Re: starship-design: Autodynamics, relativity, etc.

["N. Lindberg" <nlindber@u.washington.edu>]

<SNIP>  
	I've seen that site.  The fact that they complain about all the
criticism they've recieved makes them very hard to take seriously.  Thanks
for the book recommendations.  As to your next comment about relativity
being falsified, we already know both theories are "wrong" because they
are classical descriptions of a decidedly quantum world.  GR will
eventually (hopefully) be seen as the classical solution to some kind of
guage field theory.  Also, what is the "EPR" effect?
Best Regards,
Nels Lindberg


> Autodynamics-don't trust it. Carezani conveniently ignores many known
> facts, especially his energy calculations for accelerating particles.
> The relativistic predictions have been confirmed EXPERIMENTALLY in the
> lab, not just on paper. Do get a couple of books: 1. "Space-time
> Physics" by Wheeler and Taylor., 2. "Black holes and Time Warps:
> Einstein's Outrageous Legacy" by Kip Thorne. These are excellent books
> on the subjects. But I ask you to NOT do the following: 1. Do not close
> your mind to the possibility that either SR or GR may one day be
> falsified; or any other theory for that matter. 2. Do not believe
> unwarranted assumptions; such as: "Nothing can travel faster than light
> in a vacuum." (see my notes below) 3. Don't disregard an experimental
> result on the grounds that it disagrees with conventionally accepted
> theory. 4. If you do an experiment, and get a strange result, ask
> yourself: "How am I fooling myself? What might I have overlooked that
> could account for my anomalous result?"
> 
> Faster than light?: It happens. It's true, everywhere you look, there is
> a superluminal process taking place. It is called the "EPR effect," but
> don't get your hopes up; it cannot be used to transfer meaningful
> information. Can there be faster than light transfer of information?
> Probably. I have personally done an experiment where I had this as a
> result. On wednesday, if all goes well, I will do this again with a
> double modulated signal. The modulation I used? FM. The setup is
> proprietary. So, I give this to you as simply an interesting tidbit.
> Don't go running around and tell everyone that it has been done, because
> I could be wrong. And for all you know, I could just be some idiot
> thinking this up for idle pleasure. What my point is: don't give up on
> it. There are serious attempts to do it. Well, that about does it for
> now.
> 
> Best regards,
> Kyle R. Mcallister
>