Sorcerer wrote:
"Sue..." wrote in message
oups.com...
|
| Sorcerer wrote:
| "Sue..." wrote in message
| ups.com...
| | Communication in it most minimal form, the smallest event we
| | can observe, involves no less than the motion of a remote
| | electric charge.
|
|
| Communication in it[s] most minimal form, the smallest event we
| can observe, involves no less than the motion of a remote
| magnetic marge.
|
| http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/spin.gif
|
| My magnetic marges are faster than your electric charges,
| and my chickens came before your eggs. Nah nah na nah na!
|
| Unless you can show otherwise, you are living in Dork's universe.
|
| I'll never make it to a spelling bee.

True.

| You'll never make it to a physics bee.

Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.

|
| Your *marges* are the nearfield magnetic couplings that only
| *appear* FTL.

You are living in Dork's universe, the speed of magnetic fields
*IS* the speed of light.

| They diminish by 1/r^3 and result from two
| source charges conspiring to move one destination charge.

___________
__________N|---------------O--\/\/\/\/\--r

How much does the spring "\/\/\" holding the iron ball O extend if
I change r from the magnet N?

The "N" on your shematic is not a substitute for this"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_integral
"The origin of permanent magnetism "
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teachin...es/node62.html

Sue...


You are living in Dork's universe.

| Not terribly efficient.

Liar, transformers are 99% efficient.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...indistance.gif

It is your radiators that are terroristically not efficent. Get a bowl,
idiot,
or your trifle will be all over the table top when you bake it.
Trifle:
http://www.thefoody.com/pudding/sherrytrifle.html
Bowl:
http://www.lamit.ro/images/satellite-dish-lamit-hub.jpg

My magnetic marges are faster than your electric charges,
and my chickens came before your eggs. Nah nah na nah na!
[...]
Androcles.

"Sue..." wrote in message
oups.com...
| Sorcerer wrote:
| "Sue..." wrote in message
| oups.com...
| |
| | Sorcerer wrote:
| | "Sue..." wrote in message
| | ups.com...
| | | Communication in it most minimal form, the smallest event we
| | | can observe, involves no less than the motion of a remote
| | | electric charge.
| |
| |
| | Communication in it[s] most minimal form, the smallest event we
| | can observe, involves no less than the motion of a remote
| | magnetic marge.
| |
| | http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/spin.gif
| |
| | My magnetic marges are faster than your electric charges,
| | and my chickens came before your eggs. Nah nah na nah na!
| |
| | Unless you can show otherwise, you are living in Dork's universe.
| |
| | I'll never make it to a spelling bee.
|
| True.
|
| | You'll never make it to a physics bee.
|
| Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.
|
| |
| | Your *marges* are the nearfield magnetic couplings that only
| | *appear* FTL.
|
| You are living in Dork's universe, the speed of magnetic fields
| *IS* the speed of light.
|
| | They diminish by 1/r^3 and result from two
| | source charges conspiring to move one destination charge.
|
| ___________
| __________N|---------------O--\/\/\/\/\--r
|
| How much does the spring "\/\/\" holding the iron ball O extend if
| I change r from the magnet N?

That was a question you failed to answer, and so "[...]".
I'll ask it again with the magnet reversed.

___________
__________S|---------------O--\/\/\/\/\--r

How much does the spring "\/\/\" holding the iron ball O extend if
I change r from the magnet S?

My magnetic marges are faster than your electric charges,
and my chickens came before your eggs. Nah nah na nah na!

Androcles.

wrote:
Tom Roberts schreef:
This is not true. None of these experiments transfer INFORMATION faster
than c.

I have multiple articles and books in which these experiments are
described.

Then either a) you have interpreted them wrong, or b) they describe the
ACTUAL EXPERIMENTS incorrectly.


Information is massless.

Hmmm. That is either wrong or irrelevant, depending on what you mean.
Shannon showed that there is a minimum energy per bit that must be
transferred in order to transfer information. Energy cannot be
transferred faster than c.


Connected particles can exchange information
about spin and polarization immediately, i.e. infinitely fast.

Not true. Moreover, they do not do so in these experiments.

Repeat the mantra: correlation is not causation. These experiments
display CORRELATION, not causation or communication (other than with the
photons at speed = c).


Both connected photons travel first and polarization is fixed on
the destiny of one photon.

You are reading more into the experiments than is actually there. "the
destiny of one photon" is UNKNOWN until it's polarization is measured,
and then the other photon is found to be CORRELATED with that of the
first. but this is a natural result of quantum mechanics, in which there
is no communication whatsoever between the two MEASUREMENTS -- all that
is there is communication from the preparation of the two-photon
correlation to each of the measurements.


This state, which can be use to transport
one bit of information, is then communicated without any delay to the
connected photon.

Not true. It is not possible to use this CORRELATION to transfer
information between the two measurements; this is so because the value
of the first measurement is UNKNOWN UNTIL IT IS MADE.


SR is dead anyway, because there is no solution for the
twin-contradiction.

Again, you are wrong. There is no "contradiction" in any twin scenario
in SR. But yes, SR does not agree with naive expectations. shrug


SR is not "dead" at all -- far from it! SR is one of the best tested
theories of physics. Thousands of particle physicists (such as myself)
use it every day. shrug


Tom Roberts

Sorcerer wrote:
"Sue..." wrote in message
oups.com...
| Sorcerer wrote:
| "Sue..." wrote in message
| oups.com...
| |
| | Sorcerer wrote:
| | "Sue..." wrote in message
| | ups.com...
| | | Communication in it most minimal form, the smallest event we
| | | can observe, involves no less than the motion of a remote
| | | electric charge.
| |
| |
| | Communication in it[s] most minimal form, the smallest event we
| | can observe, involves no less than the motion of a remote
| | magnetic marge.
| |
| | http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/spin.gif
| |
| | My magnetic marges are faster than your electric charges,
| | and my chickens came before your eggs. Nah nah na nah na!
| |
| | Unless you can show otherwise, you are living in Dork's universe.
| |
| | I'll never make it to a spelling bee.
|
| True.
|
| | You'll never make it to a physics bee.
|
| Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.
|
| |
| | Your *marges* are the nearfield magnetic couplings that only
| | *appear* FTL.
|
| You are living in Dork's universe, the speed of magnetic fields
| *IS* the speed of light.
|
| | They diminish by 1/r^3 and result from two
| | source charges conspiring to move one destination charge.
|
| ___________
| __________N|---------------O--\/\/\/\/\--r
|
| How much does the spring "\/\/\" holding the iron ball O extend if
| I change r from the magnet N?

That was a question you failed to answer, and so "[...]".
I'll ask it again with the magnet reversed.

___________
__________S|---------------O--\/\/\/\/\--r

How much does the spring "\/\/\" holding the iron ball O extend if
I change r from the magnet S?

The "S" on your shematic is not a substitute for this"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_integral
"The origin of permanent magnetism "
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teachin...es/node62.html


I suppose this is yet another misguided search for the
magnetic-monopole. Why not use "Pieces of Eight"
in your theory. You can exchange them for something
of value and the chances of finding them are much better.

Sue...


My magnetic marges are faster than your electric charges,
and my chickens came before your eggs. Nah nah na nah na!

Androcles.

wrote:
LS,

Experiments with quantum mechanics have shown that information can be
transported faster than the speed of light. The speed with which two
"connected" photons communicate their polarization status is infinite,
which means - at least in principle - that timing pulses can be sent to
every corner of the universe without any delaying factor. So absolute
time does exist after all.

This is the final blow to the Theory of Special Relativity (SR for
short). SR claims that if two clocks A and B are moving with regard to
each other, B goes slower in the perception of A, and A goes slower in
the perception of B. The only excuse to maintain this contradiction has
always been the assumption that there were no fast enough communication
means to reveal this contradiction.

However, with immediate communication of timing information there is
"absolute time", and each clock in the universe has a speed in relation
to absolute time. If clock A is twice as slow as absolute time and
clock B is four times slower than absolute time, then clock A is twice
as fast as clock B, and clock B twice as slow as clock A. Ordinary
arithmetic is applicable to the speed of clocks.

There is a "zero" inertial frame and this inertial frame represents
absolute motionlessness. Motion with regard to "zero" is absolute and
not relative. It can be detected by comparing one's clock against
absolute time. If your clock is going very slowly, chances are that
your speed is close to the speed of light. The "zero" inertial frame is
also known as "aether".

The conclusion is that - contrary to Einstein's claims - time is
absolute (i.e. there is absolute time with which every event in the
universe can be synchronized) and movement is absolute. Every movement
can be related to a measurable zero inertial frame, in which all clocks
walk fastest.

So the name of this forum is even wrong. There *IS* no relativity in
time and velocity. All time and all velocity can be compared with
absolute and measurable standards.

" Time " is not an absolute.

" Motion " is the absolute.

As far as an inertial reference frame goes, there is only one of one.
However, because this frame can be in motion across Time, or across
Space, or across both, and the frame in motion is in motion within the
overall framework of the Four dimensional Space-Time, how we end up
interpreting a frame, differs depending on what direction the frame is
traveling within the Four dimensional Space-Time.

See the following pages for coverage of the Motion analysis.

http://www.outersecrets.com/real/2_motion.htm
http://www.outersecrets.com/real/3_spin.htm
http://www.outersecrets.com/real/4_4d_2.htm
http://www.outersecrets.com/real/5_4d_3.htm
http://www.outersecrets.com/real/6_spin.htm

The site is simple and boring, but if you read it all, you will be able
to put all the pieces together.

Faster than the speed of light ??? Yes, and No !

Two planes of reality exist. One includes the present Time, and the
other includes more than the present time. Two planes, equals two
kinds of events, and so .......

THE_ONE

wrote:
LS,

Experiments with quantum mechanics have shown that information can be
transported faster than the speed of light. The speed with which two
"connected" photons communicate their polarization status is infinite,
which means - at least in principle - that timing pulses can be sent to
every corner of the universe without any delaying factor. So absolute
time does exist after all.

This is the final blow to the Theory of Special Relativity (SR for
short). SR claims that if two clocks A and B are moving with regard to
each other, B goes slower in the perception of A, and A goes slower in
the perception of B. The only excuse to maintain this contradiction has
always been the assumption that there were no fast enough communication
means to reveal this contradiction.

However, with immediate communication of timing information there is
"absolute time", and each clock in the universe has a speed in relation
to absolute time. If clock A is twice as slow as absolute time and
clock B is four times slower than absolute time, then clock A is twice
as fast as clock B, and clock B twice as slow as clock A. Ordinary
arithmetic is applicable to the speed of clocks.

There is a "zero" inertial frame and this inertial frame represents
absolute motionlessness. Motion with regard to "zero" is absolute and
not relative. It can be detected by comparing one's clock against
absolute time. If your clock is going very slowly, chances are that
your speed is close to the speed of light. The "zero" inertial frame is
also known as "aether".

The conclusion is that - contrary to Einstein's claims - time is
absolute (i.e. there is absolute time with which every event in the
universe can be synchronized) and movement is absolute. Every movement
can be related to a measurable zero inertial frame, in which all clocks
walk fastest.

So the name of this forum is even wrong. There *IS* no relativity in
time and velocity. All time and all velocity can be compared with
absolute and measurable standards.

Point out just one experiment that proves that information can be
transmitted faste than light. I know you can't do because it's never
been done. Just because you don't know the difference between phase
velocity and group velocity is no reason to continue to display your
ignorance here for all the see.

wrote in message oups.com...
Hello Dirk,

Suppose I have two pieces of paper.
I write 0 or 1 on one piece and give it to you.
I write the same number on the other piece and
give it to your brother.
Your brother travels to wherever.
You both have a piece of paper with the same
number on it.
How would go about using this in practice
or -in principle- to transport information faster
than light?

Dirk Vdm

It is possible to create a pair of particles that are "connected" in
some way. Connected photons have related polarization and connected
electrons have related spin. The in this way connected particles can be
separated over long distances and after that the polarization and/or
spin properties can be influenced on one of the particles. This
influence is communicated without delay to the connected particle. This
enables information transmission faster than light. Each pair of
connected particles can be utilized to communicate one "bit" of
information (0 or 1 on your piece of paper). High speed and high volume
information transport seems to be difficult but the principle is enough
to refute Special Relativity.

I gave you an example with pieces of paper.
How would go about using this in practice
or -in principle- to transport information faster
than light?

Dirk Vdm

wrote in message ups.com...

Dear Sue...,


Communication in it most minimal form, the smallest event we
can observe, involves no less than the motion of a remote
electric charge.


Do you really know what information is?

Never mind. Sue's real name is Dennis. He is a retired
engineer and probably even more allergic to physics
than you are.
Other than that, the only thing you'll get from this troll,
is a pack of irrelevant quotes about retarded potentials :-)

Dirk Vdm

"Sue..." wrote in message
oups.com...
|
| Sorcerer wrote:
| "Sue..." wrote in message
| oups.com...
| | Sorcerer wrote:
| | "Sue..." wrote in message
| | oups.com...
| | |
| | | Sorcerer wrote:
| | | "Sue..." wrote in message
| | | ups.com...
| | | | Communication in it most minimal form, the smallest event we
| | | | can observe, involves no less than the motion of a remote
| | | | electric charge.
| | |
| | |
| | | Communication in it[s] most minimal form, the smallest event we
| | | can observe, involves no less than the motion of a remote
| | | magnetic marge.
| | |
| | | http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/spin.gif
| | |
| | | My magnetic marges are faster than your electric charges,
| | | and my chickens came before your eggs. Nah nah na nah na!
| | |
| | | Unless you can show otherwise, you are living in Dork's
universe.
| | |
| | | I'll never make it to a spelling bee.
| |
| | True.
| |
| | | You'll never make it to a physics bee.
| |
| | Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.
| |
| | |
| | | Your *marges* are the nearfield magnetic couplings that only
| | | *appear* FTL.
| |
| | You are living in Dork's universe, the speed of magnetic fields
| | *IS* the speed of light.
| |
| | | They diminish by 1/r^3 and result from two
| | | source charges conspiring to move one destination charge.
| |
| | ___________
| | __________N|---------------O--\/\/\/\/\--r
| |
| | How much does the spring "\/\/\" holding the iron ball O extend if
| | I change r from the magnet N?
|
| That was a question you failed to answer, and so "[...]".
| I'll ask it again with the magnet reversed.
|
| ___________
| __________S|---------------O--\/\/\/\/\--r
|
| How much does the spring "\/\/\" holding the iron ball O extend if
| I change r from the magnet S?

[...]
An answer, please.

Sorcerer wrote:
"Sue..." wrote in message
oups.com...
|
| Sorcerer wrote:
| "Sue..." wrote in message
| oups.com...
| | Sorcerer wrote:
| | "Sue..." wrote in message
| | oups.com...
| | |
| | | Sorcerer wrote:
| | | "Sue..." wrote in message
| | | ups.com...
| | | | Communication in it most minimal form, the smallest event we
| | | | can observe, involves no less than the motion of a remote
| | | | electric charge.
| | |
| | |
| | | Communication in it[s] most minimal form, the smallest event we
| | | can observe, involves no less than the motion of a remote
| | | magnetic marge.
| | |
| | | http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/spin.gif
| | |
| | | My magnetic marges are faster than your electric charges,
| | | and my chickens came before your eggs. Nah nah na nah na!
| | |
| | | Unless you can show otherwise, you are living in Dork's
universe.
| | |
| | | I'll never make it to a spelling bee.
| |
| | True.
| |
| | | You'll never make it to a physics bee.
| |
| | Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.
| |
| | |
| | | Your *marges* are the nearfield magnetic couplings that only
| | | *appear* FTL.
| |
| | You are living in Dork's universe, the speed of magnetic fields
| | *IS* the speed of light.
| |
| | | They diminish by 1/r^3 and result from two
| | | source charges conspiring to move one destination charge.
| |
| | ___________
| | __________N|---------------O--\/\/\/\/\--r
| |
| | How much does the spring "\/\/\" holding the iron ball O extend if
| | I change r from the magnet N?
|
| That was a question you failed to answer, and so "[...]".
| I'll ask it again with the magnet reversed.
|
| ___________
| __________S|---------------O--\/\/\/\/\--r
|
| How much does the spring "\/\/\" holding the iron ball O extend if
| I change r from the magnet S?

[...]
An answer, please.
Attempts to find monopoles
A number of attempts have been made to detect magnetic
monopoles. One of the simplest is to use a loop of
superconducting wire that can look for even tiny magnetic
sources, a so-called "superconducting quantum interference
detector", or SQUID. Given the predicted density, loops the
size of a soup can would expect to see about one monopole
event per year. Although there have been tantalizing events
recorded, in particular the event recorded by Blas Cabrera on
the night of February 14, 1982 (thus, sometimes referred to as
the "Valentine's Day Monopole"), there has never been reproducible
evidence for the existence of magnetic monopoles. The lack of
such events places a limit on the number of monopoles of
about 1 monopole per 1029 nucleons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_monopole

So...There is one chance in 1029 that the problem will have
a solution on Valentine's Day. )

Here is some Maxwell describing 1/r^3
http://www.conformity.com/0102reflections.html

Sue...