More gravity...

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 12-01-2004
Tormod's Avatar
Hypographer
Hypography Staff Member
Administrator
Senior Editor
Editor
Dev Team Member

Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 12,907
Blog Entries: 4
Tormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant future
Re: More gravity...

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexander
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.
__________________
Your Friendly Neighborhood Administrator

Want to sponsor Hypography? Buy a print in our Fall 2008 Benefit Sale

Found a problem? Report it in our Bug Tracker

Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality.
- Carl Sagan
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 12-01-2004
alexander's Avatar
Resident USSRian
Hypography Staff Member
Administrator
Gallery Curator
Dev Team Member
Re: More gravity...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tormod
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...
__________________
And remember that great question that Pierre-Simon Laplace and Sir Isaac Newton, Andrei Markov and David Hilbert, Richard Feynman and Enrico Fermi, Albert Einstein and Edmund Halley did not come to ask throughout all of their dedication and work: "Who the hell is IMing me?"


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 License.
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 12-01-2004
paultrr's Avatar
Explaining

Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 648
paultrr is on a distinguished road
Re: More gravity...

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.
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 12-01-2004
Freethinker's Avatar
Resident Atheist

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,057
Freethinker is a jewel in the roughFreethinker is a jewel in the roughFreethinker is a jewel in the roughFreethinker is a jewel in the rough
Re: More gravity...

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.
__________________
Thanks for helping to get god pounded into my head



Another succesful faith based initiative. Just like 9/11
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 12-01-2004
Freethinker's Avatar
Resident Atheist

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,057
Freethinker is a jewel in the roughFreethinker is a jewel in the roughFreethinker is a jewel in the roughFreethinker is a jewel in the rough
Re: More gravity...

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?
__________________
Thanks for helping to get god pounded into my head



Another succesful faith based initiative. Just like 9/11
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 12-01-2004
gpdone's Avatar
Thinking

Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Portland, Oregon USA
Posts: 36
gpdone is on a distinguished road
Re: More gravity...

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
Attached Thumbnails
more-gravity-pic12.jpg  
__________________
'There is only one kind of stuff.'

Last edited by gpdone; 12-03-2004 at 05:43 PM. Reason: adding image
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 12-01-2004
lindagarrette's Avatar
Explaining

Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Maryland Heights, MO
Posts: 865
lindagarrette is a jewel in the roughlindagarrette is a jewel in the roughlindagarrette is a jewel in the roughlindagarrette is a jewel in the rough
Send a message via ICQ to lindagarrette
Re: More gravity...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freethinker
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?
__________________
If god existed then science would be meaningless
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 12-02-2004
Tormod's Avatar
Hypographer
Hypography Staff Member
Administrator
Senior Editor
Editor
Dev Team Member

Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 12,907
Blog Entries: 4
Tormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant futureTormod has a brilliant future
Re: More gravity...

Quote:
Originally Posted by lindagarrette
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?
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.
__________________
Your Friendly Neighborhood Administrator

Want to sponsor Hypography? Buy a print in our Fall 2008 Benefit Sale

Found a problem? Report it in our Bug Tracker

Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality.
- Carl Sagan
Closed Thread

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Gravity and photons Rhea Physics and Mathematics 3 09-28-2004
gravity problem wepe Physics and Mathematics 10 05-26-2004
Gravity, take a look aurie Astronomy and Cosmology 0 02-23-2004
Speed of Gravity and Speed of Light thoughts and ponderings... Noah Physics and Mathematics 9 12-22-2003
Speed of gravity article Tormod Physics and Mathematics 0 07-06-2003

» Current Poll
Favorite James Bond?
Sean Connery - 63.64%
7 Votes
George Lazenby - 0%
0 Votes
David Niven - 9.09%
1 Vote
Roger Moore - 9.09%
1 Vote
Timothy Dalton - 9.09%
1 Vote
Pierce Brosnan - 0%
0 Votes
Daniel Craig - 9.09%
1 Vote
Hate 'em all - 0%
0 Votes
Who's James Bond? - 0%
0 Votes
Total Votes: 11
You may not vote on this poll.

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0 ©2008, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright © 2000-2008 Hypography
Part of the Hypography - Science for Everyone Network