Quote from: Stormbringer on 04/08/2015 01:57 pmQuote from: ChrisWilson68 on 04/08/2015 05:23 amQuote from: Stormbringer on 04/05/2015 07:16 amEDIT: Unless i am mistaken any relativistic travel allows time travel and we have observed physical objects with mass that are traveling at relativistic speed with our astronomical instruments. Certain celestial objects that got booted by a massive gravitational partner at some point. If one of these objects were to return to it's starting point at speed it would amount to time travel. No, it wouldn't amount to time travel. You seem to misunderstand the word "relativitstic" or its implications. Going faster than light would amount to time travel. The word "relativistic" means, roughly, "close to but less than the speed of light".No- i know well what these terms mean. And merely relativistic travel is also time travel due to gamma factor. if i go to a distant star at 99.99 percent C i travel in time. I experience an abbreviated time compared to observers at home. in my perspective the trip takes mere moments or weeks at worst. That is time travel. It's not your definition of time travel; but it is time travel. If i return home at 99.99 percent light speed; I will have aged moments or weeks at worst while everyone I greet at journey's end will be about 9 or ten years older. I will have effectively traveled to the future skipping all the inconvenient things in between moments.OK, then you're just making up your own definition for a term that already has a very widely understood meaning. What's the point of that other than deliberate miscommunication?
Quote from: ChrisWilson68 on 04/08/2015 05:23 amQuote from: Stormbringer on 04/05/2015 07:16 amEDIT: Unless i am mistaken any relativistic travel allows time travel and we have observed physical objects with mass that are traveling at relativistic speed with our astronomical instruments. Certain celestial objects that got booted by a massive gravitational partner at some point. If one of these objects were to return to it's starting point at speed it would amount to time travel. No, it wouldn't amount to time travel. You seem to misunderstand the word "relativitstic" or its implications. Going faster than light would amount to time travel. The word "relativistic" means, roughly, "close to but less than the speed of light".No- i know well what these terms mean. And merely relativistic travel is also time travel due to gamma factor. if i go to a distant star at 99.99 percent C i travel in time. I experience an abbreviated time compared to observers at home. in my perspective the trip takes mere moments or weeks at worst. That is time travel. It's not your definition of time travel; but it is time travel. If i return home at 99.99 percent light speed; I will have aged moments or weeks at worst while everyone I greet at journey's end will be about 9 or ten years older. I will have effectively traveled to the future skipping all the inconvenient things in between moments.
Quote from: Stormbringer on 04/05/2015 07:16 amEDIT: Unless i am mistaken any relativistic travel allows time travel and we have observed physical objects with mass that are traveling at relativistic speed with our astronomical instruments. Certain celestial objects that got booted by a massive gravitational partner at some point. If one of these objects were to return to it's starting point at speed it would amount to time travel. No, it wouldn't amount to time travel. You seem to misunderstand the word "relativitstic" or its implications. Going faster than light would amount to time travel. The word "relativistic" means, roughly, "close to but less than the speed of light".
EDIT: Unless i am mistaken any relativistic travel allows time travel and we have observed physical objects with mass that are traveling at relativistic speed with our astronomical instruments. Certain celestial objects that got booted by a massive gravitational partner at some point. If one of these objects were to return to it's starting point at speed it would amount to time travel.
Even time travel where you could not effect your own timeline would be very very useful for information gathering and for stealing acquiring artifacts (to preserve them for posterity) and grabbing specimens say for botany, biology or zoology. if there are "many worlds" then some would be so close to identical that the only difference could be some detail so minor as to be unnoticeable.
I had this idea too, so how it work's in my mind is that they have 2 entangled sets, one for receiving and one for sending, they would come up with a code, like Morse code, and send photons into their sending particle, then on the other side, the entangled particle would emit a photon and that photon would activate a detector, then a computer attached to that detector would decode the message. Assuming I under stand all of the details.
I've always wondered if Quantum Tunneling, outside of a gravity well, could effectively produce simultanious communication over interstellar distances.
Quote from: blast335 on 07/29/2015 02:26 amI had this idea too, so how it work's in my mind is that they have 2 entangled sets, one for receiving and one for sending, they would come up with a code, like Morse code, and send photons into their sending particle, then on the other side, the entangled particle would emit a photon and that photon would activate a detector, then a computer attached to that detector would decode the message. Assuming I under stand all of the details.How many times does this same myth have to be busted? Entanglement does not give faster than light communication.This is a well-known result in physics.Base your fantasies of faster-than-light communication on something else. Entanglement won't do it for you.
Well we can teleport quantum states through entangled particles, so why can't we devise a system to interpret these teleported states into messages?
Quote from: ChrisWilson68 on 08/10/2015 03:24 amQuote from: blast335 on 07/29/2015 02:26 amI had this idea too, so how it work's in my mind is that they have 2 entangled sets, one for receiving and one for sending, they would come up with a code, like Morse code, and send photons into their sending particle, then on the other side, the entangled particle would emit a photon and that photon would activate a detector, then a computer attached to that detector would decode the message. Assuming I under stand all of the details.How many times does this same myth have to be busted? Entanglement does not give faster than light communication.This is a well-known result in physics.Base your fantasies of faster-than-light communication on something else. Entanglement won't do it for you.Well we can teleport quantum states through entangled particles, so why can't we devise a system to interpret these teleported states into messages?
a (2 Bit) ansible!http://news.sciencemag.org/physics/2015/12/physicists-figure-out-how-retrieve-information-black-hole
Quote from: JasonAW3 on 04/08/2015 03:54 pmExplain quantum tunneling then. A particle going from point A to point B without transitioning through the interveining space certainly seems to violate the concept of information traveling faster than light. Admittedly this, so far, has only been observed on the nanoscopic scale, but the transition certainly SEEMS to be happining at faster than light velocities.I sure can't explain quantum tunnelling ..but the physicists who claim to understand it say that the mathematics that predict quantum tunnelling also explain why it cannot be used to transfer information faster than light.
Explain quantum tunneling then. A particle going from point A to point B without transitioning through the interveining space certainly seems to violate the concept of information traveling faster than light. Admittedly this, so far, has only been observed on the nanoscopic scale, but the transition certainly SEEMS to be happining at faster than light velocities.
https://phys.org/news/2018-02-two-way-quantum-particle.htmlis it an ansible yet?
Experimental two-way communication with one photonSuperposition of two or more states is one of the fundamental concepts of quantum mechanics and provides the basis for several advantages quantum information processing offers. In this work, we experimentally demonstrate that quantum superposition permits two-way communication between two distant parties that can exchange only one particle once, an impossible task in classical physics. This is achieved by preparing a single photon in a coherent superposition of the two parties' locations. Furthermore, we show that this concept allows the parties to perform secure quantum communication, where the transmitted bits and even the direction of communication remain private. These important features can lead to the development of new quantum communication schemes, which are simultaneously secure and resource-efficient.