Experimentalists send a signal, detect its arrival and determine its
speed: the speed is (e.g. four times) greater than 300000 km/s. At
least that is what the public should know:

http://i-newswire.com/pr43033.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796

The Criminal Relativity Cult (CRC) have sanctioned the information on
condition that experimentalists should call the signal "Hamlet" and
convince the public that, although the signal exists (after all, one
sends it and detects its arrival), it nevertheless does not exist. More
precisely, the signal should be deprived of any information and then it
is clear that if something is deprived of any information, it simply
does not exist. And if something does not exist, it can by no means
threaten divine theory of relativity.

However CRC soon discover that "total informationlessness" is too
contradictory or at least that the public would not believe this
particular version of the lie:

Tom Roberts wrote:
Any _thing_ that propagates always carries some information, its own
presence at least. But interference artifacts between existing waves
need not carry information (and usually don't).
Tom Roberts

So CRC have studied carefully a moving picture of Hamlet:

http://gregegan.customer.netspace.ne...ETS/20/20.html

and found their last resort: Hamlet cannot move before the front end of
the waves and since the speed of the front end cannot surpass 300000
km/s.... Why Hamlet should be sent together with the front end is for
the moment a grand secret in CRC: the initiated don't wish to think of
a Hamlet sent after the front end has reached its destination.

Pentcho Valev

Pentcho Valev wrote:
Experimentalists send a signal, detect its arrival and determine its
speed: the speed is (e.g. four times) greater than 300000 km/s. At
least that is what the public should know:

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796


Quoting from Valev's reference....

"While the peak moves faster than light speed, the total energy of the
pulse does not. This means Einstein's relativity is preserved, so do
not expect super-fast starships or time machines anytime soon".

Similarly arbitrary information cannot be transmitted faster than the
speed of light.

On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 07:19:15 GMT, Sam Wormley
wrote:

Pentcho Valev wrote:
Experimentalists send a signal, detect its arrival and determine its
speed: the speed is (e.g. four times) greater than 300000 km/s. At
least that is what the public should know:

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796


Quoting from Valev's reference....

"While the peak moves faster than light speed, the total energy of the
pulse does not. This means Einstein's relativity is preserved, so do
not expect super-fast starships or time machines anytime soon".

Similarly arbitrary information cannot be transmitted faster than the
speed of light.


Ah, but young master Pentode Valve didn't expect you to actually read
the whole article.
He obviously didn't.

"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message ups.com...
Experimentalists send a signal, detect its arrival and determine its
speed: the speed is (e.g. four times) greater than 300000 km/s. At
least that is what the public should know:

Porco Valev does not know the differences between
- speed and velocity
- local and global
- inertial and non-inertial
- implication and equivalence
- group velocity and phase velocity
- science and religion

http://webphysics.davidson.edu/Apple...pVelocity.html
f(x,t) = 2.5*sin(8.0*(x-1.0*t))
g(x,t) = 2.5*sin(7*(x-0.2*t))

Dirk Vdm

Pentcho Valev wrote:
Experimentalists send a signal, detect its arrival and determine its
speed: the speed is (e.g. four times) greater than 300000 km/s. At
least that is what the public should know:
http://i-newswire.com/pr43033.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796

You need to learn how to read. Both of those articles EXPLICITLY state
that relativity is not violated.

As I have said many times, interference effects between existing waves
can travel faster than c, but carry no information and do not violate
SR. shrug


[... further nonsense omitted]


Tom Roberts

Pentcho Valev wrote:
Experimentalists send a signal, detect its arrival and determine its
speed: the speed is (e.g. four times) greater than 300000 km/s. At
least that is what the public should know:

The send/receive events in these experiments are spacelike separated
and fundamentally there is no underlying causal mechanism between the
two. No doubt lightspeed barrier will be broken sooner or later, and
when this does happen, relativity will not be garbage but remain a
clever approximation to the true underlying geometry of spacetime.
Until this happens, relativity is pretty good..

http://i-newswire.com/pr43033.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796

The Criminal Relativity Cult (CRC) have sanctioned the information on
condition that experimentalists should call the signal "Hamlet" and
convince the public that, although the signal exists (after all, one
sends it and detects its arrival), it nevertheless does not exist. More
precisely, the signal should be deprived of any information and then it
is clear that if something is deprived of any information, it simply
does not exist. And if something does not exist, it can by no means
threaten divine theory of relativity.

However CRC soon discover that "total informationlessness" is too
contradictory or at least that the public would not believe this
particular version of the lie:

Tom Roberts wrote:
Any _thing_ that propagates always carries some information, its own
presence at least. But interference artifacts between existing waves
need not carry information (and usually don't).
Tom Roberts

So CRC have studied carefully a moving picture of Hamlet:

http://gregegan.customer.netspace.ne...ETS/20/20.html

and found their last resort: Hamlet cannot move before the front end of
the waves and since the speed of the front end cannot surpass 300000
km/s.... Why Hamlet should be sent together with the front end is for
the moment a grand secret in CRC: the initiated don't wish to think of
a Hamlet sent after the front end has reached its destination.

Pentcho Valev

Pentcho Valev wrote:
Experimentalists send a signal, detect its arrival and determine its
speed: the speed is (e.g. four times) greater than 300000 km/s. At
least that is what the public should know:
http://i-newswire.com/pr43033.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796


Many things can travel faster than light. Consider for example an infinite
set of explosives positioned in a straight line with each explosive
separated by 1 light year. If the explosives are set to detonate beginning
from one end of the line within 1 day of each other, then the apparent rate
of change along the line will be 365 times greater than the speed of light!
In general any change can travel faster than light.

Voice of Wisdom wrote:
Pentcho Valev wrote:
Experimentalists send a signal, detect its arrival and determine its
speed: the speed is (e.g. four times) greater than 300000 km/s. At
least that is what the public should know:
http://i-newswire.com/pr43033.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796


Many things can travel faster than light. Consider for example an infinite
set of explosives positioned in a straight line with each explosive
separated by 1 light year. If the explosives are set to detonate beginning
from one end of the line within 1 day of each other, then the apparent rate
of change along the line will be 365 times greater than the speed of light!
In general any change can travel faster than light.

Each detonation event is spacelike separated to all the others and thus
cannot be casually connected, which is what matters in FTL.. The
casaulity of each individual charge is due to your configuration
(timers/positioning) and all this was ultimately constrained by
lightspeed.

Example: A mexican wave in a footbal stadium propagates because the
event of one person waving his hands triggers the waving of the
adjacents persons hands.. If you sat everyone down before the game and
told them all specifically to wave their hands at specific times, then
you can simulate a much faster mexican wave but it's completely useless
for FTL information propagation because the information in the system
was determined at configuration time, not by the actual wave.

And besides, you don't need an elaborate experiment to prove that
spacelike separated events occur. Simply look at stars on one end of
the night sky and then look at another.

Pentcho Valev wrote:
Experimentalists send a signal, detect its arrival and determine its
speed: the speed is (e.g. four times) greater than 300000 km/s. At
least that is what the public should know:

http://i-newswire.com/pr43033.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796


snip legalezze sleeze


Using ESO's Very Large Telescope, astronomers have recorded a massive
star moving at more than 2.6 million kilometres per hour. Stars are not
born with such large velocities. Its position in the sky leads to the
suggestion that the star was kicked out from the Large Magellanic
Cloud.

You can access ESO Press Release 27/05 at
http://www.eso.org/outreach/press-re.../pr-27-05.html, while a
longer web story is also available at
http://www.eso.org/outreach/press-re...-27-05_p2.html

--
How can you weigh the Earth with a straw, a paperclip and a piece of
thread? Why don't we really know what we see? How can a juggling act
explain mathematics?

These are but a few of the on-stage activities that will be shown at
the EIROforum Science on Stage Festival, to be held from 21 to 25
November at CERN in Geneva (Switzerland). With support from the
European Commission, this international festival brings together around
500 science educators from 29 European countries to show how
fascinating and entertaining science can be.

Read more about this unique event in ESO Press Release 28/05 at
http://www.eso.org/outreach/press-re.../pr-28-05.html


With kind regards,

The ESO Public Affairs Dept.

-------

Forwarded by Sue...

Voice of Wisdom wrote:
Many things can travel faster than light. Consider for example an infinite
set of explosives positioned in a straight line with each explosive
separated by 1 light year. If the explosives are set to detonate beginning
from one end of the line within 1 day of each other, then the apparent rate
of change along the line will be 365 times greater than the speed of light!

In your example, NOTHING travels faster than the speed of light. You
have simply PRE-arranged for a set of unrelated explosions to occur in
sequence. Nothing strange about that (except why one would bother).

There are numerous other examples (e.g. the spot from a rotating
searchlight, the crossing point of a large-bladed scissors, ...). But
they all have in common the fact that no THING is moving faster than c,
and like your example above, they are powerless to carry information
faster than c.


Tom Roberts