# Question about Gunter Nimtz's experiments

1. Apr 11, 2012

### GTOM

I've searched, I found something in the archives, and several other places on the net, but i wonder, how further experiments debunked this phenonemon?

I saw this explanation : "Aephraim Steinberg, a quantum optics expert at the University of Toronto, Canada, uses the analogy of a train traveling from Chicago to New York, but dropping off train cars at each station along the way, so that the center of the ever shrinking main train moves forward at each stop; in this way, the speed of the center of the train exceeds the speed of any of the individual cars.[44]"

While i see, this isnt good for sending exact analog information, i fail to see yet, why cant it be used to transfer digital data, when it is enough information, whether something has arrived or not?

2. Apr 11, 2012

### Cthugha

You seem to misunderstand Steinberg's explanation.

The wavefront is travelling at the same speed anyway. All Nimtz does is a non-linear attenuation of the tail of a wave. In other words every single car which arrives, arrives at the same time irrespective of whether the other parts of the cars were dropped off (irrespective of whether other parts of the wave were attenuated or not). It is just the mean position of the left-over cars which moves to the front. However any information is necessarily carried by each individual car (to stay inside the analogy), but obviously no information is connected with the center of all of them.

Or as another analogy: For ten days you send one letter each day from europe to the USA. Each takes one day to get there. So within eleven days all of the letters are there. Now you do the same again, but the final five letters get lost along the way. Now all the letters that arrive will already be there after 6 days, but did you send any information faster than before?

Last edited by a moderator: Apr 12, 2012
3. Apr 12, 2012

### GTOM

Yes, good explanation, however i still wonder on something.

"All Nimtz does is a non-linear attenuation of the tail of a wave."

He claimed, he could reconstruct Mozart's symphony with this method. Where is the cheating?
If partial information can be enough for reconstruction, without previous knowledge about what we should reconstruct, that can be used for more effective information sending, like zipping a document.

Last edited by a moderator: Apr 12, 2012
4. Apr 12, 2012

### Cthugha

There is no cheating. Attenuating a wave does not necessarily throw away information. Just imagine the case you are just playing a Metallica record loudly. Now you reduce the volume. You just attenuated the wave, but do not lose any information about the song played. Of course you will lose some fun by listening to a metal song with tuned down volume instead...

Last edited by a moderator: Apr 12, 2012
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook