"holog" wrote in message
.. .


Paul Cardinale wrote:

Richard wrote in message
...

[snip]


Who knows? What I do know is that upon reflection, SR is incompatible
with any superluminal speed, even of a non-thing.


Wrong. As always. The speed limit of c in SR applies to matter,
energy, and information. The limit does not apply to interference
patterns, shadows, projections, and cuts.

Paul Cardinale

I think the trick here is the barrier they use it to alter the wave form
so the peak of the wave is advanced. Then the detector detects it sooner
than if it was not manipulated. i.e. chart an x any y graph and run a
sine wave through so a new wave starts at zero, continue the wave in the
negative direction also. Now make a sine wave with a longer wavelength,
but only on the right side. A detector would detect the longer wave first.

holog


c only applies to matter with relative mass..
No relative mass... No speeding tickets....


Paul R. Mays
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Some where within the Quantum State
Http://Paul.Mays.Com/story.html
http://paul.mays.com/mayday.html
http://paul.mays.com/rainy.html

"Science is not gadgetry. The desirable adjuncts of modern
living, although in many instances made possible by
science, certainly do not constitute science. Basic scientific
knowledge often (but not always) is a prerequisite to such
developments, but technology primarily deserves the credit
for having the financial courage, the ingenuity, and the
driving energy to see to it that so-called “pure knowledge”
is in fact brought to the practical service of man. And it
should also be recognized that those who have the urge to
apply knowledge usefully have themselves often made
significant contribution to pure knowledge and have even
more often served as a stimulation to the activities of a pure
researcher."
- Warren Weaver
(1894–1978)

There are plenty of scientific papers and news reports touting
superluminal velocities and even negative transit times for pulses of
light propagating through atomic caesium vapor.

http://www.neci.nec.com/homepages/lw...er/paper39.pdf
http://www.neci.nec.com/homepages/lw...er/paper49.pdf

I wonder if this is all nonsensical hoopla based on the antiquated
wave theory of light or if there is a real, measurable
faster-than-light particle view of quantum mechanical tunneling going
on. If I understand Richard P. Feynman correctly, photons are always
particles; the wave nature of light only reveals itself in terms of
probabilities. All quantum mechanists know the rules of adding
amplitudes but I would like to know if something new about quantum
mechanical tunneling has been revealed. Are individual photons in
these experiments moving at velocities faster than light?

Answer:

The sheer mention of this result together with Einstein's theory of
special relativity and the principle of causality is a scam. Not a
single photon is moving faster than light.

The alleged generation of superluminal velocities without violating
causality is intentionally misleading physicists' hoopla and all the
media hype is pure distortion. The fact that the dramatic 60 ns
advance is only one fiftieth of the width of the pulse is a clear
indication of this.

If you were hoping to conceptualize how Einstein's special theory of
relativity might be false, then don't let these facts disappoint you.
It is possible to modify Einstein's special theory to allow for motion
faster than light.

http://www.everythingimportant.org/viewtopic.php?t=605
http://www.everythingimportant.org/r...multaneity.htm

Is there a real empirically confirmed theory of superluminal
velocities? No, not yet. But there is no evil in being able to
conceptualize such things.

Eugene Shubert

Perfectly Innocent wrote:

There are plenty of scientific papers and news reports touting
superluminal velocities and even negative transit times for pulses of
light propagating through atomic caesium vapor.

http://www.neci.nec.com/homepages/lw...er/paper39.pdf
http://www.neci.nec.com/homepages/lw...er/paper49.pdf

I wonder if this is all nonsensical hoopla based on the antiquated
wave theory of light or if there is a real, measurable
faster-than-light particle view of quantum mechanical tunneling going
on. If I understand Richard P. Feynman correctly, photons are always
particles; the wave nature of light only reveals itself in terms of
probabilities. All quantum mechanists know the rules of adding
amplitudes but I would like to know if something new about quantum
mechanical tunneling has been revealed. Are individual photons in
these experiments moving at velocities faster than light?

Answer:

The sheer mention of this result together with Einstein's theory of
special relativity and the principle of causality is a scam. Not a
single photon is moving faster than light.

The alleged generation of superluminal velocities without violating
causality is intentionally misleading physicists' hoopla and all the
media hype is pure distortion. The fact that the dramatic 60 ns
advance is only one fiftieth of the width of the pulse is a clear
indication of this.

If you were hoping to conceptualize how Einstein's special theory of
relativity might be false, then don't let these facts disappoint you.
It is possible to modify Einstein's special theory to allow for motion
faster than light.

http://www.everythingimportant.org/viewtopic.php?t=605
http://www.everythingimportant.org/r...multaneity.htm

Is there a real empirically confirmed theory of superluminal
velocities? No, not yet. But there is no evil in being able to
conceptualize such things.

Eugene Shubert

Suppose a particle is moving along in tandem with the group wave. SR
velocity addition applies to the particle, and the speed of the particle
wrt lab frame is

(v+w)/(1+vw/c^2)

and since for any velocity of the particle wrt the frame of any given
phase wave, the speed of the particle must always be less than c, then
according to the equation it will always be less than c wrt lab frame
also.

What we have in the cesium experiment though, is an apparent inability
to correlate the group wave to that of a particle moving in parallel to
it at the same velocity. If the group velocity exceeds c, then no
particle can move along in tandem with it. The interesting thing is,
that at c, the particle will traverse infinite lab frame distance in
zero time wrt its own frame, thus the group speed which is greater, per
above, requires that this group wave move backward in time wrt lab
frame.

However the group wave will not actually appear at the outlet before the
beam strikes the surface of the cesium cell, for obvious reasons, one of
which is that a shutter can be located at the entry point of the cell
that can shut off access of the photons to the cell after the group node
has already exited. Thus the beam will have never entered the cell to
create the group node that exited nonetheless. This is pure idiocy.

SR doesn't allow for group velocities greater than c, though it does
allow for transverse phase wave velocities greater than c. In the cesium
experiment you should note however that the group velocity is not
transverse, it is longitudinal.

SR has been proved by the experiment to be untenable.

Richard Perry

Perfectly Innocent wrote:

There are plenty of scientific papers and news reports touting
superluminal velocities and even negative transit times for pulses of
light propagating through atomic caesium vapor.


And yet Nature's speed limit is not locally violated for mass in
motion, propagation of electromagnetic radiation or communication
of information.

"Perfectly Innocent" wrote in message om...
There are plenty of scientific papers and news reports touting
superluminal velocities and even negative transit times for pulses of
light propagating through atomic caesium vapor.

http://www.neci.nec.com/homepages/lw...er/paper39.pdf
http://www.neci.nec.com/homepages/lw...er/paper49.pdf

See today's reply on a similar thread in sci.physics:
http://groups.google.com/groups?&threadm=5zjkb.821525$uu5.145166@sccrnsc04

Dirk Vdm

Perfectly Innocent wrote:

There are plenty of scientific papers and news reports touting
superluminal velocities and even negative transit times for pulses of
light propagating through atomic caesium vapor.

http://www.neci.nec.com/homepages/lw...er/paper39.pdf
http://www.neci.nec.com/homepages/lw...er/paper49.pdf

I wonder if this is all nonsensical hoopla based on the antiquated
wave theory of light or if there is a real, measurable
faster-than-light particle view of quantum mechanical tunneling going
on. If I understand Richard P. Feynman correctly, photons are always
particles; the wave nature of light only reveals itself in terms of
probabilities. All quantum mechanists know the rules of adding
amplitudes but I would like to know if something new about quantum
mechanical tunneling has been revealed. Are individual photons in
these experiments moving at velocities faster than light?

Answer:

The sheer mention of this result together with Einstein's theory of
special relativity and the principle of causality is a scam. Not a
single photon is moving faster than light.

The alleged generation of superluminal velocities without violating
causality is intentionally misleading physicists' hoopla and all the
media hype is pure distortion. The fact that the dramatic 60 ns
advance is only one fiftieth of the width of the pulse is a clear
indication of this.

If you were hoping to conceptualize how Einstein's special theory of
relativity might be false, then don't let these facts disappoint you.
It is possible to modify Einstein's special theory to allow for motion
faster than light.

http://www.everythingimportant.org/viewtopic.php?t=605
http://www.everythingimportant.org/r...multaneity.htm

Is there a real empirically confirmed theory of superluminal
velocities? No, not yet. But there is no evil in being able to
conceptualize such things.

Eugene Shubert

Perfectly Innocent wrote:

There are plenty of scientific papers and news reports touting
superluminal velocities and even negative transit times for pulses of
light propagating through atomic caesium vapor.

http://www.neci.nec.com/homepages/lw...er/paper39.pdf
http://www.neci.nec.com/homepages/lw...er/paper49.pdf

I wonder if this is all nonsensical hoopla based on the antiquated
wave theory of light or if there is a real, measurable
faster-than-light particle view of quantum mechanical tunneling going
on. If I understand Richard P. Feynman correctly, photons are always
particles; the wave nature of light only reveals itself in terms of
probabilities. All quantum mechanists know the rules of adding
amplitudes but I would like to know if something new about quantum
mechanical tunneling has been revealed. Are individual photons in
these experiments moving at velocities faster than light?

Answer:

The sheer mention of this result together with Einstein's theory of
special relativity and the principle of causality is a scam. Not a
single photon is moving faster than light.

The alleged generation of superluminal velocities without violating
causality is intentionally misleading physicists' hoopla and all the
media hype is pure distortion. The fact that the dramatic 60 ns
advance is only one fiftieth of the width of the pulse is a clear
indication of this.

If you were hoping to conceptualize how Einstein's special theory of
relativity might be false, then don't let these facts disappoint you.
It is possible to modify Einstein's special theory to allow for motion
faster than light.

http://www.everythingimportant.org/viewtopic.php?t=605
http://www.everythingimportant.org/r...multaneity.htm

Is there a real empirically confirmed theory of superluminal
velocities? No, not yet. But there is no evil in being able to
conceptualize such things.

Eugene Shubert



Why do people think if you go faster than light you can immediately go
back in time?
i.e. if you could travel at twice the speed of light it would still take
two years to get to alpha centuri, right?


holog

On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 15:53:38 -0400, holog wrote:



Perfectly Innocent wrote:

There are plenty of scientific papers and news reports touting
superluminal velocities and even negative transit times for pulses of
light propagating through atomic caesium vapor.

http://www.neci.nec.com/homepages/lw...er/paper39.pdf
http://www.neci.nec.com/homepages/lw...er/paper49.pdf

I wonder if this is all nonsensical hoopla based on the antiquated
wave theory of light or if there is a real, measurable
faster-than-light particle view of quantum mechanical tunneling going
on. If I understand Richard P. Feynman correctly, photons are always
particles; the wave nature of light only reveals itself in terms of
probabilities. All quantum mechanists know the rules of adding
amplitudes but I would like to know if something new about quantum
mechanical tunneling has been revealed. Are individual photons in
these experiments moving at velocities faster than light?

Answer:

The sheer mention of this result together with Einstein's theory of
special relativity and the principle of causality is a scam. Not a
single photon is moving faster than light.

The alleged generation of superluminal velocities without violating
causality is intentionally misleading physicists' hoopla and all the
media hype is pure distortion. The fact that the dramatic 60 ns
advance is only one fiftieth of the width of the pulse is a clear
indication of this.

If you were hoping to conceptualize how Einstein's special theory of
relativity might be false, then don't let these facts disappoint you.
It is possible to modify Einstein's special theory to allow for motion
faster than light.

http://www.everythingimportant.org/viewtopic.php?t=605
http://www.everythingimportant.org/r...multaneity.htm

Is there a real empirically confirmed theory of superluminal
velocities? No, not yet. But there is no evil in being able to
conceptualize such things.

Eugene Shubert



Why do people think if you go faster than light you can immediately go
back in time? i.e. if you could travel at twice the speed of light it
would still take two years to get to alpha centuri, right?

Yup...

The problem is definitions of SR as to 'event sequencing'. LRT does
not have this problem since it does NOT have a defined
synchronization process that sets time as a pseudo-distance...

Paul Stowe

wrote:

On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 15:53:38 -0400, holog wrote:



Perfectly Innocent wrote:

There are plenty of scientific papers and news reports touting
superluminal velocities and even negative transit times for pulses of
light propagating through atomic caesium vapor.

http://www.neci.nec.com/homepages/lw...er/paper39.pdf
http://www.neci.nec.com/homepages/lw...er/paper49.pdf

I wonder if this is all nonsensical hoopla based on the antiquated
wave theory of light or if there is a real, measurable
faster-than-light particle view of quantum mechanical tunneling going
on. If I understand Richard P. Feynman correctly, photons are always
particles; the wave nature of light only reveals itself in terms of
probabilities. All quantum mechanists know the rules of adding
amplitudes but I would like to know if something new about quantum
mechanical tunneling has been revealed. Are individual photons in
these experiments moving at velocities faster than light?

Answer:

The sheer mention of this result together with Einstein's theory of
special relativity and the principle of causality is a scam. Not a
single photon is moving faster than light.

The alleged generation of superluminal velocities without violating
causality is intentionally misleading physicists' hoopla and all the
media hype is pure distortion. The fact that the dramatic 60 ns
advance is only one fiftieth of the width of the pulse is a clear
indication of this.

If you were hoping to conceptualize how Einstein's special theory of
relativity might be false, then don't let these facts disappoint you.
It is possible to modify Einstein's special theory to allow for motion
faster than light.

http://www.everythingimportant.org/viewtopic.php?t=605
http://www.everythingimportant.org/r...multaneity.htm

Is there a real empirically confirmed theory of superluminal
velocities? No, not yet. But there is no evil in being able to
conceptualize such things.

Eugene Shubert



Why do people think if you go faster than light you can immediately go
back in time? i.e. if you could travel at twice the speed of light it
would still take two years to get to alpha centuri, right?

Yup...

The problem is definitions of SR as to 'event sequencing'. LRT does
not have this problem since it does NOT have a defined
synchronization process that sets time as a pseudo-distance...

Paul Stowe

Exactly.

Richard Perry

Richard
wrote in message ...
wrote:

Yup...

The problem is definitions of SR as to 'event sequencing'. LRT does
not have this problem since it does NOT have a defined
synchronization process that sets time as a pseudo-distance...

Paul Stowe

Exactly.

Richard Perry

[EL]
Hi Richard and Paul.

Please help me on this because I really do not know what experiment
was being conducted when that discovery was made.

If it was not a discovery that was discovered during conducting
another experiment, then this is a fabricated setup with intentional
end results in mind and a complex rig to hide a glitch.

My very clear question is {What was the original research researching
when the alleged superluminal propagation was allegedly found out?}

Naturally, they never saw any results on any oscilloscope because a
scan line is constant time dependant and it is rather obscenely
ridiculous to assume an output showing before an input.
Therefore we expect them to tell us more numerical details on the
measurements without any hoopla of equations because until I see the
detailed circuit being used I doubt that they have measured and wave
propagation at all.

Those who know about electronics, know very well that a continuous
wave may be displayed by synchronising the sweep rate at an integer
multiple or part of the wave frequency otherwise the wave shape shall
slip on the screen.

However, they talk on something much more demanding because they talk
about a single pulse that demands a trigger to catch it.

Now if the input was not the trigger then they never caught anything
but if the input was the trigger then it is impossible to catch
anything before such an event.

This excludes all the negative time bull **** of course.

So we are left a sixty millimetre tube full of caesium gas and a LASER
pumped pulse as an input and a trigger that is supposed to traverse
the tube in 0.2 nanoseconds IN VACUUM.

If the signal was delayed by 62 ns in caesium then how can that be
faster than light?

To capture detailed data of a full pulse wave-shape within 0.2
nanoseconds is a formidable task and I demand the release of the
electronic parts that accomplished that feat if they dare, but I am
certain that it is all a fabrication.

They were not working on something else and made a discovery, but the
whole scam was planned ahead before any rig was constructed, right?



Regards.

EL