Originally Posted by Nereid

I am missing something Ari, so I've constructed some toy models. In the following, "N" is not presenting an ATM idea, nor defending such an idea; "{A}" is an ATM idea, previously presented in the ATM thread (and which has nothing to do with SR or muons).

1) N: "{A} is inconsistent with good observational results."

2) N: "{A} is inconsistent with good observational results concerning the relationship between the observed half-life of muons and their speed."

3) N: "{A} in internally inconsistent because {words}."

4) N: "{A} is inconsistent with the SR, the theory."

5) N: "in SR, muon half-lives are a function of the (perceived) speed of the muons."

Is your proposal, re a rule change, that N needs to be held accountable for answering questions about the following classes of (N) statement: {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, none of the above}?

(to be continued)