Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 2:49 am
And there are theoretical particles called tachyons that some physicits have discussed as possibly going FTL, but most don't think they exist.
Page 4 of 4
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 2:54 am
The tachyons are located around Uranus, mostly
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 9:07 am
maybe we already did send ourselves a message, but were not advnaced enough to find it 
or maybe you already thought of this halfassed idea and it failed, as usual.
im guessing the latter is true
or maybe you already thought of this halfassed idea and it failed, as usual.
im guessing the latter is true
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 10:10 am
I only read about the first 8 posts in this thread and got bored. But kracus, even assuming the universe does alternately explode and implode in a continuing cycle, i see no reason to believe that every cycle is identical. There is no "you" every time, so this whole thread, as far as i can see, is predicated on a fundamentally flawed premise.
In short, fuck off.
In short, fuck off.
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 2:23 pm
Actualy it definitely couldn't work. Let's say I could make a message appear right now in another galaxy let's say 20 light years away. It would be 20 years before I saw the message here.tnf wrote:[xeno]Julios wrote:doesn't work out - there's some sort of fundamental censorship principle that prevents any information from being transfered.tnf wrote:Well, I guess if we look at the idea of quantum entanglement information might be transferred instantaneously...but "we" can't go faster than light..that's what I meant.
edit: actually, with quantum, information regarding the quantum state of something like a photon would be instantaneously transferred to a photon it is entangled to...so, yea, the idea of FTL information transmission is theoretically possible.
I forget the details - and maybe some theorists think differently - but i seem to remember Roger Penrose (I think in Shadows of the Mind) explaining it.
Just read up on this in Greene's book. Yea, Kracus, even with quantum entanglement (which you really need to understand for this point to make any sense), no information can be transmitted at faster than light speeds. Jules - the 'censorship' is a pretty simple idea now that I have read up on it again (funny what you forget over the years). Basically, even though two things might be entangled (lets say two photons), it is impossible to encode any information using measurements of one of them. We cannot predict the outcome of any of the measurements, all we can predict is that whatever the outcome of the measurement of the local photon is, the distant one will correlate. But all these results are really just random sequences.
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 2:27 pm
Light takes 20 years to travel 20 light years???!?!?!?!?!@?~!@#?!@?$#
That's an astounding observation, kracus.
That's an astounding observation, kracus.
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:05 pm
Kracus wrote:Actualy it definitely couldn't work. Let's say I could make a message appear right now in another galaxy let's say 20 light years away. It would be 20 years before I saw the message here.tnf wrote:[xeno]Julios wrote: doesn't work out - there's some sort of fundamental censorship principle that prevents any information from being transfered.
I forget the details - and maybe some theorists think differently - but i seem to remember Roger Penrose (I think in Shadows of the Mind) explaining it.
Just read up on this in Greene's book. Yea, Kracus, even with quantum entanglement (which you really need to understand for this point to make any sense), no information can be transmitted at faster than light speeds. Jules - the 'censorship' is a pretty simple idea now that I have read up on it again (funny what you forget over the years). Basically, even though two things might be entangled (lets say two photons), it is impossible to encode any information using measurements of one of them. We cannot predict the outcome of any of the measurements, all we can predict is that whatever the outcome of the measurement of the local photon is, the distant one will correlate. But all these results are really just random sequences.
Oh Kracus...
Quantum entanglement results in the instantaneous 'transmission' of quantum state information. Of course if we are talking in terms of basic matter/energy being used as 'medium' to transfer said message the speed of light would be a limiting factor. That's why I brought up the quantum entanglement issue - it allows for the faster than light transmission of something (we really don't know for sure what). But the limiting factor with this is that we can't encode a message using it. The doesn't have any direct relationship with the problem.
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:08 pm
Yeah I find a lot of people say that sending particle data in such a small format is useless because you can't send any information but I think that you could use a system like this like morse code. So you don't need to send any info, you just need to send something that's detectable of course on the receiving end.tnf wrote:Kracus wrote:Actualy it definitely couldn't work. Let's say I could make a message appear right now in another galaxy let's say 20 light years away. It would be 20 years before I saw the message here.tnf wrote:
Just read up on this in Greene's book. Yea, Kracus, even with quantum entanglement (which you really need to understand for this point to make any sense), no information can be transmitted at faster than light speeds. Jules - the 'censorship' is a pretty simple idea now that I have read up on it again (funny what you forget over the years). Basically, even though two things might be entangled (lets say two photons), it is impossible to encode any information using measurements of one of them. We cannot predict the outcome of any of the measurements, all we can predict is that whatever the outcome of the measurement of the local photon is, the distant one will correlate. But all these results are really just random sequences.
Oh Kracus...
Quantum entanglement results in the instantaneous 'transmission' of quantum state information. Of course if we are talking in terms of basic matter/energy being used as 'medium' to transfer said message the speed of light would be a limiting factor. That's why I brought up the quantum entanglement issue - it allows for the faster than light transmission of something (we really don't know for sure what). But the limiting factor with this is that we can't encode a message using it. The doesn't have any direct relationship with the problem.
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:11 pm
Nice idea, but you couldn't use it like morse code. Again, we can't predict the outcome of any of the initial measurements we do, all we know is that they will be the same for the entangled particle, however far away it is.
Morse code requires you putting in a definite signal - encoding information.
Can't do it with this. Trust me, some of the true heavyweights in physics have already said so, and the logic is pretty straightforward once you understand quantum theory.
Morse code requires you putting in a definite signal - encoding information.
Can't do it with this. Trust me, some of the true heavyweights in physics have already said so, and the logic is pretty straightforward once you understand quantum theory.
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:16 pm
I see... That's too bad though instantaneous transfer of info would make for an awsome ping time. 
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:20 pm
Yea, it would be nice...my railgun would be unstoppable.