Why it is impossible to reverse temporal ordering in superluminal information transfer.

"If you can move faster than light you will go backwards in time"

This is the paradox most trundle out to show how impossible it is to either
move or communicate superluminally. In the case of communicating devices, a
straight forward interpretation of the lorentz transform equations used in
relativity theory will mean at speeds VC, t 0. If you are using some
superluminal communication scheme, for example, in some reference frame that
is reletivistically accelerated with respect to the transmitter frame, it
will be
possible to experience the reception of information before it is generated.
This needs closer looking into. A good question to ask is "How may we
decide a transmission we are listening to is indeed being sent from the
future in this manner?"

There is no easy way to determine this without having prior knowledge of the
transmitter frame, something which is not assumed in conventional
information transfer theory
so should also not be assumed in superluminal information transfer
frameworks. If we have learned
one thing from researchers running EPR style experiments where superluminal
entanglements
have been demonstrated, it is this: You need a point of reference to compare
to or it is impossible to see if such a connection has been made. In the
case
of EPR experiments, the researchers need to compare their data at a later
time at which point they are able to tell whether such a connection has
taken place or not.
But, this is non immediate. The only way it can be immediate requires a
God-like (omnipresent) perspective.
If some third party is able to view both the sender and the receiver from
his own reference frame
he may -or may not- see temporal reversibility, but this is not a valid
solution for the persons conducting
the experiment because the third party is outside the light cones of the
individuals conducting the experiment,
and can not communicate his results to them until a later time. This is a
valuable insight into future FTL schema: it can
only be party to party, and not third party without also admitting potential
causality violations. In my experiments,
P2 probability wave generation does indeed satisfy this 2-party requirement,
as there is currently no method to
allow a third party to directly influence information flow without the use
of a remote access point, which by its very
nature introduces a proportionate time delay which keeps time positive
valued. This is but one fundamental difference between
FTL "radio" communications and conventional radio communications, and also
points out why the term 'radio' is not an appropriate
adjective to use with superluminal communications.

In fact, there are only two solutions to the so-called paradox of global
causality violation owing to temporal effects:
1) Negative values for transform results while valid mathematically, are a
phenomenologically disallowed state in
reality, or, 2) because of the limitations of physical processes, even if
experimenters are communicating superluminally,
they will never be in a position to observe causality violations caused by
their own actions. Either way, if you can
never see causality being violated by your own actions, it is a meaningless
exercise to consider anything you do is not
allowed by present theory.

Greysky

www.allocations.cc
Learn how to build your own FTL radio