--- Standing Bear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Listers
> I would like to say that IMHO any photons
> actually measured at greater
> that 'c' would be enough to shake the foundations of
> the Einstein religion
> to its very foundations. And I do mean .....ANY
> photons!
My thoughts on this would be that if some photon moves
from point A to point B at a speed greater than C,
then it doesn't really matter if the bulk of photons
take longer to get there...if it moves FTL, then the
problem is simply getting whatever is measuring to
trigger off of the photons which arrive first, and
reply using the same system, with a receiver at the
opposite end measuring for the first, FTL photons as
well. Then two way FTL communications should be
possible, Feynman's path quantum mechanics
notwithstanding.
Personally, I find the whole business of a photon
taking every available path to the target as being a
little ridiculous. If I aim a laser pointer at the
wall, it is obvious which way the photons are going.
They are not going to go to the far reaches of the
universe, then travel back in time by just the right
amount to get to the spot on the wall and make it
'average out' to c. If you can't measure these, but
must just assume that they are their because some
probability mathematics says so, then I question why
everyone is so against something which, although it
cannot be measured directly by currently known means,
is a lot more sensible than most of QM, the idea of an
absolute frame of reference.
Read about advanced/retarded waves for some more 'good
stuff'. As I understand it, the problem arose from
some infinities showing up in the math of photons
being emitted from a source, had to do with the recoil
effect on the emitter. So, to solve this, it was
proposed that two waves are involved, not just one, a
retarded wave which moves from emitter to absorber,
and an 'advanced' wave which moves from absorber to
emitter, but in time-reversed manner. When I first
heard this, my first thought was, well, lets just say
it would give this email close to an R rating. Now it
is interesting that the whole issue of causality is
under severe threat by these theories, and everyone
feels its ok. But whenever someone brings up FTL
communication, which according to relativity should
threaten causality, everyone balks. Why? As near as I
can tell, it is because true FTL communication would
allow us to determine if causality-violating things
actually do take place, which further could imply that
the unobservable elements of QM become observable, and
thus face potential refutation. If you get real,
useful FTL, you risk losing a good chunk of both
relativistic theory and QM.
--Kyle
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com
