----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" <[email protected]> Date: Monday, June 8, 2009 6:01 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Time Dilation and relativity. Was Relativistic magnetic fields and time
> > > Taylor J. Smith wrote: > > > Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > > > ... time dilation isn't really just a simple number. > > > > Hi All, 6-8-09 > > > > Here are some thoughts on time dilation. > > > > Jack Smith > ... > > "It is usually stated that this dilation of the proper > > time of a body in motion has been proven by experiments... > > Total nonsense, of course. > > You can't *PROVE* a theory. You can only DISPROVE it. > > The meson data is consistent with the predictions made using SR, > and so > can be viewed as supporting it. Other interpretations are certainly > possible, however, and this experiment, alone, certainly doesn't > *prove*that time dilation occurs; to claim so is to step way > outside the bounds > of correct interpretation of the results. (This experiment *does* > disprove the null hypothesis, which is that there's nothing at all > "funny" going on with the meson half-lives.) > > The "failure to prove the theory" is true of any individual > experiment,of course -- you can always find another theory which is > also not > disproved by a particular experiment. The trick, if you want to > replaceSR with something else, is to find a theory which is not > disproved by > *any* of the experiments which have been performed (and replicated). > That's harder than you might think. The new theory should also suggest novel experiments that wouldn't have been imagined within the framework of the older theory. Harry
