@moonbus saidJust that no information can go faster than c. Even though we see entanglement reveal its partner's specs, spin, whatever, when we measure one the other sees its reveal immediately as if information somehow traveled between them but that does not seem to be the case, like the glove thought experiment where it had gloveness all along so revealing one would reveal what both ends knew to be a false trail, it is not gloveness causing entanglement and nobody has a viable theory as to why we see apparent action at a great distance faster than c but it is just quantum mechanics still in High School, maybe the dilemma will clear up in a few hundred years.
What does passing information have to do with it ?
1 edit
@sonhouse
Can I presume that you have heard about the tunnel effect? A pulse sent into a tunnel can traverse the tunnel at faster than c. The pulse wh/ exits the tunnel is not the same as the pulse wh/ went in. Physicists have concluded from this, falsely IMO, that no information can be sent, because the pulse wh/ comes out is distorted.
But being a networker myself, not a physicist, I have a thought experiment for you.
Let us suppose that we send a robot on a mission to a distant planet to see whether it might be habitable for humans. To shorten the time it takes to communicate, we program the robot to establish such tunnels upon arrival at the distant planet -- I leave it up to physicists and engineers HOW this is to be accomplished, this is just a thought experiment. We need to know two things: 1) whether the robot has landed on the planet's surface and is functional, and 2) whether there is liquid water available.
Let us suppose that the robot lands and is functional, and it sets up two such tunnels. It sends a pulse down ONE tunnel if condition 1) holds but condition 2) does not hold. It sends a pulse down both tunnels if both conditions hold.
If receivers on Earth detect a pulse on one tunnel only, the humans know that the root landed, is functional, but no water was detected. If receivers on Earth detect a pulse on both tunnels, the humans know that the robot landed, is functional, and that water was detected.
It does not matter that the pulse wh/ went into the tunnel comes out distorted. All that matters is that some activity or other is detected on one or both tunnels. This is entirely sufficient for binary communication: pulse on one tunnel = 0, pulse on both tunnels = 1.
If we can get one pulse out one or both tunnels at faster than c, then we can send sequences of pulses on one or both tunnels at faster than c, and bingo, we have information transfer at faster than c.
@moonbus saidThe problem with that idea is entanglement and such cannot be used for faster than light communications, proven in labs, as it is now, we would be in non locality area, and we are local, we can't find out about something faster than light can get there, and the only way out of that is if there is in fact more dimensions and we can slide past such speed barriers and connect two parts of the universe together, so we can just go anywhere without violating speed of light.
@sonhouse
Can I presume that you have heard about the tunnel effect? A pulse sent into a tunnel can traverse the tunnel at faster than c. The pulse wh/ exits the tunnel is not the same as the pulse wh/ went in. Physicists have concluded from this, falsely IMO, that no information can be sent, because the pulse wh/ comes out is distorted.
But being a networker myself, no ...[text shortened]... s on one or both tunnels at faster than c, and bingo, we have information transfer at faster than c.
@sonhouse saidThat's an engineering issue; doesn't show the thought experiment is wrong.
The problem with that idea is entanglement and such cannot be used for faster than light communications, proven in labs, as it is now, we would be in non locality area, and we are local, we can't find out about something faster than light can get there, and the only way out of that is if there is in fact more dimensions and we can slide past such speed barriers and connect two parts of the universe together, so we can just go anywhere without violating speed of light.
- Joined
- 20 Oct 06
- Moves
- 10647
@moonbus saidI'm not a physics expert, but I came across this fairly recent paper that measured the speed of tunneling atoms at less than the speed of light.
@sonhouse
Can I presume that you have heard about the tunnel effect? A pulse sent into a tunnel can traverse the tunnel at faster than c. The pulse wh/ exits the tunnel is not the same as the pulse wh/ went in. Physicists have concluded from this, falsely IMO, that no information can be sent, because the pulse wh/ comes out is distorted.
But being a networker myself, no ...[text shortened]... s on one or both tunnels at faster than c, and bingo, we have information transfer at faster than c.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2490-7.epdf
- Joined
- 20 Oct 06
- Moves
- 10647
@sonhouse saidThe multi-dimensional hip-hopping ideas that get around the massive distances required for space travel always makes me think this is some evidence that we're living inside a digital reconstruction of humanity, where the distances between stars and galaxies is vast enough to guarantee that we will never be able to get there.
The problem with that idea is entanglement and such cannot be used for faster than light communications, proven in labs, as it is now, we would be in non locality area, and we are local, we can't find out about something faster than light can get there, and the only way out of that is if there is in fact more dimensions and we can slide past such speed barriers and connect two parts of the universe together, so we can just go anywhere without violating speed of light.
1 edit
@wildgrass saidWell, we may not get to light speed but just .1c gets you to Alpha Centauri in about 50 years, so it COULD happen at least for the closest stars. Or generation ships, taking say 300 years to get from point A to point B., All very difficult but not impossible technologies.
The multi-dimensional hip-hopping ideas that get around the massive distances required for space travel always makes me think this is some evidence that we're living inside a digital reconstruction of humanity, where the distances between stars and galaxies is vast enough to guarantee that we will never be able to get there.
I think it would take more evidence than that to see we are in a simulation. There is recent work showing we do NOT live in such a sim.
- Joined
- 20 Oct 06
- Moves
- 10647
@sonhouse saidYeah, well I feel like we've been saying a manned Mars expedition is only 10 years away for my entire lifetime (and I'm a lot older than 10). The Alpha Centauri trip won't launch for at least a thousand years at this rate. Of course there's the financial issues, but we've made decisions to fund wars of choice instead of science.
Well, we may not get to light speed but just .1c gets you to Alpha Centauri in about 50 years, so it COULD happen at least for the closest stars. Or generation ships, taking say 300 years to get from point A to point B., All very difficult but not impossible technologies.
I think it would take more evidence than that to see we are in a simulation. There is recent work showing we do NOT live in such a sim.
And it seems like we're going more backwards than forwards. In a thousand years, we're just as likely to be traveling to alpha centauri as we are to be debating whether boogers taste good or not.
Simulation is kind of a joke, but somehow less so with the incredible features of AI and iterative learning with computers. We're not likely inside of one, but the computers are creating a simulation as we write, and the tech gets exponentially better every year. In a thousand years, it seems MORE likely that we'll have invented a realistic human simulation than that we'll have figured out how to get to other solar systems.
@wildgrass saidWell, a thousand years from now humans could be extinct. Which is why we need to get the hell off this planet. But it looks like Mars is a sure thing at least for a few humans to visit, but it would cost literally trillions to get a city going there.
Yeah, well I feel like we've been saying a manned Mars expedition is only 10 years away for my entire lifetime (and I'm a lot older than 10). The Alpha Centauri trip won't launch for at least a thousand years at this rate. Of course there's the financial issues, but we've made decisions to fund wars of choice instead of science.
And it seems like we're going more backwar ...[text shortened]... ted a realistic human simulation than that we'll have figured out how to get to other solar systems.
So many problems to live there but a lot easier than the moon, at least there is SOME air, not breathable but we proved at least you can fly helicopters there.
People are saying Titan may be another moon we could live on, 200 below or some such with methane seas, I think I would rather try Mars 🙂
@sonhouse saidMoving faster than light could happen, but only over much shorter distances than between stars; it could happen at a microscopic level, not just on a galactic scale. If something moved faster than light, depending on what it is and how fast, it could be beyond our ability to detect but still affect the universe. It doesn’t do much for anything I care about. When we were trying to get the CPU to work at higher speeds, that was a challenge.
There are phase moves but that does not let you pass information.
@KellyJay saidThat is where you are 100% wrong, there IS no faster than light PERIOD. That has been proven in labs around the world time after time.
Moving faster than light could happen, but only over much shorter distances than between stars; it could happen at a microscopic level, not just on a galactic scale. If something moved faster than light, depending on what it is and how fast, it could be beyond our ability to detect but still affect the universe. It doesn’t do much for anything I care about. When we were trying to get the CPU to work at higher speeds, that was a challenge.