Nick Herbert finds Ray Jensen's error in FTL Signal Gedankenexperiment



 Science > Physics > Nick Herbert finds Ray Jensen's error in FTL Signal Gedankenexperiment

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 1
Topic: Science > Physics
User: "Jack Sarfatti"
Date: 27 Nov 2005 06:08:04 PM
Object: Nick Herbert finds Ray Jensen's error in FTL Signal Gedankenexperiment
On Nov 27, 2005, at 3:13 PM, nick herbert wrote:
Hi Ray--
Your ingenious FTL scheme was forwarded to me by Jack Sarfatti.
Having constructed dozens of such schemes while writing my FTL book (none
of which ever worked) I am familiar with most of the pitfalls a would-be
EPR FTL signaller will encounter.
In your case the problem occurs with your Eq 4 where you give the
<amplitudes> for detection of photons at the two interferometer arms. What
you want is the probabilities (amplitudes squared) for each of the two
types of pure-state photons that impinge on the interferometer.
Since these distributions are caused by separate photons (a single photon
interfers with itself) one must add probabilities--not amplitudes as you
have done. When you do this, the sin squared plus cos squared identity
wipes out all fringe variation and the two cases (0 and 1 input) give
exactly the same result at the output.
Ah yes! Now I recall. It's been 15 years since I thought about that.
Nick, I think, is correct.
What did you expect? That FTL signalling would be easy?
Mother Nature isn't easy. She wants to be coaxed.
But thanks for trying.
warm regards
Nick Herbert
http://members.cruzio.com/~quanta
http://quantumtantra.com
==================================================
On Nov 27, 2005, at 1:52 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
The key is his fig 2 & eq. 3. At the moment, without thinking about it
very much, I cannot refute what he claims about eq. 3. Does anyone see
the error there? If there is no way to tell which path photon 2 takes
then there should be local interference according to Feynman. And it
seems there is no way to tell what state photon 1 was in on the left. So
why won't it work? Any opinions?
On Nov 27, 2005, at 1:30 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
bcc
Probably this paper is wrong, but I have not yet had time to read it
carefully. Any opinions? The author is aware of Stapp's et-al objection.
Begin forwarded message:
From:

Date: November 27, 2005 1:14:36 PM PST
Subject: Re: Your STAIF paper
enclosed is a copy per your request. Thank you for your
interest. Sincerely,
Ray Jensen
<20050822FTLC3.pdf>
.


  Page 1 of 1


Related Articles
Quantized Elevator Gedankenexperiment?
Gedankenexperiment to test Equivalency
Nick Herbert's critique of Ray Jensen's FTL signal idea
Did Nick Herbert find an error in Ray Jensen's FTL EPR Signal Device?
Higgs signal? --- could be big, big news
Please answer my rational question [was Re: AM radio: astronomically-high frequency modulator signal present on an astronomically-low frequency carrier signal]
Faster Than Light Quantum Signal Nonlocality?
Signal Noise Ratio (kst)
Why sending a signal, or travel, back in time can't be done
Triangulation of Broadcast Signal
AM radio: astronomically-high frequency modulator signal present on an astronomically-low frequency carrier signal
All popular electronic circuit simulators demonstrate FTL signal propagation in.............................................................
Automated Signal Analysis - AutoSignal
Please answer my question [was Re: AM radio: astronomically-high frequency modulator signal present on an astronomically-low frequency carrier signal]
MASSIVE objects are lightspeed frame draggers only for the outgoing signal!!
 

NEWER

pg.1612     pg.1232     pg.940     pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER