The muon experiment from the muon's frame of reference I was considering the muon experiment that is typically used to provide a justification to special relativity.
I understand the experiment from the Earth observer's perspective (with time dilation). However, I have trouble understanding the experiment from the muon's perspective.
I understand that the length should contract, but what I do not understand is why time dilation does not occur. From the muon's perspective, isn't the Earth moving towards it at a very high speed? If so, shouldn't the time it takes the Earth to travel to and meet up with the muon dilate? Therefore, wouldn't the effects of time dilation and length contraction cancel out?
I know I am at fault somewhere, I just do not know where. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you!
 A: I think the thing that you are missing here the lifetime of a muon is a property of the particle. It is defined in terms of the time that passes for the particle. 
In essence decay lifetimes are clocks in the particle frame of reference. So the scientist has to correct for time dilation, but a hypothetical muon-fair just uses the time on his fairy-watch.
And they both use the length of the lab as they measure it (which is shorter for the fairy).
In the end they make the same prediction.
A: If what is seen from Earth frame is correct (effective life time extension due to muons process slowing down) is true, then:


*

*The muons once created must have had accelerated to the relative speed to us. You do not expect earth accelerating to a static muons every time they enter atmosphere. You would feel enormous acceleration forgetting all other absurdities involved.

*The abstract coordinate system associated with muon would still be including Einstein's Clock synchronisation to give the muon frame an illusion that it does not move relatively to light. This would create an apparent reciprocal effect of earth time rate slowing down contrary to reality. It is more elaborate to prove that effective lifetime of muons will be consistently calculated from both points of view.

A: I am unable to see how anyone can feel that they have done this subject justice without deeply considering clock synchronizations as an integrated part of any working model they accept, and I am just not seeing the integration in other people's thinking. As a mere deeply interested layman, I only get to read about the work of others, which is quite limiting. Nevertheless, the June 16, 2016 activity contained in this link interests me greatly, especially the way it ends, and seems directly relevant to this question:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_relative_simultaneity_a_misinterpretation_of_Special_Relativity

Andrew Wutke · Thales Group
Allan
Thanks for the response to this old question.  By now this question is
  now an affirmative statement.  The relative simultaneity does not
  exist. Only relative synchroneity of clocks

I would encourage anyone who harbors doubts about the current prevailing wisdom of relative simultaneity (which is to say anyone who thinks kinetic energy is more than an idle observer of the dynamics of our existence) to read that entire post. While the details are beyond the scope of my own current concerns, the generalities of the conclusions agree with my own thoughts.
Furthermore, I found much of the high level notions presented in this earlier work quite compelling, and at odds with current prevailing wisdom: https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0606188.pdf
Finally, I present my own thoughts for consideration or otherwise for anyone that feels that something here just isn't quite right. Alas, I have no professional qualifications to support my thinking, just years of obsessive consideration and a deep intuitive sense that I see things as they are. I wrote this before finding the other two links previously posted, and maybe some day, after my knowledge grown deeper and my thoughts are more evolved, I'll write a more professional and technical piece: https://www.quora.com/The-muon-experiment-shows-that-scientists-record-time-as-moving-more-slowly-for-the-muons-than-for-the-scientists-Would-the-muons-think-that-time-had-passed-more-slowly-for-the-scientists/answer/Craig-Heile
