[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: starship-design: This and that.

KellySt@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 6/18/97 5:51:16 PM, hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu  wrote:
> >Questions:
> >
> >To: Steve VanDevender
> >Re: Traveling Faster Than Light.
> >
> >In message dated Sun Jun 15 1997 you write: (reformated)
> >
> >> More importantly, relativistic physics, as we now know it,
> >> does not in any way prohibit a material object from traveling
> >> at any speed less than C, but does prevent anything from traveling
> >> faster than that.
> >
> >It is my understanding (limited though it may be) that Einstein's
> >equations do not prohibit travel FASTER THAN the speed of light,
> >but only prohibit travel AT the speed of light.  Is this not correct?
> Thats what I remember.  Of course that transition past C might be a problem.
>  Its not a theoretical imposibility.

The Transition past the C barrier might not be so dificult.  for a
single particle, all you'd need to do is get it to make a small
tunneling jump.  for example,

1) Accelerate to near light speed (99.99.... %) as close as you can.
2) make a quatum jump of only a very short distance which happens in
zero time.

> Kevin writes again.
> >To: Steve VanDevender
> >Re: Talking Faster Than Light.
> >
> >In message dated Sun Jun 15 1997 you write: (reformated)
> >
> >> The few FTL effects that are thought to exist in particle
> >> physics don't translate to macroscopic objects, and even
> >> when postulated don't transmit information or mass faster
> >> than light.
> >
> >Again, my limited understanding tells me that communication via
> >particle/wave duality phenomenom is possible.  Via the following method:
> >
> >1) Generate a single photon every 1/100 second.
> >2) use a beam spiltter to give the photon a 50% chance of:
> >       3a) going to your friend (or enemy) at Tau Ceti.
> >               -or-
> >       3b) into a trap for 12 years (perfect reflectors, whatever)
> >
> >Once the other photon has had enough time to arrive at Tau Ceti, send
> >your 12 yr old photon into a double slit experiment.  Your friend (or
> >enemy) does the same.  You both observe the pretty, pretty, interference
> >pattern.
> >
> >Now comes the tricky part:
> >You turn on a particle detector and are able to decide exactly which
> >slit the photon went through. of course, your interference pattern
> >disappears, but
> >
> >SO DOES THE OTHER GUY'S (and at the same time too)
> >
> >After sending your morse code message, you turn off your particle
> >detector and stare at the interference pattern again (pretty... 8)
> >
> >Suddenly the pattern begins disappearing in an orderly fashion as your
> >friend (who is now your enemy for ruining your interference pattern)
> >transmits his message:
> >
> >>>Hey, thanks a lot, JERK! you riuned my interference pattern :( <<
> >
> >Aside from the obvious technical problems of observing the same photon
> >at the same time (whatever "same time" might mean)(and BTW I can finagle
> >around that one too if you insist.)  This method should allow FTL
> >communication.  and temporal communication as well.  Causality be
> >damned.
> Sounds familure?
> Oh, what do you project your interstellar interfearence pattern on?

Any solid object.  The reason this works is that when a single photon
(behaving as a wave) encounters two closely spaced slits, it goes
through both of them, and this is what produces the interference
pattern.  When a photon (behaving as a particle) encounters two closely
spaced slits, it must choose one or the other, and the pattern
disappears.  This effect (interference breakdown at a distance) has been

> Kevin writes again.
> >To: all
> >Re: support of Kyle
> >
> >First let me (mis)quote Clark's first law:
> >
> >"When an intelligent but young scientist says that something is
> >possible, he is almost certainly correct.  When an elderly but
> >distinguished scientist says something is impossible, he is almost
> >certainly incorrect."
> Well its not always true.  ;)

No, it's not always true, but it's true often enough to make me want to
listen fully to the younger guy before making any judgement.  See my
.sig line for an idea of what happens to those who say "it can't be
done".  BTW, Einstein himself was nailed by this very phenomenom when he
said "God does not play dice with the universe."  We now suspect, that
not only does God play dice, but they are loaded as well.

> Kevin writes again.
> >
> >You may say: "But how can one generate such a tremendous negative energy
> >(or gravitation) gradient?"
> >
> >This is a valid question, but we might as easily ask Kelly how he
> >intends (exactly now) to initiate a sustained fusion burn in his
> >explorer class engines.  ----
> Would you prefer pulsed?  <Noisy!>

Hey, no problem, I live in the flight path of the airport, I can handle
any amount of noise you care to generate  ;)

Kevin "Tex" Houston 		http://umn.edu/~hous0042/index.html
Webmaster			http://www.urly-bird.com/index.html
"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and
Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." A. Einstein