Exactly how is causality violated by superluminal travel?

Click For Summary
Causality violations in superluminal travel, particularly with tachyons, arise from the relativity of simultaneity in special relativity. When two observers, A and B, send tachyon signals, the events can be perceived differently across various inertial frames, leading to scenarios where one observer receives a response before sending their original message. This occurs because signals traveling faster than light in one frame may travel backwards in time in another, creating paradoxes. The discussion emphasizes that for causality to be preserved, both observers must be in the same rest frame when sending signals; otherwise, FTL communication can lead to contradictions. Understanding these concepts requires grappling with spacetime diagrams and the implications of simultaneity in different frames.
  • #31
DrGreg said:
No, it assumes the observers are inertial and therefore can't travel faster than light, but you can measure any events at all. My post that I linked to begins with three events, without any mention of motion.

OK. Right. I have this simpler scenario. Its very simple- I hope.

Bob (the cause) kills Alice (the effect) with a laser beam that takes 10 minutes to arrive at her location.

Alice's friend (Martha) sees the dead Alice and jumps into an FTL rocket to try to reverse the death. She travels back to Bob at 5 times the speed of light. So at 5c time goes backwards and she arrives at Bob a minute before he fires his laser and implores him not to shoot.

Bob is prevented from shooting. But Alice is already dead.

Now t1 = t2/SQRT(1 - vSQUARED/cSQUARED)
= t2SQRT(1 - 25)
= t2SQRT(-25)













If something cannot be explained simply then you do not understand it. (Einstein)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Assume light travels a planks length in one clock tick - and also assume that this is ontologically how light (or information) travels in space-time.

Then Lorentz corrections can be applied and all is dandy as we know already.

Now, assume that in one click of the clock an entity can travel multiple planks lengths instead of just one - steps. The previous Lorentz correction is no longer applicable.

That 'entity' could be a wave-function that travels in single steps and leaves no trace of its path. Why no trace? Because it jumped in one step. A wave-function is not information per se - it is 'knowledge of quantum states'. So it is allowed to go ftl.
 
Last edited:
  • #33
LaserMind said:
OK. Right. I have this simpler scenario. Its very simple- I hope.

Bob (the cause) kills Alice (the effect) with a laser beam that takes 10 minutes to arrive at her location.

Alice's friend (Martha) sees the dead Alice and jumps into an FTL rocket to try to reverse the death. She travels back to Bob at 5 times the speed of light. So at 5c time goes backwards and she arrives at Bob a minute before he fires his laser and implores him not to shoot.
An object emitted at speed 5c at the event of Alice's death, going at 5c in the direction towards Bob, reaches Bob 12 minutes after he fired the laser.

Also, the whole idea of Alice jumping into an FTL rocket is inconsistent with SR. Massive particles (like the ones in her body) can't be accelerated to, or past, the speed of light. The energy required to accelerate her to speed v goes to infinity as v→c.

LaserMind said:
If something cannot be explained simply then you do not understand it. (Einstein)
Only if you take this as a definition of what it means to understand something. I don't think that would make sense though. Physics is no longer about things that can be explained in simple terms. That doesn't mean that physics can't be understood.

SR is however one of those things that can be explained in simple terms. Spacetime diagrams are by far the simplest.

LaserMind said:
Assume light travels a planks length in one clock tick - and also assume that this is ontologically how light (or information) travels in space-time.
The Planck length has no special significance in special or general relativity. It only becomes relevant in quantum theories of gravity. Do you want to analyze this scenario using relativity or a quantum theory of gravity? What quantum theories of gravity do you know? :wink:
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 137 ·
5
Replies
137
Views
10K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
1K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
5K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
3K