Faster than light speed may be possible .. so what?

[12 Monkeys]

will any of these things help me build a time machine?

[Cyberia]

Faster-than-light neutrino measurement has two possible errors

http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/02/faster-than-light-neutrino-measurement-has-two-possible-errors.html?WT.mc_id=TWT_NatureNews


I suspected so.  Nevertheless, the team that found these results should be congratulated.  This is how science works.  They followed proper procedure.

[monkeymind]

Keep the faith brothers. Ignore this man (he's a scientist).
Science is wrong a lot.
 

[DumpsterFire]

Though technically, if the quantum entanglement problems could be overcome, FTL would be possible, if you were pure information.

You mean the ansible concept?

I'm certainly no physicist, but it would seem the most practical immediate use for quantum entanglement (utilized in a binary type application) would be instantaneous communication regardless of distance. The ansible. I don't think matter can ever go FTL though, at least not via acceleration as we know it.

[12 Monkeys]

I am starting to build my time machine DeLorean......should be ready when they have perfected + LS travel

[ungod]

Faster-than-light neutrino measurement has two possible errors

http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/02/faster-than-light-neutrino-measurement-has-two-possible-errors.html?WT.mc_id=TWT_NatureNews


I suspected so.  Nevertheless, the team that found these results should be congratulated.  This is how science works.  They followed proper procedure.

They should have put the Pope in charge - he's infallible.

[ParkingPlaces]

I read years ago that there was a primitive way to communicate faster than the speed of light. If you had a taut fishing line that ran between earth and Pluto and tugged on it at this end, the tug would be felt immediately on Pluto, even though it is almost four light hours away. Of course, a piece of fishing line that long would be too heavy to tug on, but it's the thought that counts.

Edit: fixed spelling.

[monkeymind]

Awesome!

[Historicity]

The fishing line thing would not work.  Electrons, protons and neutrons are spongy balloons of electromagnetic matter.  They are, in effect, solidified forms of light.   You would be imposing an electromagnetic pulse that would have to move faster.

The neutrino experiment was tantalizing because all the tests of relativity were on electromagnetic matter and there was a possibility that c applied only to that and neutrinos could have a slightly different speed which I will call c_neu.  Since I have less influence in the world of science than does 8 year old Lisa Simpson I doubt my notation would be adopted.

I just searched my history and I've lost a quote.  One of the chief Italian scientists on the project said just the other day on finding the loose cable that he should have expected it; nothing in Italy arrives ahead of time.

[monkeymind]

What about space itself? If space connects everything, why can't a "tug" on space be felt on Pluto? I suppose the tug would be felt everywhere all at once and would need to be filtered from all the randomly occurring tugs?

[ParkingPlaces]

I can't find reference to it on google, but some guy wrote his doctorate on the physics of fly fishing. He proved that the tug one end of the line is felt on the other end instantly, no matter what length the line is. And he got his PhD out of the deal. I know it may not be quite that true, but the article I read about it did mention the Pluto thing as an example of the implications.

He might have been a republican though, which negates the whole thing.

[monkeymind]

If the geodetic effect or frame dragging  could be controlled, wouldn't that be a similar result.
In other words, Einstein's idea that gravity is not a force but is a result of the distortion of space time.
A large object like the earth bends the fabric of space/time (geodetic effect).  The spinning of the earth twists the surrounding space (frame dragging) that (I think -which means nothing, I know) would be "felt" everywhere through out the space time continuum.

[monkeymind]

I know, I know, one would have to control a very large spinning object to take advantage of frame dragging. How big and how far the effect, I haven't a clue how to determine that. Is it even possible to slow or speed up spin of a planet or moon, whatever?

[Grogs]

I've seen this question asked of GR several times, and the answer is always the same: gravity propagates at the speed of light. Thus, if you were somehow able to make the sun disappear completely, we would have absolutely no way of knowing until 8 minutes later when the change reached us. Think of the space like a giant trampoline - If you jumped up and down, it will take a while before the waves reach a person 100 miles away and he feels your motion.

As for the fishing line, I remember we studied something like that in my modern physics class when we were discussing potential violations of the speed of light. There were no real violations, and the answer for why this wouldn't work was pretty much the one Historicity gave. The string is held together by the electromagnetic force, so when you pull on one end, the atom closest to your hand pulls on the next, which pulls on the next, which pulls on the next, etc, and that propagates at the speed of light. I suspect that, if the story isn't just an urban legend, the abstract would have started by making some assumptions that aren't present in the real universe, i.e., if the laws of physics were different, it would work.

[monkeymind]

Ha! Gravity propagates at the speed of light... it's the gravity wave. Of course. Even massless particles have to travel at the speed of light!

Too much religion has ruined my mind!

[Dante]

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/03/16/einstein-can-rest-easy-neutrinos-are-not-faster-than-light-speed/

Nope, looks like Einstein's theory still holds true.

[Cyberia]

New detector weighs in: neutrinos don't exceed light speed[1]

Another one.

1.	I told you so.

[DumpsterFire]

I know, I know, one would have to control a very large spinning object to take advantage of frame dragging. How big and how far the effect, I haven't a clue how to determine that. Is it even possible to slow or speed up spin of a planet or moon, whatever?

Actually, in the late 70's it was determined that if an object roughly the size of Christopher Reeve was to orbit a planet at enormous velocity, and in a direction exactly opposite the direction of that planet's rotation, the result would be to slow and then even reverse the planet's rotation.

I believe there were some time-travel related implications, as well.

[kymer]

Could someone explain to this layman why light speed is considered the fastest possible. Thanks.

[One Above All]

Could someone explain to this layman why light speed is considered the fastest possible. Thanks.

In short, light is composed of massless "particles". Logic dictates that it will be the fastest thing in the universe.

[kymer]

I don't really understand the ins and outs of visible light. Could you explain what you mean?

[Tinyal]

Could someone explain to this layman why light speed is considered the fastest possible. Thanks.

I don't know about anyone else - but I'm not here to provide you with an education.  There are many, many summaries of Einstien's work available on the internet (you know, that thing you using to post your one-liner questions) - consider doing some homework.

And these single-line questions of yours are now getting tiring, I think I'll begin to ignore them.

[HAL]

I don't really understand the ins and outs of visible light. Could you explain what you mean?

Much of the information you are asking on the forum is available easily on the internet, simply by searching for it. For the basic information you are asking for in this and other threads please use the available resources on the internet.

If you want to talk about ideas that you have an opinion on that you might want other people to comment on, please do so.

[kymer]

Could someone explain to this layman why light speed is considered the fastest possible. Thanks.

I don't know about anyone else - but I'm not here to provide you with an education.  There are many, many summaries of Einstien's work available on the internet (you know, that thing you using to post your one-liner questions) - consider doing some homework.

And these single-line questions of yours are now getting tiring, I think I'll begin to ignore them.

Sorry, I'm just trying to learn a bit from you all. Anyway I find that it's always best to keep things concise, hence the one line questions.

[monkeymind]

We may be getting suspicious....

First: Why ask these questions here instead of Physics or science forum?
Second: This looks suspiciously like something we have all seen b4. You really have answers to your questions, but are probing to see which way to go at it.

[kymer]

I'm sorry you feel that way.

[Dante]

I'm sorry you feel that way.

If you really have legit questions, I suggest you start a new topic for the specifics. It would go a long way to improving your standing here, and would help everyone have consistent conversation.

[joebbowers]

I thought I posted this a couple of days ago, but I guess I forgot to hit post or something...

It is possible to travel faster than the speed of light, infinitely faster in fact, using entanglement.

As you may already know, entangled protons mirror each other's rotation, polarization, etc. If you reverse the spin of one particle, it's entangled counterpart will reverse itself as well, instantly[1] regardless of their distance apart from each other.[2]

By utilizing this simple principle, it would be easy to build a binary data interpreter using counterclockwise and clockwise spin as 1 and 0, and transmit data between planets, even solar systems, instantly.

The most significant hurdle to building this super data transmitter is keeping the entangled particles stable. Right now we are only able to keep them stable for fractions of a second, but in time we will be able to keep them stable indefinitely.

The other problem is getting the receiver to wherever it needs to be. That would have to be done with whatever our most powerful propulsion technology is at the time, most likely a fraction of lightspeed at best.

But once it's there on location we could instantly transmit schematics and commands to fabricate shelter, air purifiers, even people if our fabricators are sophisticated enough, which I expect they will be in 20 years or so.

Thus a copy of a person could be transmitted across the stars and rebuilt on the other side, essentially allowing faster than light teleportation. There is still a question of what to do with the original. Well, I see no harm in copying people, as I don't believe in such superstitious nonsense as souls, but you could simply destroy the original as soon as it's been scanned. A combination scanner/incinerator for example. Of course if you do that then you run the risk of losing the person forever if there were any errors in the data transmission or fabrication, but hey, no form of transportation is 100% safe.

More about quantum entanglement here...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement

1.	Or at least so quickly that our most sophisticated equipment cannot detect the delay.
2.	Einstein and others worked hard to disprove this, as it seemed to defy the laws of physics. In the end they accepted the fact that it works, despite not understanding how or why.

[Cyberia]

By utilizing this simple principle, it would be easy to build a binary data interpreter using counterclockwise and clockwise spin as 1 and 0, and transmit data between planets, even solar systems, instantly.

Er, no.  While entangled particles seem to transmit information to each other at FTL speeds, the process cannot be used as an information channel in the human perspective. 

Consider that we entangled two particles and separated them by a large distance.  The particles have undefined spin until they are measured.  This doesn't mean they have a spin and we just don't know what it is, they actually haven't established a specific spin yet.

When we measure either particle, it takes on a certain spin with a 50-50% chance and the other takes on the opposite spin value nearly instantaneously.  But how does the receiving side KNOW when to measure?  They don't.  They can't tell if their particle has a specific spin unless they measure it.....an act which would actually set it, if it wasn't already set.  They only way around this would be to transmit a radio signal saying "hey we set a particle spin" and that would obviously defeat the whole point.

Even if there was a way around that, since you cant specify the spin (it's 50-50), you can't establish a binary information channel.  For example, if you could set the spin on the transmitting side, and then the receiving side simply checks every few seconds for particles with a set spin (again we're ignoring the measurement problem) then they could could receive a sequence of 1s and 0s in binary like a computer.   But you CAN'T specify the spin, so the receiving side would ALWAYS get a random sequence.

Even though the particles are exchanging information at FTL or even instantaneous speeds, there is no known way for us to use this as an information channel.  It's a bummer, I know.