Time Dilation and Muon Energy vs. height (Muon Experiment)

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the theoretical and practical aspects of measuring time dilation in muons using a detector. Participants explore the minimum height required for the detector to achieve a 1% time dilation effect while ensuring a sufficient count of muons for reliable data collection. The conversation touches on the application of special relativity, experimental setup, and data analysis techniques.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Experimental/applied

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks to determine the minimum height for a muon detector to observe a 1% time dilation, referencing a derived formula involving decay time and constants.
  • Another participant identifies a potential error in the formula presented by the first participant, suggesting a correction to the expression for time dilation.
  • A third participant shares practical experience with the Teachspin device, noting the importance of conducting independent exponential curve fitting rather than relying on provided software, and discusses the implications of truncated exponential distributions.
  • This participant also mentions discrepancies in lifetime measurements, attributing some of the differences to contamination from shorter-lived particles and suggests methods to mitigate these effects in data analysis.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the accuracy of the formulas used and the reliability of the data collection methods. There is no consensus on the best approach to analyze the muon decay data or the implications of potential errors in the formulas.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations related to the assumptions in their formulas and the challenges posed by finite data sets in accurately fitting exponential decay curves. The discussion also highlights the dependence on specific experimental conditions, such as altitude and potential contamination from other particles.

piareround
Messages
77
Reaction score
0
Hey guys

The lab manual for the class is found here
http://advancedlab.physics.gatech.edu/labs/Muons/Muons.pdf

One of the things, I was interested in figuring out was what would be the minimum height needed to put a moun detector (currently at ground level) in order to detect a minimum 1% time dilation with at least a muon count of 100-1000 muons. Because I have only one detector and where I live is very level, I would have to present theoretical results to my professor first in my lab report to his help in find a place to get to measure time dilation. Here is the formula, I derived:
t'= \alpha/\rho \ln(\sqrt{{\gamma }^{2} - 1}+\gamma) =\alpha/\rho =\ln(\sqrt{{\rho/\alpha*h }^{2} - 1}+\rho/\alpha*h )
\alpha = m*c/C_{0}


So I tried to use the time dilation formula gave in the book to put the lab frame decay time t' in terms of time and then figure out the a decay time that give me at least something near the moun decay rate of 2.19. However, each time I plug it in I get unusual results for constants like \alpha α .

I have a spanish 1001 final in like 10 minutes, so I was wonder if later I post my questions can someone out there who knows enough about the Teach Spin Muon experiment help me understand what I am doing wrong with special relativity?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
piareround said:
Hey guys

The lab manual for the class is found here
http://advancedlab.physics.gatech.edu/labs/Muons/Muons.pdf

One of the things, I was interested in figuring out was what would be the minimum height needed to put a moun detector (currently at ground level) in order to detect a minimum 1% time dilation with at least a muon count of 100-1000 muons. Because I have only one detector and where I live is very level, I would have to present theoretical results to my professor first in my lab report to his help in find a place to get to measure time dilation. Here is the formula, I derived:
t'= \alpha/\rho \ln(\sqrt{{\gamma }^{2} - 1}+\gamma)

Looking at your .pdf , you definitely have an error in the symbolic result for the integral, the correct formula is:

t'= \alpha/\rho \ln(2 \sqrt{{\gamma }^{2} - 1}+\gamma)

There might be other errors but this is the first one I noticed, so I stopped here.
 
Thanks :)
 
I've run the Teachspin device for a couple of months at about 1500 meters altitude. Some things to watch out for:
  1. You should probably do your own exponential curve fitting, rather than trusting the canned software that comes with it. If you do this, realize that you are not fitting a full (infinite time) exponential, but a truncated exponential over a finite time. This would have been a little messy 10 years ago, but recently the truncated exponential was solved analytically (F.M. Al-Athari, "Estimation of the Mean of Truncated Exponential Distribution", Journal of Mathematics and Statistics 4(4) 284-288 (2008)) so it's not that hard anymore.
  2. Many people are finding that their lifetime numbers are slightly lower than the "correct" value. There is an attempt to explain this on the Teachspin website, but I can't make any sense of it. In my own data, I saw evidence for a tiny amount of contamination by shorter-lived particles (probably mainly pions and/or Klongs). Although there were only a few of these (about 0.3%), their lifetime was so much shorter (empirically around 28 nS average, versus over 2000 nS) that it could explain about half the discrepancy. NOTE: At sea level you might get different results. Also NOTE: I was only able to curve fit for a sum-of-2-exponentials to separate out these shorter-lived particles because I had a lot of data. If you only get a thousand events, you probably won't be able to do that reliably.
  3. The Teachspin is unreliable at recording times below 2 or 3 multiples of the 20 nS FPGA clock. If you look at the number of events in each bin, you can see this. It's probably best to discard the first 3 bins and slide the other bins over by 60 nS. You can do this because the exponential distribution is memoryless. A side-benefit of doing this is that any effect from contamination by pions etc. will be greatly reduced.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
11K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
8K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K