#### Groit

##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #80 on: April 15, 2020, 03:09:48 PM »
During this time the Earth accelerates at 9.81 m/s^2 with respect to the cosmic ray.
It most certainly does not. Relativistic effects would make for pretty pronounced differences in the perception of the Earth's acceleration when observed from the cosmic ray's side of things versus the observation someone would make on the surface of the Earth. The cosmic ray would "see" the Earth accelerating at a much smaller rate. Smaller with each passing moment. Yet the observer on the Earth would observe no change in the Earth's acceleration at all.

Ok, so observers on the surface of Earth are in an accelerating frame (non-inertial)?

#### JSS

• 1618
• Math is math!
##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #81 on: April 15, 2020, 03:21:23 PM »
Can someone fill me in about what's being argued here now? I've been reading this since it started and I'm kinda lost now.

The OP was saying that UA can't be true because it would push the Earth past the speed of light which is clearly wrong. UA is fine in those regards, 1G acceleration forever doesn't break laws. I think everyone can agree the OP's argument was wrong.

Now it seems too be focused on arguing if Earth is an non-inertial reference frame, which to me seems pretty clear that it is. Doesn't matter if it's Earths gravity accelerating us down or some UA force accelerating us up, either way a person on the surface is undergoing acceleration.

What exactly is being argued here at this point? I could use some help.

#### Groit

##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #82 on: April 15, 2020, 03:45:54 PM »
Now it seems too be focused on arguing if Earth is an non-inertial reference frame, which to me seems pretty clear that it is. Doesn't matter if it's Earths gravity accelerating us down or some UA force accelerating us up, either way a person on the surface is undergoing acceleration.

What exactly is being argued here at this point? I could use some help.

But those accelerations are not the same. UA is due to a force from beneath the Earth, and gravity is due to the curvature of spacetime and is not really a force, when you are accelerating towards the surface of the Earth you don't feel any forces acting on you.

Anyway my argument was towards the way we observe muons passing through the atmosphere.
JSS, maybe you can help, if the Earth was accelerating towards the muons would we measure them any differently to how we observe them in RET?

#### JSS

• 1618
• Math is math!
##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #83 on: April 15, 2020, 04:20:39 PM »
JSS, maybe you can help, if the Earth was accelerating towards the muons would we measure them any differently to how we observe them in RET?

I don't know enough about relativistic math to quote any supporting equations. But that muon would accelerate faster as it neared the Earth either due to our planets gravity, or due to it accelerating forward due to UA.

My suspicion is if there were any difference, it would be incredibly hard to measure. Possibly beyond the accuracy of anything we can currently rig up.

Lets take the rising elevator example as a starting point.  If you are in a metal box, you can not tell the difference between being on the surface of a planet at 1g, or being accelerated in space by a rocket at 1g. There is just no way in relativity theory to tell if you are accelerating or being pulled by gravity, they are literally the same thing.

So inside that box you just can't tell.

Now lets say the top of the box is open, and you have a muon detector with you.

Will muons behave differently?  I don't think so, but really, none of us have a PhD in Relativistic Physics in this so it's all kind of guesswork. I haven't drawn space-time diagrams to trace light cones through different frames of reference since college so I'm a little rusty.

#### Groit

##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #84 on: April 15, 2020, 05:49:24 PM »

I don't know enough about relativistic math to quote any supporting equations. But that muon would accelerate faster as it neared the Earth either due to our planets gravity, or due to it accelerating forward due to UA.

My suspicion is if there were any difference, it would be incredibly hard to measure. Possibly beyond the accuracy of anything we can currently rig up.

Lets take the rising elevator example as a starting point.  If you are in a metal box, you can not tell the difference between being on the surface of a planet at 1g, or being accelerated in space by a rocket at 1g. There is just no way in relativity theory to tell if you are accelerating or being pulled by gravity, they are literally the same thing.

So inside that box you just can't tell.

Now lets say the top of the box is open, and you have a muon detector with you.

Will muons behave differently?  I don't think so, but really, none of us have a PhD in Relativistic Physics in this so it's all kind of guesswork. I haven't drawn space-time diagrams to trace light cones through different frames of reference since college so I'm a little rusty.

Thanks for the explanation.
I would say that UA is probably the best evidence for FE'rs to back up their theory, as its very hard to disprove. Even Einstein said " It's as though the Earth is accelerating upwards".

Let's try another approach:
During some of my studies we observed natural radio waves emitted from gas clouds through the plane of our Galaxy. In doing this we could determine the distance and speeds of the spiral arms of the galaxy by measuring the change in wavelength of the radio waves. To get accurate measurements, we used some sophisticated software to account for the Earth's motion within the Galaxy, these being; Earth's axial spin, the orbit around the sun and the suns orbit around the Galaxy.
There were no formulas used to account for the Earth accelerating at 9.81 m/s^2.

Also, I do believe that when cosmologist are measuring the subtle differences in the Cosmic Microwave Backround Radiation (CMBR) to map the early universe, then they too need to account for the same motions and also the motion of the Galaxy around its centre of mass. They do not account for any acceleration due to UA.

If we were in fact accelerating as UA suggest, then we could actually measure the effects it would have on the CMBR. In the direction of acceleration the CMBR's would be greatly blueshifted and in the opposite direction it would be significantly redshifted, This is not what's being observed by the cosmologists. I think the CMBR can be used as reference frame in many aspects of physics/cosmology especially when travelling at relativistic speeds through acceleration.

#### JSS

• 1618
• Math is math!
##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #85 on: April 15, 2020, 06:10:20 PM »
Thanks for the explanation.
I would say that UA is probably the best evidence for FE'rs to back up their theory, as its very hard to disprove. Even Einstein said " It's as though the Earth is accelerating upwards".

Let's try another approach:
During some of my studies we observed natural radio waves emitted from gas clouds through the plane of our Galaxy. In doing this we could determine the distance and speeds of the spiral arms of the galaxy by measuring the change in wavelength of the radio waves. To get accurate measurements, we used some sophisticated software to account for the Earth's motion within the Galaxy, these being; Earth's axial spin, the orbit around the sun and the suns orbit around the Galaxy.
There were no formulas used to account for the Earth accelerating at 9.81 m/s^2.

Also, I do believe that when cosmologist are measuring the subtle differences in the Cosmic Microwave Backround Radiation (CMBR) to map the early universe, then they too need to account for the same motions and also the motion of the Galaxy around its centre of mass. They do not account for any acceleration due to UA.

If we were in fact accelerating as UA suggest, then we could actually measure the effects it would have on the CMBR. In the direction of acceleration the CMBR's would be greatly blueshifted and in the opposite direction it would be significantly redshifted, This is not what's being observed by the cosmologists. I think the CMBR can be used as reference frame in many aspects of physics/cosmology especially when travelling at relativistic speeds through acceleration.

Yes that's exactly right, we would absolutely see everything blue shifted in the sky, and red shifted if we drilled a hole through the Earth's disk and looked through it.

It's actually way worse than not detecting any blueshift.  As stated in another thread, if we have been accelerating at 1g for a mere 6000 years, the outside universe would experience 8.843e+1345 years of time. That's an insanely long amount of time. There wouldn't BE a universe outside at this point, which would be lucky because if there was, even a single PHOTON hitting the earth would vaporize it. I can't even calculate how much energy incoming light would have going that close to light speed. So the universe would have to be 100% empty. Everything we see would have to be, well, something else. It would mean that 100% of everything we know about the universe is wrong. All of it. That's a big stretch.

The basic issue here is that to make UA work it has to exist in a very different universe than our own. Planets, the stars, the sun, cosmic background radiation, gravity... none of it works. Literally everything not attached to the Earth has to have some alternate explanation.  Maybe some illusion or projection so the likely answer to your question is "CBR isn't real" or "CBR is just static leaking from the holo-emitters that create the sky."

UA breaks everything.

#### MathJunkie1

• 6
##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #86 on: April 15, 2020, 07:42:44 PM »
I assume Iactuallycanthink believes the earth is round, which is great! I think so too. If you use the conventional model of our Earth orbiting a celestial star, the Sun, it is accelerating and maintaining a constant speed. For the sake of argument, though, has anyone ever suggested that a flat earth could simply do the same? If it were facing inward, centrifugal force could plausibly create a gravitational force similar to our planet’s own.
Please get back with me if I sound crazy. This is the first time I put that thought out and I’m NOT a flat earther I swear!

#### JSS

• 1618
• Math is math!
##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #87 on: April 15, 2020, 08:18:10 PM »
I assume Iactuallycanthink believes the earth is round, which is great! I think so too. If you use the conventional model of our Earth orbiting a celestial star, the Sun, it is accelerating and maintaining a constant speed. For the sake of argument, though, has anyone ever suggested that a flat earth could simply do the same? If it were facing inward, centrifugal force could plausibly create a gravitational force similar to our planet’s own.
Please get back with me if I sound crazy. This is the first time I put that thought out and I’m NOT a flat earther I swear!

That's actually a great idea. There is nothing at all wrong with using your imagination, now you've given people something interesting to think about.

If the Earth were a disk, attached to the sun with a a rope and spun around it fast enough we would indeed experience centrifugal force, and it would be very similar to gravity.

The difference would be the Coriolis force for anything thrown or launched into the air, making it curve.  On something as big as a planet this effect would be small but absolutely measurable and we would have seen it. Artillery shells for instance would need to be corrected for it. Long distance battleship guns in fact have to take into account the curve and rotation of the Earth, so on a flat Earth being spun we would need different corrections.

Math time!  I used to design make believe rotating space stations in my spare time when I was younger, so I remember the formula for centrifugal force. (With help from Wikipedia)

g = v^2 / r

So g is the gravitational acceleration felt in meters per second, v is the radial velocity in meters per second, r is the radius in meters.

We can rearrange that to this to solve for the radial velocity.

v = (g * r)^0.5

We want 1g for the liner acceleration so that is 9.8m/s

Lets set the radius at 150,000,000,000m which is the distance to the Sun.

So we get...

( 150,000,000,000 * 9.8 ) ^ 0.5 = 1,212,435m/s

So that's pretty fast.  The speed of light is 299,792,458m/s so that's nearly 0.5 percent of the speed of light.  Whoo.

That speed would make one year about 9 days long.

If you fell off the edge, you would go flying off into space away from the sun at 0.5c for free.  This would make launching deep space probes super easy, just push it off the edge. Getting them back would be a problem.

Launching anything sunward would be interesting.  If you weren't careful it would slam back into the disk as it was being slung around.

This would make an awesome setting for a sci-fi story, actually.  Finding some crazy flat planet tethered to a star that aliens built.  I'd read that!

( Edit: Well duh, that's basically Niven's Ringworld stories but a disk instead of a ring. Same distance and speed, hah. The sci-fi comment made me remember it. )
« Last Edit: April 15, 2020, 08:27:01 PM by JSS »

#### Groit

##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #88 on: April 18, 2020, 03:48:48 PM »
During this time the Earth accelerates at 9.81 m/s^2 with respect to the cosmic ray.
It most certainly does not. Relativistic effects would make for pretty pronounced differences in the perception of the Earth's acceleration when observed from the cosmic ray's side of things versus the observation someone would make on the surface of the Earth. The cosmic ray would "see" the Earth accelerating at a much smaller rate. Smaller with each passing moment. Yet the observer on the Earth would observe no change in the Earth's acceleration at all.

So from the muons FoR the Earth's acceleration would be very small and we can say its negligible. Then the Earth and the muons are travelling towards each other at close to speed of light, the muons at 0.98c and lets say the Earth is also travelling at 0.98c (although it would probably be higher since its been accelerating for thousands of years).

So then using the velocity transformation to find the relative velocity:

is the relative velocity
is the muons velocity
is the Earth's velocity
using 1 for the speed of light

we have:

Now, the rest halflife time for the muons to decay is

Using the time dilation equation:

is Earth's clock
is the muons clock

So then the time measured on Earth would be:

This is not the time being measured by the scientists. The actual time measured is
And if we use the relative velocity between the Earth and the muons of 0.98c then this matches the observations made by the scientists:

If the Earth was hurtling towards the muons at near c then the muons would take 10 times longer to decay.

#### Clyde Frog

• 1043
• [kʰlaɪ̯d fɹɒg]
##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #89 on: April 18, 2020, 06:20:44 PM »
Now you want to talk about muons? I guess have fun continuing to shift the conversation.

#### Groit

##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #90 on: April 18, 2020, 08:36:44 PM »
Now you want to talk about muons? I guess have fun continuing to shift the conversation.

It's slightly off topic to the OP, but I've been talking about the 'muon measurements' since page 2 of the thread, but we couldn't seem to decide on a reference frame for the Earth.
Pete Svarrior said "take note of TheRealDave's posts" as you seem to know a bit about UA, and your last post suggested that the Earth is travelling close to the speed of light and the acceleration would be very small from the cosmic rays rest frame. Since muons are created by cosmic rays, i took your advice and used some SR to calculate the effects of time dilation when the Earth and the muons are travelling towards each other.

#### xasop

• 9442
• Professional computer somebody
##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #91 on: April 30, 2020, 10:09:26 AM »
If the Earth was hurtling towards the muons at near c then the muons would take 10 times longer to decay.

Your reasoning here is completely backwards.

You start with the calculated speed of these muons based on observations combined with the RE model. You then plug this RE-derived speed into the FE model (using a frame of reference corresponding to the Earth's velocity hundreds of years ago, for some reason) and conclude that the prediction of their decay time doesn't match observations. No shit?

That's not how science works. The only variable in this entire calculation that has been directly measured is the muons' decay time, which tells us their speed relative to the Earth. Any and all calculation of other variables must be done using a consistent model.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2020, 10:16:22 AM by Parsifal »
when you try to mock anyone while also running the flat earth society. Lol

#### BRrollin

• 265
##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #92 on: April 30, 2020, 02:53:47 PM »
If the Earth was hurtling towards the muons at near c then the muons would take 10 times longer to decay.

Your reasoning here is completely backwards.

You start with the calculated speed of these muons based on observations combined with the RE model. You then plug this RE-derived speed into the FE model (using a frame of reference corresponding to the Earth's velocity hundreds of years ago, for some reason) and conclude that the prediction of their decay time doesn't match observations. No shit?

That's not how science works. The only variable in this entire calculation that has been directly measured is the muons' decay time, which tells us their speed relative to the Earth. Any and all calculation of other variables must be done using a consistent model.

That is not quite correct either, because the muon lifetime has been pinned down using other collision experiments. Hence, We also can identify the inertial frame to be the Earth.

If the Earth was accelerating upwards, we would indeed measure a longer lifetime for the muon, rather than a shorter one.

The muon decay is experimental evidence that stands against UA.
“This just shows that you don't even understand the basic principle of UA...A projectile that goes up and then down again to an observer on Earth is not accelerating, it is the observer on Earth who accelerates.”

- Parsifal

“I hang out with sane people.”

- totallackey

#### JSS

• 1618
• Math is math!
##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #93 on: April 30, 2020, 10:18:46 PM »
So from the muons FoR the Earth's acceleration would be very small and we can say its negligible. Then the Earth and the muons are travelling towards each other at close to speed of light, the muons at 0.98c and lets say the Earth is also travelling at 0.98c (although it would probably be higher since its been accelerating for thousands of years).

Higher is an understatement.

I've tried to calculate what percentage of the speed of light a Flat Earth would be going after 6000 years of 1G acceleration and have yet to find a way of calculating it with the precision needed to get anything other than 100%.  It's going to be 99.99999% something, but with a LOT of nines.  I'm still trying to get an answer for my own curiosity.

I think I'll try again tonight to enter the equations into an infinite precision calculator of some sort and see if I can get a number.  It's a fun challenge.

It would be fast enough that a single muon would likely be a literal earth shattering event.

#### Pete Svarrior

• e
• Planar Moderator
• 15513
• (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #94 on: April 30, 2020, 10:24:41 PM »
Most of these objections continue to assume that the Earth "has been accelerating for thousands of years", relative to some mystical univeral frame of reference.

So, for the guys at the back: there is no such thing as a universal frame of reference. Similarly, saying that the Earth is moving at a certain percentage of c without defining the FoR is not just wrong, it's meaningless.

P.S.  All of us illiterate folks understood this the first time.

#### Tom Bishop

• Zetetic Council Member
• 10229
• Flat Earth Believer
##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #95 on: April 30, 2020, 10:51:30 PM »
Not all physicists agree that the muon anomaly represents new physics or a contradiction of the equivalence principle.

#### iamcpc

• 832
##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #96 on: April 30, 2020, 11:26:50 PM »
Most of these objections continue to assume that the Earth "has been accelerating for thousands of years", relative to some mystical univeral frame of reference.

So, for the guys at the back: there is no such thing as a universal frame of reference. Similarly, saying that the Earth is moving at a certain percentage of c without defining the FoR is not just wrong, it's meaningless.

Pete the issue here is that there has been some force pulling things down toward the earth for as long as we have history of. There are hieroglyphs from ancient Egypt depicting moving stone blocks along the ground because of some force which is pulling those blocks twoard the earth. That was literally thousands of years ago.

In UA this force is caused by the acceleration of the earth. Because we know this force existed for thousands of years, and the force is caused by acceleration, then the acceleration must have been happening for thousands of years.

#### BRrollin

• 265
##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #97 on: April 30, 2020, 11:45:43 PM »
Not all physicists agree that the muon anomaly represents new physics or a contradiction of the equivalence principle.

The g-2 anomalous magnetic moment of the muon is an entirely different subject, and has to do with quantum electrodynamics. It has nothing to do with relativistic time dilation, and instead involves the deviation from a point like structure as found through higher order loop corrections of Feynman diagrams.

The only connection between this topic and the current discussion is the word “muon.”

Perhaps you wish to start a new thread? I would be happy to talk more about it there, including detailing the mathematics of the renormalization process of the spacetime integrals. But it is not on-topic here.

Nevertheless, it is always important, if you wish to cite disagreement among physicists, to link published articles in peer reviewed journals. Because that is where the dialogues of disagreement takes place. Doing so also ensures one is not inadvertently linking to pseudoscientific tangents that seek to derail legitimate scientific discourse.

Scientists disagree on all sorts of things. This is one power of science
“This just shows that you don't even understand the basic principle of UA...A projectile that goes up and then down again to an observer on Earth is not accelerating, it is the observer on Earth who accelerates.”

- Parsifal

“I hang out with sane people.”

- totallackey

#### JSS

• 1618
• Math is math!
##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #98 on: April 30, 2020, 11:53:17 PM »
Most of these objections continue to assume that the Earth "has been accelerating for thousands of years", relative to some mystical univeral frame of reference.

So, for the guys at the back: there is no such thing as a universal frame of reference. Similarly, saying that the Earth is moving at a certain percentage of c without defining the FoR is not just wrong, it's meaningless.

I guess I'm confused. If the Earth is accelerating at 1G now, and is still accelerating at 1G in ten minutes, that's 10 minutes of acceleration.

So if you go back 1000 years, that's 1000 years of acceleration at 1G.

#### Tom Bishop

• Zetetic Council Member
• 10229
• Flat Earth Believer
##### Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT
« Reply #99 on: May 01, 2020, 12:23:15 AM »
Not all physicists agree that the muon anomaly represents new physics or a contradiction of the equivalence principle.

The g-2 anomalous magnetic moment of the muon is an entirely different subject, and has to do with quantum electrodynamics. It has nothing to do with relativistic time dilation, and instead involves the deviation from a point like structure as found through higher order loop corrections of Feynman diagrams.

The only connection between this topic and the current discussion is the word “muon.”

It is talking about how Einstein's Equivalence Principle may have or have not been properly implemented: "It is my melancholy duty to report that these articles are fundamentally flawed in that they fail to correctly implement the Einstein equivalence principle of general relativity."

The article links to a blog by physicist Luboš Motl which also talks about the equivalence principle for this:

https://motls.blogspot.com/2018/02/experiments-may-only-measure-gauge.html

Quote
For example, the equivalence principle says that if you perform an experiment inside a small enough and freely falling lab which has no windows, the results don't allow you to figure out whether you're in a gravitational field or not. If the ratio of the electron's and muon's magnetic moments depended on your being near Earth, you could say whether you're near the Earth inside that lab, and the equivalence principle would be violated. That's it.

Again, this description from physicist Luboš Motl is describing about how this muon anomaly may violate the equivalence principle. You are incorrect to claim that this does not have anything to do with relativistic effects.

If not this muon-equivalence-principle anomaly, what muon-equivalence-principle anomaly are you referring to?

Quote from: BRrollin
Nevertheless, it is always important, if you wish to cite disagreement among physicists, to link published articles in peer reviewed journals. Because that is where the dialogues of disagreement takes place. Doing so also ensures one is not inadvertently linking to pseudoscientific tangents that seek to derail legitimate scientific discourse.

The blog links to the work of physcists, and their disagreements. It shows that it is controversial. I can't see that you have linked us to anything.

This physicist sure seems to think that the anomalous muon magnetic moment is related to a test of relativistic time dilation:

https://inspirehep.net/literature/133026

Quote
Final Report on the CERN Muon Storage Ring Including the Anomalous Magnetic Moment and the Electric Dipole Moment of the Muon, and a Direct Test of Relativistic Time Dilation

Abstract: A comprehensive description of the muon storage ring and its operation is given, and the final results of the experiment are presented and discussed. The anomalous magnetic moments of positive and negative muons are found to be a μ + = 1165911(11) × 10 −9 and a μ − = 1165937(12) × 10 −9 giving an average value for muons of a μ = 1165924(8.5) × 10 −9 . The electric dipole moments were also measured with the results D μ += (8.6 ± 4.5) × 10 −9 e · cm and D μ − = (0.8 ± 4.3) × 10 −19 e · cm. Under the assumption of the CPT theorem these yield a weighted average of D μ = (3.7 ± 3.4) × 10 −19 e · cm. Finally the time transformation of special relativity is shown to be valid to (0.8 ± 0.7) × 10 −3 at γ ≅ 29.3. All the errors quoted here are one standard deviation and contain both statistical and systematic effects.

So again, what are you talking about when you claim that the anomalous magnetic moment has nothing to do with relativistic time dilation or the equivalence principle?

Maybe you should link to and list out these anomalous muon time dilation experiments for us, so we can see what they actually are.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2020, 03:13:43 AM by Tom Bishop »