Tormod Posted November 30, 2004 Report Posted November 30, 2004 We featured this research here as well: Speed of Gravity Researcher Stands Behind Theoryhttp://www.hypography.com/article.cfm?id=33083
alexander Posted November 30, 2004 Report Posted November 30, 2004 I've read the article, i've seen it before, but never had the time to read through it, again' I'm not that knowledgeble about gravity, I was reading through some articles here and there, and most of them dint metion anything about speed of gravity = speed of light, but then it doesnt support the speed of particle interaction experiment. Cant tell you all about it, it's been a while since i read about it, but there was an experiment done to calculate the speed of particle interaction, with 2 molecules sent out in 2 different direction, and one's polarity was changed, they measured the amount of time it took the other one to start rotating in the other direction, and it was instanteneous..... but maybe i'm wrong and imagining things....
Aki Posted December 1, 2004 Report Posted December 1, 2004 Thanks Aki, I will definately take a look. I think that the link was posted on the forum already a little while ago, my problem is that Linux Firefox still doesnt have a plugin for it, or I cant find one forit anyways... But I'll try to figure something out. oh really? I viewed it with firefox. Do you have Quicktime installed?
Tormod Posted December 1, 2004 Report Posted December 1, 2004 Cant tell you all about it, it's been a while since i read about it, but there was an experiment done to calculate the speed of particle interaction, with 2 molecules sent out in 2 different direction, and one's polarity was changed, they measured the amount of time it took the other one to start rotating in the other direction, and it was instanteneous..... but maybe i'm wrong and imagining things.... What you're refering to is entanglement which is not related to the speed of light. It is a puzzle, though, and was the basis of much heated debate between Einstein's group and Niels Bohr's group. But while entanglement seems to violate the speed of information transfer, nobody has yet been able to use entanglement to actually transfer information, only measure properties.
alexander Posted December 1, 2004 Report Posted December 1, 2004 What you're refering to is entanglement which is not related to the speed of light. It is a puzzle, though, and was the basis of much heated debate between Einstein's group and Niels Bohr's group. But while entanglement seems to violate the speed of information transfer, nobody has yet been able to use entanglement to actually transfer information, only measure properties.Thanks for clarifying it Tormod, as i said, it's been a while so...
paultrr Posted December 1, 2004 Report Posted December 1, 2004 Part of the problem is we simply have to use the long way(C limited way) to test the validity of any experiment. Some of this error correction enters in with quantum computer ideas also. Any data set(information) has to have error correction to validate a given process of transfer. That error correction with entanglement requires us to use the long path to begin with. The other part of the problem is these types of paths seem to have a difference in the type of information they allow. The type of information we've shown by experiments so far is allowed is what we term quantum information. We can send say the QI about spin. But we cannot modulate an entangled particle to send normal information. Normal information seems at present to be strickly C limited. There might be a way around this I have seen no attempt to try yet. If one were to treat all spin up particles as a dit and all spin down particles as a dash, then allow no direct recheck of the encoded via morse code information through a series of entangled particles sent one at a time via an entangled path it would be interesting to see at the end of the experiment how much of the original info goes through without error. Here I left out the error correction during the experiment and only allowed it at the end after the experiment. If nature somehow closes any path to normal information being FTL then the messages received would be junk. But, if it does allow such then one would get the main message being sent. This would be a case of compensating for uncertanity by not doing anything at all and letting nature work its own solution out.
Freethinker Posted December 1, 2004 Report Posted December 1, 2004 I could be wrong, but I believe with the quantum pair situation, it is not so much that we AFFECT the spin of the distant particle as when we DETECT the spin of the local of the pair we then KNOW the spin of the distant one. Before that it is indeterminate.
Freethinker Posted December 1, 2004 Report Posted December 1, 2004 As to the speed of gravity issue, from what I ahve been reading, they are discussing two different speeds. One is connected to the "speed" of the gravitational effect bewteen two bodies. The other is the propagation of information. And if memory serves, from back when I watched the Elegant Universe program, he shows Gravity as travelling at C. I recall a graphic showing the curved space model and how if the sun was instantly removed, the effect would reach earth at C. Info I have seen shows that the EFFECT of the sun's gravity on Earth ahead of C. i.e. the direction of pull from the sun on Earth is based oon the sun's ACTUAL position, not the position we SEE based on photon's leaving the sun taking a while to reach us. It takes just over 8 mins for the sun's light to reach us. Thus we SEE where the Sun WAS when the photons left it/ Not where it IS when the photons reach us 8 mins later. But the PULL is towards where the Sun IS. That perhaps while the PULL of gravity is faster than C, the info is around C. Or that while the PULL is towards the Sun's CURRENT location, if the sun exploded, the gravitational effect would take C to get to us. Thus some sites discuss the Sppef og Gravity as C and others have faster speeds varying from perhaps instant to magnitudes faster than C. Oh how much we don't know. Excitingly beautiful isn't it?
gpdone Posted December 1, 2004 Report Posted December 1, 2004 Freethinker, Excitingly beautiful? Yes! And, delightfully, any new discovery worth it's salt produces at least a dozen new exciting questions! I agree with your latest post on this topic up to this point: 'That perhaps while the PULL of gravity is faster than C, the info is around C. Or that while the PULL is towards the Sun's CURRENT location, if the sun exploded, the gravitational effect would take C to get to us.' The FTL demo demonstrates clearly that the information arrives at least several minutes before the arrival of light from the sun! The clincher will be when I have done a demonstration at a location above 60 degrees N Lat. at a time of the year when the visible solar disc never quite sets. At some time before it reaches it's lowest point the pattern will occur indicating that gravitational sunset HAS occured. I fully realise no resonable person will (or should) accept this untill they have verified from there own experience that the pattern does occur, that it does not occur at any other time and it always occurs near sun or rise or set. If you would like to see .jpg images of actual graphed data let me know and I'll email you some. See image below Lee
alexander Posted December 1, 2004 Report Posted December 1, 2004 mmm, images....you could post them here too, but if you really dont want to, it would be great if you could send me an email to [email protected]. Thanks!
lindagarrette Posted December 2, 2004 Report Posted December 2, 2004 I could be wrong, but I believe with the quantum pair situation, it is not so much that we AFFECT the spin of the distant particle as when we DETECT the spin of the local of the pair we then KNOW the spin of the distant one. Before that it is indeterminate. That's how I understand it also. Hence no way to send information instantaneously. Once entangled particles must retain their properties in sync forever. So what's the point?B)
Tormod Posted December 2, 2004 Report Posted December 2, 2004 That's how I understand it also. Hence no way to send information instantaneously. Once entangled particles must retain their properties in sync forever. So what's the point?B) The interesting thing is to find out whether entanglement can actually be used to transmit information. Like if it were possible to manipulate the spin of particle A and see a change in particle B. That would revolutionise communication... But likely? No idea. B)
Recommended Posts