are you claiming that identical lightning strikes hit both Louisianna and Washington State at the same time?

I think if you were to narrow the format of the book down a bit then it could well be expressed as a single formula made up of estimations and projections. If all the abbreviations come at the beginning of the section for each letter (ie A.Z.X comes before aardvark) then you have 26 instances in which you are likely (how likely?) to get abbreviations. If the dictionary starts a new page for a new letter then that likelihood becomes a certainty on 26 pages and a possibility on 26 more (over two pages of abbreviations) or 52 (+4 pages) etc. The easiest way to proceed with the task is of course to skip any page with any abbreviations on it. This of course would lower the percentage of words with second letter near the beginning of the alphabet and near the end of the alphabet

! Moderator Note Mike Smith Cosmos Sorry but this thread has run its course - 39 pages ago it was clear that your objection was based on incredulity heightened by a lack of real understanding; the most recent posts continue this trend. We have reached an impasse - you merely re-iterate your position adorned with differing misunderstood quotes and guesswork; you seem to dismiss all answers that are not based on your rationale as speculation or without foundation; and you continue to ask vague and unrelated questions to distract from the fact that you just don't like the present understanding of this topic. I am locking this thread. You may continue to ask simple self contained questions about any topic - but please try to avoid these spralling threads that go nowhere and merely evidence a failure to grasp and accept modern science. Do not respond to this moderation other than through the reporting system

When your clock is viewed from a different frame which is in relative motion then the gap between each tick is lengthened. It is worth noting that when you look at the clock which you share a single frame with then you notice nothing unusual. Everything which has a time element: clock's ticking, hair growing, particles decaying, etc will be observed as going slower when observed from a separate frame which is in relative motion

Again - I think this is an artefact of the planck units rather than anything profound . All planck units are interelated and the only constants required are the speed of light, newton's graviational, permitivity of free space, boltzmann's, planck's and the value of pi. You can manipulate the dimensions of any of the planck units or combinations of same to punch out these constants - but they are there because that is how the unit system was designed. If you could tie in any of the universal dimensionless constants (like alpha the coupling constant 1/137) with the planck units then you would start getting somewhere. The planck temperature is the temperature at which photons of planck energy would be emitted, it is also the temperature at which emitted radiation would have the same wavelength (factor of 2pi) as the compton wavelength - these would both lead to us assuming that both gravity and quantum effects would need to be taken into account for any calculations at the planck scale or lower. So yes - this is kind of where quantum gravity starts; but I dont think that was what you meant. I don't think your rearranged equation provides any illumination into the question other than by showing how the planck system of units was devoloped

Frankly if you can decide to kick smoking and actually get over viral hep then cycling is a piece of cake - kudos for succeeding so far and good luck for the current challenge. Regarding suspension - not my scene; I have only ever used it on serious downhill and then on borrowed bikes with A1 equipment. For bumpy roads and tracks I prefer rigid carbon forks and a good width squidgy tyre. Hopefully Arete will look at this thread - if memory serves he races MTB's and will have much more experience with front susp than I have.

! Moderator Note We are not going there. Thread locked. Do not bring up this topic again - nor any other topic which involves potentially illegal and definitely reprehensible acts again. This thread has been reported for moderator discussion - further action may be taken

Your argument is persuasive and comforting - unfortunately it is also wrong; it fails to explain observed experimental data. muons hit the earth's surface, ions in a collider are flattened in the CoM frame, gps works...

! Moderator Note OK - thread locked. I did ask people to be nice in their critique and for responses to criticism to be measured; the first few posts after my modnote were completely at odds with that request. The thread may be re-opened when other staff members who are not already involved in the thread are here to moderate the discussion. DrKrettin Accusations of being an example of the Dunning-Kruger effect is not something we like to see bandied around - it is insulting and provocative; but your later post crosses the line from potentially insulting to outright abuse. Please stop - it will not be tolerated.

! Moderator Note I am moving this thread to the lounge: the thread has long departed from the topic. it bears no relation to physics, and seems to have become a mishmash of English comprehension/writing and the art of article publication. Both these new topics are important and can be discussed here - but not in the Physics Sub-forum I have also reported the thread to invoke staff discussion / a non-involved moderator - it is going nowhere and I think it risks becoming a bit flamey and unpleasant. A moderator who is not involved in the discussion can make a decision of the thread's future when such staff member is available; but in the meantime please stick to impersonal and friendly comments - critique does not have to be bitter and response to honest commentary should not smack of retaliation

Bingo!

16km - so alright for a short ride but what about a decent length? Only joking - good to hear you have found a solution, and frankly these things are so personal that only you can find the solution. Talking about personal - here is a snapshot of my commuter's handlebars. I do about 10-12000km a year on this bike and you can see that with that amount of usage you tend to end up with odd but unique and personal solutions; each hand has different brakes, different shifters, and different grips

This paper contends that the treatment of cancer through radiotherapy is at present suboptimal as the current methodology fails to engage with the mathematical analysis and statistical framework necessary to provide a full therapeutic regime. Mathematical Analysis - more specifically the Completeness Principle - provide foundations that all naturally occuring phenomena must adhere to; it is this papers assertion that through an amalgum of present medical practice and functional analysis the overall prognosis of those suffering from cancer can be significantly improved. We aim to show that this is the case through a rigorous statistical analysis of ...

We aren't in Hell - I have just come back from a boozy teary lunch with an old friend who cheered me up and made me laugh for the first time in weeks; we talked about families and loved ones, about success and failure, about joy and pain, and we both got upset and we both drew strength from an old friendship. Life can be shit - but it can also be so amazingly good that we put up with all the nasty painful bits for those moments of unadulterated pleasure. Even more so - we can deal with the suffering because of the quiet, boring, and routine days spent with those we love; snuggling on the sofa, out on a bike ride, on a favourite walk, a pint at your local - we do simple things with those that we care for ... and nothing else really matters.

love it

Two hints 1. Always draw a diagram - this helps you make sure you have it in your head straight and even if you have it wrong it might well demonstrate to your teacher / marker that you understood the methodology but got confused in the question. Diagrams are just a must in these sorts of questions - they do not have to be to scale or works of art. 2. You will also need the Parallel Axis Theorem in addition to the link that Endy has provided.

Great Find. I always like explanations that use two different ways to get to the same answer. Out of curiosity - I would use the second method; am I right in presuming you would have used the first?

Being a shallow soul I would concentrate on how embarrassed I would be telling those I respected and loved that I had failed - it was a fear of failure rather than a desire for success that kept me clean. I relapsed massively at a party - but I was so blitzed that I didnt remember it and those who noticed decided to wait a week or so before telling me. Do not give up on giving up - you are stronger than your cravings

Can we not go further and say that if a model can possibly give rise to different predictions then we know that the model is flawed (or incorrectly applied outside the models zone of application)?

I think that is definitional rather than interesting - but I am not totally sure. If i recall correctly - and a quick mess with the basic planck units seem to bear this out - the planck mass is the mass of a black hole with a schwartchild radius (or diameter?) equal to a planck length . The planck temperature is intimately connected with the wavelength of the radiation it would give off - which is what we are talking about with hawking temperature

Nah. A body that goes from stationary to rotating (whether or not there is additional linear motion as well) has changed measurably - imaginary forces do not cut it; you need to have force applied over a distance and thus work to do an energy audit. If it is sliding with no friction, or sliding with some friction then you have one simple case - but rolling brings a completely new element to the model which must be accounted for properly; you have not done this

! Moderator Note Metacogitans You have been asked direct questions by Mordred, Swansont and Sensei; please make an attempt at answering these before expounding any further. thanks.

http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html