Blub, blub, blub....

Silly, silly. STR says no preferred frame of reference. The humans are the ones accelerating. Muon at rest. No effect on muon decay. So, sorry.

BTW, I am loving every moment of this as you display monumental ignorance of STR? Or would you prefer to just toss STR out for the moment because it is inconvenient?

The humans are the ones accelerating. Muon at rest. — Rich

So you support your position of there being no preferred frame by stating your preference for a frame?You support the reciprocality principle by denying it applies between two frames?

Wow. Your grades as school must have been spectacular. You can't seem to make a single point that isn't a self-contradiction.

You are a mess.

I said no preferred frames of reference. The muon can be said to be at rest and thus there is no effect on its decay.

Who the heck am I talking to. A kid?

You know, you are, like good scientist, suppose to say that STR does not apply to accelerating systems, and then I'm suppose to ask you, then where the heck is there such a thing as a non-accelerating system?

Then you are suppose to throw out STR as being universally irrelevant, and nd then I throw out STR time, linear and all. And then you are left with GTR time which is ?????, well definitely not linear.

Am I missing too fast for your you? No worry, just turn it around, and you'll be moving too fast for me.

The muon can be said to be at rest and thus there is no effect on its decay. — Rich

So you can subtract away all acceleration to arrive at an inertial frame. But after constraining second derivative motion to get first degree motion, how do you actually arrive at actual zeroeth degree motion - this "proper rest" you want to talk about?

This is why the reciprocity is between the second and first degree derivatives of motion, not between some absolute frame with matchingly absolute resting coordinates.

To put any rate on a muon's decay, some reference frame must be established as your chosen coordinate basis. Conventionally one can make that the global cosmic backdrop. That seems safe enough for SR purposes. A muon's decay could be then measured against that as its inertial frame. A slow muon could be compared to a fast muon from some general cosmic point of view.

But to claim baldly that a muon has some proper spacetime coordinate all of its own - a zeroeth derivative - shows you haven't really thought this relativistic measurement business through.

You know, you are, like good scientist, suppose to say that STR does not apply to accelerating systems... — Rich

You seem really confused. Perhaps you don't get the consequences of SR adopting a Minkowski geometry framework where spacetime is united as four dimensions? That means we can map one inertial frame onto another via a Lorentz transformation. Length contraction and time dilation - the reciprocality - gets handled automatically by now being built into the mathematical structure. The constant c - lightspeed - is now the scaling factor. So you get that inverse relation, c/1 vs 1/c, hardwired in as a new universal constraint.

Restmass arises as the possibility of going slower than c - so slow as to be "at rest". And a muon at rest is experiencing much more time due to dilation, so its decay comes as fast as it possibly can. A muon travelling at near the speed of light has a clock that ticks slower, so its decay is stretched out. All this of course being the view we are seeing having fixed our frame of reference so that one muon is not moving relative to us, the other is moving at near lightspeed.

Which nicely brings me back to my first reply to the OP.

You are a real lightweight. Go find someone else who might sit in awe of your junior league analyses and your foolhardy predictions.