![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Various experiments over the years
have verified that no information travels faster than light as appears to be the case in regards to recently negated experimental superluminal neutrino OPERA results. In astrophysics, Blazar apparent superluminal jets are presently explained by difference in geometry of Jet vector and observer. But National Institute of Standards and Technology work as reference: arXiv:1204.0810v1 [quant-ph] 3 Apr 2012 suggests that superluminal transfer of information is possible as per their suggestion: "the present results suggest that the superluminal propagation of images may be possible in future experiments." Could some astrophysical data particularly regarding some Blazar superluminal jets be explained in this context? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , "Richard D. Saam"
writes: Various experiments over the years have verified that no information travels faster than light as appears to be the case in regards to recently negated experimental superluminal neutrino OPERA results. Right. In astrophysics, Blazar apparent superluminal jets are presently explained by difference in geometry of Jet vector and observer. Right. But National Institute of Standards and Technology work as reference: arXiv:1204.0810v1 [quant-ph] 3 Apr 2012 suggests that superluminal transfer of information is possible as per their suggestion: "the present results suggest that the superluminal propagation of images may be possible in future experiments." Could some astrophysical data particularly regarding some Blazar superluminal jets be explained in this context? No. Their conclusion you quote, if taken at face value, seems to imply the propagation of information at speeds faster than light. If so, this would be a sensation. (I doubt this is what they mean, though.) However, it has nothing to do with blazars. You seem to be taking two things which have one thing vaguely in common and postulating a connection for which there is no evidence. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4/14/12 4/14/12 5:28 AM, Richard D. Saam wrote:
But National Institute of Standards and Technology work as reference: arXiv:1204.0810v1 [quant-ph] 3 Apr 2012 suggests that superluminal transfer of information is possible This looks like anomalous dispersion in a new guise. As long as any individual wave is restricted to speeds = c, even though a superluminal group velocity is possible, no information propagates faster than c -- the front velocity remains = c. The superluminal propagation of pulses is merely an artifact of the way the different waves interfere with each other, but there is no pulse if there are no waves, and if the individual waves travel = c so does the front edge of the waves, the forward limit of the pulse, and any information transfer. See a direct demonstration of this (Java required): http://gregegan.customer.netspace.ne...ETS/20/20.html Note how closing and then opening the shutter affects the waves. Note that a NEGATIVE group velocity is possible, showing how artificial are these group velocities, and that they do NOT represent any transfer of information; the paper referenced above mentions a negative pulse velocity, implying they are discussing a similar interference phenomenon. Tom Roberts |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4/14/12 9:43 AM, Phillip Helbig---undress to reply wrote:
In , "Richard D. Saam" But National Institute of Standards and Technology work as reference: arXiv:1204.0810v1 [quant-ph] 3 Apr 2012 suggests that superluminal transfer of information is possible as per their suggestion: "the present results suggest that the superluminal propagation of images may be possible in future experiments." Could some astrophysical data particularly regarding some Blazar superluminal jets be explained in this context? No. Their conclusion you quote, if taken at face value, seems to imply the propagation of information at speeds faster than light. If so, this would be a sensation. (I doubt this is what they mean, though.) However, it has nothing to do with blazars. You seem to be taking two things which have one thing vaguely in common and postulating a connection for which there is no evidence. Their superluminal information propagation statement is based on "multi-spatial-mode nature of 4wave mixing (WM) in atomic vapors", which appears to be an extrapolation of the reported experimental results based on solid rubidium (Rb) cell. In as much as blazars may have an "atomic vapor" component, the connection may be valid. I can appreciate Tom Robert's animation in this regard, but there must be something about the 'atomic vapor' medium that may extend this NIST fast light concept to superluminal transfer of information possibility. Richard D. Saam |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
HOW EXACTLY SUPERLUMINAL SIGNALS INVALIDATE RELATIVITY | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 2 | August 21st 07 08:05 PM |
New Maths for Superluminal Speeds | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 0 | August 18th 07 07:52 AM |
Communicating with superluminal phase waves? | [email protected][_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 60 | May 6th 07 11:44 PM |
Superluminal Observations: Was Einstein Wrong? | Double-A | Misc | 2 | February 26th 05 03:27 PM |
Superluminal Communication? Sleuths? | Mad Scientist | Misc | 2 | September 2nd 04 09:45 PM |