Can music really be transmitted faster than light?

[Rasine]

i just heard that some outlandish men in germany transmitted music faster than light. is this true?

 

[whozum]

Music travels at the speed of sound, so I'm going to say no just on that basis. That fails on many more levels though.

 

[Claude Bile]

Music travels at the speed of sound, so I'm going to say no just on that basis. That fails on many more levels though.

The music obviously isn't in sound form, it is probably transmitted optically. I seem to recall reading something similar in New Scientist magazine, will see if I can find any verification of this.

Claude.

 

[WhirlwindMonk]

The music obviously isn't in sound form, it is probably transmitted optically. I seem to recall reading something similar in New Scientist magazine, will see if I can find any verification of this.

Claude.

I also remember reading something about this too. I don't remember where, and I think it has something to do with quantum tunneling, but I can't be certain.

 

[whozum]

I don't know, but when I think music, I think a series of audible notes, but that's just me.

 

[moose]

is this true?

No, if it was, everyone and their pet rocks would know about it.

It probably is just some technicality that makes it technically faster than light in some way but in reality it's not.

 

[JamesU]

if they sent it faster than the speed of light, then how could they detect it? it would've gone back in time, thus never reaching it's destination point (while the experament was taking place)

 

[Gza]

I think you are referring to the group velocity of the wavepacket comprised of the component waves of the signal to be greater than the speed of light. This has been documented already, but doesn't violate relativity.

 

[Lisa!]

I don't think that this news would be right.I heard about breaking light speed a lot but it's not been true.I think if it happens 1 day physicists will be

 

[Anzas]

the day someone even reaches the speed of light will be the day people will know how to divide by 0

 

[Danger]

The music obviously isn't in sound form, it is probably transmitted optically

Are you familiar with the concept that 'optically' means 'by light'? Light does not under any circumstances go faster than itself.
On the other hand, it has been documented for decades that physical objects travel as fast as or faster than light. The specific rule in relativity theory is that no object with mass can travel at the speed of light in vacuum.
Massive objects can exceed light speed in vacuum, as long as that is their lowest boundary. That's what 'tachyons' are about. Conversely, massive objects can exceed light speed in a refractive medium without violating the laws. 'Cherenkov radiation', for instance, is the bluish glow that you see in a uranium storage pool and is caused by neutrons and some other particles going faster than light speed in water.

 

[Lisa!]

the day someone even reaches the speed of light will be the day people will know how to divide by 0

You're so optimistic!

 

[ZapperZ]

On the other hand, it has been documented for decades that physical objects travel as fast as or faster than light. The specific rule in relativity theory is that no object with mass can travel at the speed of light in vacuum.
Massive objects can exceed light speed in vacuum, as long as that is their lowest boundary. That's what 'tachyons' are about.

However, let's not forget that "tachyons" are not one of those that have been "documented". They have not been detected, much less verified to be superluminal.

Zz.

 

[ZapperZ]

i just heard that some outlandish men in germany transmitted music faster than light. is this true?

I didn't stick my nose into this thread before this because I HATE question like this (was that a strong-enough denounciation?). :)

"I just heard" or "I read somewhere" shouldn't be used anymore, at least not on PF physics section. If one demands a thorough, coherent, and valid reply, then the question should also, at the very least, not be ambiguous. You must always cite the source of where you got such a thing. This allows the rest of us to (i) double check if you read it correctly and not simply misinterpret what you read (a common occurrence); (ii) to address accurately what is being said or written.

The only possible scenario that I can think of for such a question was the situation a while back (yes, this is outdated) that someone claiming to have transmitted a radio signal via tunneling through a medium of a piece of Mozart symphony, and comparing it with the signal that just went through air. The claim then was that the signal that tunnneled through traveled faster.

This is nothing new. There has been repeated claims that tunneling could be a superluminal process. It has not been verified, and the claim made above is still under dispute.

Of course, this could all be moot if the OP isn't referring to this particular experiment.

Zz.

 

[Danger]

However, let's not forget that "tachyons" are not one of those that have been "documented". They have not been detected, much less verified to be superluminal.

True that they haven't been documented, but their existence is allowed for in Einstein's formulae. I haven't heard anything about them being ruled out by any QM theories, but that's a field that I can't keep up with very well. The last that I read about them, people were still trying to figure out some way to detect them if they're there. As for the superluminosity, that's why they're called 'tachyons'. If they're slower than light, they'd be something else.

 

[jma2001]

The only possible scenario that I can think of for such a question was the situation a while back (yes, this is outdated) that someone claiming to have transmitted a radio signal via tunneling through a medium of a piece of Mozart symphony, and comparing it with the signal that just went through air. The claim then was that the signal that tunnneled through traveled faster.

Yes, I believe that is exactly what the OP was referring to, I am surprised no one has come up with the name yet. It is Guenter Nimtz of Cologne University, here is a page describing his "superluminal tunneling device":
http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/online/qo02/nimtz/

He gained some notoriety a few years back when he was featured on the television program NOVA:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/2612time.html

Here is an article by John G. Cramer that explains why this, and similar devices, do not violate causality. It has to do with the distinction between the group velocity and the front velocity of a light wave:
http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw105.html

 

[panthera]

i just heard that some outlandish men in germany transmitted music faster than light. is this true?

its possible..its an analog signal and it can be transformed to electromagnetic wave signal, NOT NECCESSARILY an optical one but can be any other form as we know there are many types of EM waves, light being one of those.In fact we don't transmit it as sound wave for long distance as it is liable to noise...we know that C< Vp i,e phase velocity (wave trains)but it can't be used for transmission of message.I am sure in air its impossible to exceed speed of light but in some other medium its possible to send msg faster than light as in the medium the speed of light gets reduced to c/n..n is R.I of the medium ...

 

[panthera]

I also remember reading something about this too. I don't remember where, and I think it has something to do with quantum tunneling, but I can't be certain.

tunneling is a total diff concept and you can't correlate it with this...it refers to alpha emission from nucleus! I will die if i hear this once more

 

[Anzas]

You're so optimistic!

im realistic, seeing as in relativity $$\gamma$$ is given by

$$\gamma = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - \frac{v^2}{c^2}}}$$

if anything reaches the speed of light either relativity is incorrect or we can now divide by 0

 

[ZapperZ]

tunneling is a total diff concept and you can't correlate it with this...it refers to alpha emission from nucleus! I will die if i hear this once more

Well, I hope you don't "die" from hearing this, but I think I may have misunderstood what you have said here. Are you implying that "tunneling" concept is only restricted to "alpha emission from nucleus", and that photon tunneling or any other form of tunneling just doesn't exist?

Zz.

 

[Lisa!]

im realistic, seeing as in relativity $$\gamma$$ is given by

$$\gamma = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - \frac{v^2}{c^2}}}$$

if anything reaches the speed of light either relativity is incorrect or we can now divide by 0

Yeah,poor physicists have to develope new theories But who knows everything is possible,so maybe we would divide by zero!

 

[panthera]

Well, I hope you don't "die" from hearing this, but I think I may have misunderstood what you have said here. Are you implying that "tunneling" concept is only restricted to "alpha emission from nucleus", and that photon tunneling or any other form of tunneling just doesn't exist?

Zz.

okay fine if you are talking about photon tunneling but it cannot(as far as i remember) carry any information at a speed more than the speed of light but it's implications were not clear to me when i had an overview of the article so i had almost forgotten about it[thanks for reminding] ...but whatever be "faster than light communication" is not possible as per me...

 

[Danger]

its possible..its an analog signal and it can be transformed to electromagnetic wave signal, NOT NECCESSARILY an optical one but can be any other form as we know there are many types of EM waves, light being one of those.

True, but for purposes of relativity, all electromagnetic propagation is considered 'light'. Again, it cannot go faster than itself, regardless of the medium.

 

[ZapperZ]

okay fine if you are talking about photon tunneling but it cannot(as far as i remember) carry any information at a speed more than the speed of light but it's implications were not clear to me when i had an overview of the article so i had almost forgotten about it[thanks for reminding] ...but whatever be "faster than light communication" is not possible as per me...

Well, if you have looked at my earlier response in this thread, I too am skeptical that tunneling processes are superluminal. However, I wasn't addressing that issue with my question to you. I just wanted to make sure that what you mean by "tunneling" isn't restricted to just the alpha emission. There is a whole zoo of processes that make use of this phenomenon (STM, for example) involving more than just alpha particles.

Zz.

 

[panthera]

True, but for purposes of relativity, all electromagnetic propagation is considered 'light'. Again, it cannot go faster than itself, regardless of the medium.

hey i just meant we can consider it to travel faster than light in a medium NOT air...i mean the music in air (or any other medium having smaller RI than the one through which light travels) may travel faster than C in medium(other than air) ...i think i confused u...

 

[Danger]

hey i just meant we can consider it to travel faster than light in a medium NOT air...i mean the music in air may travel faster than C in medium(other than air) ...i think i confused u...

I think that I see what you mean, but if so then it doesn't actually apply here. It appears that you are setting up a situation similar to a car on a dock racing against a boat in the water beside it. Obviously, sound in air travels a lot faster than light in molasses, but it doesn't provide any practical benefits.

 

[panthera]

I think that I see what you mean, but if so then it doesn't actually apply here. It appears that you are setting up a situation similar to a car on a dock racing against a boat in the water beside it. Obviously, sound in air travels a lot faster than light in molasses, but it doesn't provide any practical benefits.

yes i know but else its impossible to send information faster than light. so i took that only possible case.

 

[Danger]

so i took that only possible case.

As sneaky approach, I must admit. (You're studying law, aren't you?)

 

[panthera]

As sneaky approach, I must admit. (You're studying law, aren't you?)

would you elaborate? the question has no answer so i told the only possibility which can hold good...whats wrong there?

 

[Danger]

would you elaborate? the question has no answer so i told the only possibility which can hold good...whats wrong there?

What I meant was that you're thinking like a lawyer. You casually slipped into a different set of circumstances without making it obvious that you were doing so, and thus bypassed the original question. Since the thread-starter was referring to a technique described as 'superluminal', and that means 'faster than light in the same medium', your answer didn't apply to the question. I'm not faulting your approach, merely pointing out that it's of no benefit to the OP.