- #1
falloutcast
- 12
- 0
if it were possible to send a message or travel at speed's higher than light what would happen? i know that at the speed of light time would stop.but beyond...?
Hans Dorn said:Messages already have been sent faster than light speed, by making use of the tunnel effect.
Hans Dorn said:Messages already have been sent faster than light speed, by making use of the tunnel effect.
ZapperZ said:Please try not to use Wikipedia as a source, especially when you don't know the validity of the information that you are citing.
Zz.
Hans Dorn said:I'm a physics layman, so please bear with me...
I was under the impression that when a photon is created, it's wave function instantly fills the entire universe, i.e. there is a very small, but non-zero possibility of detecting it virtually anywhere.
Is this correct?
ZapperZ said:This is a completely different subject and should not be discussed in this thread. You are asking about non-locality, where a particle's position is spread out over various locations. This is NOT the same as having a FTL movement!
Zz.
Hans Dorn said:Nonlocality leads to the possibility of FTL communication, though:
JamesUniverse said:Yeah there have a particle that travel faster than a light which is ka-ki-yon I don't know if I spell it right or not, but I think not, but anyway this particle can not travel in a speed that lower than light year it can only travel in a speed that faster than light year. But this is just a theory can not be improve yet, but now scientists try figure it out right now.
sanman said:Okay, so what about these vacuum fluctuations, which are said to be occurring at the sub-Planck scale. If we apply sub-Planck even to the time-axis, then doesn't this imply events which are occurring faster than light?
falloutcast said:can't a virtual particle's travel faster than light? or some connection between virtual particle's and and the idea of faster than light.
03myersd said:If we take a photon and split it so that the two are entangled, then no matter what we do to one happens to the other INSTANTLY.
So you may think: "Hey I can send messages faster than light using this method."
But you can't.
falloutcast said:is something traveling faster than light equivelent to something "going back in time"?
Hans Dorn said:I can't help but find this fact to be quite unfair :)
I fail to see why the double slit experiment with entangled photons can't be used as a communication device.
The setup is like this: One half (photon A) of a photon pair with entagled momentum is sent through a double slit and then detected (by detector A), while the other half (photon B) is captured by another detector (B).
Since detector B is able to determine his photon's momentum, and hence the momentum of the entangled photon A, detector A doesn't see an interference pattern.
This changes when you put a lens in the right place front of detector B that "maps" all B photons to the same spot, and makes their momentum indistinguishable.
With the lens in place, the pair's momentum is undecided, and detector A sees an interference pattern.
This setup seems to be able to transmit FTL messages. You have 2 easily distinguishable signals at detector A (absence/presence of interference) and can send these signals by placing/removing the lens at point B.
Can you give me some pointers to why this can't work?
Hans Dorn said:The setup is like this: One half (photon A) of a photon pair with entagled momentum is sent through a double slit and then detected (by detector A), while the other half (photon B) is captured by another detector (B).
Since detector B is able to determine his photon's momentum, and hence the momentum of the entangled photon A, detector A doesn't see an interference pattern.
This changes when you put a lens in the right place front of detector B that "maps" all B photons to the same spot, and makes their momentum indistinguishable.
With the lens in place, the pair's momentum is undecided, and detector A sees an interference pattern.
This setup seems to be able to transmit FTL messages. You have 2 easily distinguishable signals at detector A (absence/presence of interference) and can send these signals by placing/removing the lens at point B.
Can you give me some pointers to why this can't work?
Hans Dorn said:Since detector B is able to determine his photon's momentum, and hence the momentum of the entangled photon A, detector A doesn't see an interference pattern.
Yep. I just looked up the experiment I quoted, and it involves a coincidence counter.Naty1 said:No information, intelligence, can be sent faster than light. Entanglement appears to be instantaneous, yet no information is communicated. "c" appears to be one of the fundamental constants in this universe...and one of it's most limiting ones.
The theory of relativity, proposed by Albert Einstein, states that the laws of physics are the same for all observers in uniform motion. This means that the speed of light is constant and cannot be exceeded by any particle or mass. Therefore, it is not possible for particles to travel faster than light according to this theory.
The fastest speed possible for particles is the speed of light, which is approximately 299,792,458 meters per second. This speed is measured using various methods, such as the time-of-flight method, where the time it takes for a particle to travel a known distance is measured and used to calculate its speed.
No, there have been no particles or masses observed traveling faster than light. In fact, many experiments have been conducted to test this possibility, including the famous OPERA experiment in 2011 which initially reported faster-than-light neutrinos, but the results were later found to be due to a faulty measurement.
If a particle were to travel faster than light, it would violate the theory of relativity and cause a number of paradoxes and contradictions in our understanding of the universe. For example, it would mean that the particle could go back in time, which goes against the concept of causality.
Based on our current understanding of physics, it is highly unlikely that the speed of light will change or that particles will be able to travel faster than light in the future. However, as our knowledge and technology continue to advance, it is always possible that new discoveries could challenge our current understanding and lead to new theories and explanations.