| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Pentcho Valev" |
| Date: |
05 Oct 2005 02:05:29 AM |
| Object: |
Superluminal Signals and Ignatius of Loyola |
Pentcho Valev wrote:
Perhaps there is no statement in science more popular than "According
to Einstein's theory of relativity, nothing can move faster than
light". Accordingly, one would expect the discovery of greater speeds
to become one of the greatest sensations for the last 100 years. Not in
the zombie world:
http://i-newswire.com/pr43033.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796
The authors, who are experts in telecommunication and obviously have
nothing to do with the theory of relativity, don't wish to offend
relativists and accordingly offer the following short explanations:
"They were also able to create extreme conditions in which the light
signal travelled faster than 300 million meters a second. And even
though this seems to violate all sorts of cherished physical
assumptions, Einstein needn't move over - relativity isn't called
into question, because only a portion of the signal is affected."
"By using the oscilloscope to trace the pulse's strength and speed, the
researchers confirmed they sent the signal's peak tunnelling through
the cable at more than four billion kilometres per hour. "It really is
basement science," Robertson said. The apparatus is so simple that
Robertson once assembled the setup from scratch in 40 minutes. While
the peak moves faster than light speed, the total energy of the pulse
does not. This means Einstein's relativity is preserved, so do not
expect super-fast starships or time machines anytime soon."
Initiated relativists find the explanations extremely convincing
whereas the rest of the scientific world is taught to obey the
principle of Ignatius of Loyola:
"That we may in all things attain the truth, that we may not err in
anything, we ought ever to hold it a fixed principle, that what I see
white I believe to be black if the Romish Church define it so to be".
There is a nice demonstration of the principle of Ignatius of Loyola.
See an explanation of the superluminal speed:
http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/APPLETS/20/20.html :
"However, the total wave (the bottom trace, in white) has its strongest
peaks where all the individual frequencies are in phase, and the places
where that happens shift with time, at a "speed" that is greater
than c. Nothing is actually travelling with these peaks, though;
they're just an artifact of the way the different frequencies are
slipping in and out of phase."
So superluminal signals or "wave packets" are just "nothing".
Experimentalists send them, detect their arrival and yet they are
"nothing". Again, those interested in the verification of the theory of
relativity should introduce a superluminal signal in the case of
Problem 6 ("Train in a tunnel"), p. 47 (solution on p. 53), in
http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~phys16/Textbook/ch10.pdf
Pentcho Valev
.
|
|
| User: "Harry" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals and Ignatius of Loyola |
05 Oct 2005 07:45:02 AM |
|
|
"Pentcho Valev" <pvalev@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1128495929.301589.16460@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Pentcho Valev wrote:
Perhaps there is no statement in science more popular than "According
to Einstein's theory of relativity, nothing can move faster than
light". Accordingly, one would expect the discovery of greater speeds
to become one of the greatest sensations for the last 100 years. Not in
the zombie world:
http://i-newswire.com/pr43033.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796
The authors, who are experts in telecommunication and obviously have
nothing to do with the theory of relativity, don't wish to offend
relativists and accordingly offer the following short explanations:
"They were also able to create extreme conditions in which the light
signal travelled faster than 300 million meters a second. And even
though this seems to violate all sorts of cherished physical
assumptions, Einstein needn't move over - relativity isn't called
into question, because only a portion of the signal is affected."
"By using the oscilloscope to trace the pulse's strength and speed, the
researchers confirmed they sent the signal's peak tunnelling through
the cable at more than four billion kilometres per hour. "It really is
basement science," Robertson said. The apparatus is so simple that
Robertson once assembled the setup from scratch in 40 minutes. While
the peak moves faster than light speed, the total energy of the pulse
does not. This means Einstein's relativity is preserved, so do not
expect super-fast starships or time machines anytime soon."
Initiated relativists find the explanations extremely convincing
whereas the rest of the scientific world is taught to obey the
principle of Ignatius of Loyola:
"That we may in all things attain the truth, that we may not err in
anything, we ought ever to hold it a fixed principle, that what I see
white I believe to be black if the Romish Church define it so to be".
There is a nice demonstration of the principle of Ignatius of Loyola.
See an explanation of the superluminal speed:
http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/APPLETS/20/20.html :
"However, the total wave (the bottom trace, in white) has its strongest
peaks where all the individual frequencies are in phase, and the places
where that happens shift with time, at a "speed" that is greater
than c. Nothing is actually travelling with these peaks, though;
they're just an artifact of the way the different frequencies are
slipping in and out of phase."
So superluminal signals or "wave packets" are just "nothing".
No, you are confused, due to sloppy wording in news articles. Nevertheless
you got the clearest explanation that you could wish for. What did you not
understand from the above animation?
Just restart the animation, and look at the initial speeds of the
wavefronts. Did you see any wave front go faster than c?
Maybe a more material explanation could help. Did you hear of the one in
which in theory, the interface of fast closing large scissors can move
faster than light? The interface is however just an appearance from the
combined movement of the two blades.
Now try to make a single light pulse go faster than c - or similarly, a pair
of scissors.
Good luck.
Harald
Experimentalists send them, detect their arrival and yet they are
"nothing". Again, those interested in the verification of the theory of
relativity should introduce a superluminal signal in the case of
Problem 6 ("Train in a tunnel"), p. 47 (solution on p. 53), in
http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~phys16/Textbook/ch10.pdf
Pentcho Valev
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals and Ignatius of Loyola |
05 Oct 2005 01:33:33 PM |
|
|
----- Original Message -----
From: "Harry" <harald.vanlintel@epfl.ch>
Newsgroups:
sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.skeptic,sci.philosophy.tech
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 5:45 AM
Subject: Re: Superluminal Signals and Ignatius of Loyola
"Pentcho Valev" <pvalev@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1128495929.301589.16460@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Pentcho Valev wrote:
Perhaps there is no statement in science more popular than "According
to Einstein's theory of relativity, nothing can move faster than
light". Accordingly, one would expect the discovery of greater speeds
to become one of the greatest sensations for the last 100 years. Not in
the zombie world:
http://i-newswire.com/pr43033.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796
The authors, who are experts in telecommunication and obviously have
nothing to do with the theory of relativity, don't wish to offend
relativists and accordingly offer the following short explanations:
"They were also able to create extreme conditions in which the light
signal travelled faster than 300 million meters a second. And even
though this seems to violate all sorts of cherished physical
assumptions, Einstein needn't move over - relativity isn't called
into question, because only a portion of the signal is affected."
"By using the oscilloscope to trace the pulse's strength and speed, the
researchers confirmed they sent the signal's peak tunnelling through
the cable at more than four billion kilometres per hour. "It really is
basement science," Robertson said. The apparatus is so simple that
Robertson once assembled the setup from scratch in 40 minutes. While
the peak moves faster than light speed, the total energy of the pulse
does not. This means Einstein's relativity is preserved, so do not
expect super-fast starships or time machines anytime soon."
Initiated relativists find the explanations extremely convincing
whereas the rest of the scientific world is taught to obey the
principle of Ignatius of Loyola:
"That we may in all things attain the truth, that we may not err in
anything, we ought ever to hold it a fixed principle, that what I see
white I believe to be black if the Romish Church define it so to be".
There is a nice demonstration of the principle of Ignatius of Loyola.
See an explanation of the superluminal speed:
http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/APPLETS/20/20.html :
"However, the total wave (the bottom trace, in white) has its strongest
peaks where all the individual frequencies are in phase, and the places
where that happens shift with time, at a "speed" that is greater
than c. Nothing is actually travelling with these peaks, though;
they're just an artifact of the way the different frequencies are
slipping in and out of phase."
So superluminal signals or "wave packets" are just "nothing".
Einstein said it best: "Nothing can traver faster than light." He is right:
Nothing can go as fast as it wants to go, and is not bounded by C. See my
web site to lears now to manipulate 'Nothing' meaningfully.
No, you are confused, due to sloppy wording in news articles. Nevertheless
you got the clearest explanation that you could wish for. What did you not
understand from the above animation?
Just restart the animation, and look at the initial speeds of the
wavefronts. Did you see any wave front go faster than c?
Maybe a more material explanation could help. Did you hear of the one in
which in theory, the interface of fast closing large scissors can move
faster than light? The interface is however just an appearance from the
combined movement of the two blades.
Now try to make a single light pulse go faster than c - or similarly, a
pair
of scissors.
Good luck.
Harald
This is a nice gedanken. Now imagine if your scissor blades are infinitly
sharp and rigid. If a photon is att he intrface of the scissors as they
close faster than light, what happens to the poor photon when it is bisected
by this point of nothing moving faster than C? Does it get snipped in half?
Experimentalists send them, detect their arrival and yet they are
"nothing". Again, those interested in the verification of the theory of
relativity should introduce a superluminal signal in the case of
Problem 6 ("Train in a tunnel"), p. 47 (solution on p. 53), in
http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~phys16/Textbook/ch10.pdf
Pentcho Valev
"Ultimately it is the concept of nothing and its reciprocal, infinity, that
will trip up and hang western civilization."
Eddy the trashcan man, 1995.
Greysky
www.allocations.cc
Learn how to build a FTL radio.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Harry" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals and Ignatius of Loyola |
06 Oct 2005 05:10:03 AM |
|
|
"Greysky" <greyskyat@sbcglobaldot.net> wrote in message
news:10V0f.4113$Zs3.2286@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Harry" <harald.vanlintel@epfl.ch>
Newsgroups:
sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.skeptic,sci.philosophy.tech
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 5:45 AM
Subject: Re: Superluminal Signals and Ignatius of Loyola
"Pentcho Valev" <pvalev@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1128495929.301589.16460@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Pentcho Valev wrote:
Perhaps there is no statement in science more popular than "According
to Einstein's theory of relativity, nothing can move faster than
light". Accordingly, one would expect the discovery of greater speeds
to become one of the greatest sensations for the last 100 years. Not
in
the zombie world:
http://i-newswire.com/pr43033.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796
The authors, who are experts in telecommunication and obviously have
nothing to do with the theory of relativity, don't wish to offend
relativists and accordingly offer the following short explanations:
"They were also able to create extreme conditions in which the light
signal travelled faster than 300 million meters a second. And even
though this seems to violate all sorts of cherished physical
assumptions, Einstein needn't move over - relativity isn't called
into question, because only a portion of the signal is affected."
"By using the oscilloscope to trace the pulse's strength and speed,
the
researchers confirmed they sent the signal's peak tunnelling through
the cable at more than four billion kilometres per hour. "It really
is
basement science," Robertson said. The apparatus is so simple that
Robertson once assembled the setup from scratch in 40 minutes. While
the peak moves faster than light speed, the total energy of the pulse
does not. This means Einstein's relativity is preserved, so do not
expect super-fast starships or time machines anytime soon."
Initiated relativists find the explanations extremely convincing
whereas the rest of the scientific world is taught to obey the
principle of Ignatius of Loyola:
"That we may in all things attain the truth, that we may not err in
anything, we ought ever to hold it a fixed principle, that what I see
white I believe to be black if the Romish Church define it so to be".
There is a nice demonstration of the principle of Ignatius of Loyola.
See an explanation of the superluminal speed:
http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/APPLETS/20/20.html :
"However, the total wave (the bottom trace, in white) has its strongest
peaks where all the individual frequencies are in phase, and the places
where that happens shift with time, at a "speed" that is greater
than c. Nothing is actually travelling with these peaks, though;
they're just an artifact of the way the different frequencies are
slipping in and out of phase."
So superluminal signals or "wave packets" are just "nothing".
Einstein said it best: "Nothing can traver faster than light." He is
right:
Nothing can go as fast as it wants to go, and is not bounded by C. See my
web site to lears now to manipulate 'Nothing' meaningfully.
No, you are confused, due to sloppy wording in news articles.
Nevertheless
you got the clearest explanation that you could wish for. What did you
not
understand from the above animation?
Just restart the animation, and look at the initial speeds of the
wavefronts. Did you see any wave front go faster than c?
Maybe a more material explanation could help. Did you hear of the one in
which in theory, the interface of fast closing large scissors can move
faster than light? The interface is however just an appearance from the
combined movement of the two blades.
Now try to make a single light pulse go faster than c - or similarly, a
pair
of scissors.
Good luck.
Harald
This is a nice gedanken. Now imagine if your scissor blades are infinitly
sharp and rigid.
That's the same as imagining to go at the speed of light. We can imagine
that, but we should not be surprised if the result is against the laws of
physics (garbage in -> garbage out) . :-)
If a photon is att he intrface of the scissors as they
close faster than light, what happens to the poor photon when it is
bisected
by this point of nothing moving faster than C? Does it get snipped in
half?
- You don't need infinitely rigid scorrors for that.
- The scissors themselves don't close faster than light.
- Your question is interesting for quantum physics, and is independent of
"faster than c".
Thus:
What happens when a shutter closes in much less than the photon transit
time, and a photon is just entering the shutter slit when it happens? BTW, I
don't know the answer on that, foremost as I'm not sure yet what the right
interpretation is of the photon concept(s).
Harald
Experimentalists send them, detect their arrival and yet they are
"nothing". Again, those interested in the verification of the theory of
relativity should introduce a superluminal signal in the case of
Problem 6 ("Train in a tunnel"), p. 47 (solution on p. 53), in
http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~phys16/Textbook/ch10.pdf
Pentcho Valev
"Ultimately it is the concept of nothing and its reciprocal, infinity,
that
will trip up and hang western civilization."
Eddy the trashcan man, 1995.
Greysky
www.allocations.cc
Learn how to build a FTL radio.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Helmut Wabnig EmailAddress" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals and Ignatius of Loyola |
05 Oct 2005 02:47:57 AM |
|
|
On 5 Oct 2005 00:05:29 -0700, "Pentcho Valev" <pvalev@yahoo.com>
wrote:
See an explanation of the superluminal speed:
http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/APPLETS/20/20.html :
Very nice applet. Send this to N I M T Z.
:-=)
w.
"However, the total wave (the bottom trace, in white) has its strongest
peaks where all the individual frequencies are in phase, and the places
where that happens shift with time, at a "speed" that is greater
than c. Nothing is actually travelling with these peaks, though;
they're just an artifact of the way the different frequencies are
slipping in and out of phase."
So superluminal signals or "wave packets" are just "nothing".
Experimentalists send them, detect their arrival and yet they are
"nothing". Again, those interested in the verification of the theory of
relativity should introduce a superluminal signal in the case of
Problem 6 ("Train in a tunnel"), p. 47 (solution on p. 53), in
http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~phys16/Textbook/ch10.pdf
Pentcho Valev
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
