7n7is, why bother making such certain statements about things you know nothing about or have very little experience with. If you happen to be a Physics professor please do share your research with us that adds some backing and understanding to your views, and as I guess none of us are physics professors, it would be useful to try and explain things at a more public level. Otherwise your statements are no more meaningful than a deaf man telling you sound doesn't exist.
Try coding a GPS system, you will find it is largely inaccuracy without taking into account relativity theory.
Something you mite find interesting is that you can achieve super-luminous speeds in materials under certain conditions. You you get a sort of "light boom". True phenomena. Check out Cherenkov radiation.
Also, you can have other things travelling faster than c, the key rule is that no Information travels faster than c. Check out light spots and shadows. Also if you think about what a wave of light really is, you can think about how the up/down motion of the wave has to travel faster than the propagating speed c. But that is fine! Have a ponder.
Try coding a GPS system, you will find it is largely inaccuracy without taking into account relativity theory.
Something you mite find interesting is that you can achieve super-luminous speeds in materials under certain conditions. You you get a sort of "light boom". True phenomena. Check out Cherenkov radiation.
Also, you can have other things travelling faster than c, the key rule is that no Information travels faster than c. Check out light spots and shadows. Also if you think about what a wave of light really is, you can think about how the up/down motion of the wave has to travel faster than the propagating speed c. But that is fine! Have a ponder.
I once wrote a garbage generator which looked at letter patterns. It could produce text which looked a bit like Welsh to an English-speaker. A similar program working at word level could produce text which looks like science to a non-scientist. Even more fun, it could probably produce Sokal-like arty papers or advertising copy for audio gizmos.
Of course, how do we know that 7n7 is a real person?
Of course, how do we know that 7n7 is a real person?
Actually the speed of light in a vacuum is an upper limit. Light can be slowed to zero in a laboratory. A single photon suspended. It has been done.
Information CAN be transferred faster than the speed of light if the reference of distances is our four dimensional space. It is called quantum entanglement. Einstein called it "spooky action at a distance" It has been demonstrated.
Information CAN be transferred faster than the speed of light if the reference of distances is our four dimensional space. It is called quantum entanglement. Einstein called it "spooky action at a distance" It has been demonstrated.
I'd be very cautious to announce you can transmit information faster than light, even with entanglement... my opinion is you can't. i'm fairly sure if you try the information gets destroyed. Much like how a black hole sort of spits out what it sucks in, but destroys all information. Entanglement is not that simple... yes the action of an electron here is affected by an electron at the edge of the universe instantaneously... but I think the point is that no tangible information (as we know it, or interpret it) is transferred in that instant. The action of the observer observing, kills the predicted outcome or information gain. I think there must be a higher level of stuff going on that we have no hope of understanding... at least for a while?
Right, you get a pair of electrons and set them up in an entangled state. The procedure is that you collapse the wave function of one of them to know the state of the other "instantly". It's far beyond our experimental skills to be able to separate the two entangled electrons to a distance large enough to be able to then collapse one and accurately measure the "instant" information transfer. The entangled states people have set up so far have been on the nm scale? perhaps even mm scale? So no way accurate enough to test if it's faster than light. I think you need FAR larger distances to be able to measure the instantaneous result. Thus, experimentally it is not possible to measure faster than light information travel. Furthermore my gut feeling is that the act of the observer separating two electrons to such a large distance, would destroy the gain of information transfer at speeds faster than c.
These are my thoughts, as I haven't seen any evidence of faster than light information transfer in science. And the physics says it's highly unlikely in my opinion. I'm sure it would be everywhere if it was possible to do such experiments. I'm open to anyone linking me anything that could show it though?
These are my thoughts, as I haven't seen any evidence of faster than light information transfer in science. And the physics says it's highly unlikely in my opinion. I'm sure it would be everywhere if it was possible to do such experiments. I'm open to anyone linking me anything that could show it though?
No this is not true, it is a mis-understanding of the results presented by the press for the usual sensationalistic angle. CW your intuition is actually pretty good, you can't change the result when you "sample" the spin (for instance) on one of the entangled particles therefore you can't effect instant information transfer.
Last edited:
There used to be a very nice interview with one of the folks that did one of those experiments (UK?), that explained the difference between what seems to be and what is. Maybe my way of explaining it is too simplistic.
Interesting!
I remember a photo and a few lines of text saying that research was carried, on testing advanced encryption techniques using coherent polarized light beams sent over long distances.
The photo was showing a booth with a set up (it seemed to me like a theodolite) high up in the Swiss Alps.
That was some 15 years ago or more (I was still reading EW & WW)
George
I remember a photo and a few lines of text saying that research was carried, on testing advanced encryption techniques using coherent polarized light beams sent over long distances.
The photo was showing a booth with a set up (it seemed to me like a theodolite) high up in the Swiss Alps.
That was some 15 years ago or more (I was still reading EW & WW)
George
I think you may be referring to the quantum key distribution scheme?
Quantum key distribution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
i find quantum states and encryption to be very, very interesting subject.
The challenge with using quantum states and photon entanglement is that it cant be amplified securely without modifying the quantum states (altough i suspect one can concieve a system using qubits to build federated key schemas). until then this limits practical range to ~100km or so over fiber optics (i think the swiss guys showed practicality up to 7km back in 2001).
Indeed an ingenious way of transmitting bits one by one using qubits. Here is some good reading for those who are interested
: http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/crypt/overview.php
fun stuff!
Quantum key distribution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
i find quantum states and encryption to be very, very interesting subject.
The challenge with using quantum states and photon entanglement is that it cant be amplified securely without modifying the quantum states (altough i suspect one can concieve a system using qubits to build federated key schemas). until then this limits practical range to ~100km or so over fiber optics (i think the swiss guys showed practicality up to 7km back in 2001).
Indeed an ingenious way of transmitting bits one by one using qubits. Here is some good reading for those who are interested
: http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/crypt/overview.php
fun stuff!
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.