Faster-Than-Light Light

[HP]

I found this (http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=2544) story interesting.A friend of mine was researching something and was asking me about relativity, so like any good 2+2'er I hit the MS paint. Then my friend was too busy to look at it, so I came here for validation of my work. In other words, I hope you find this interesting.

My MSPaint Pic (http://img48.imageshack.us/img48/4601/fasterthanlight1fk.png)

[Andrew Karpinski]

http://img48.imageshack.us/img48/4601/fasterthanlight1fk.png

[Praxis101]

[ QUOTE ]
I found this (http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=2544) story interesting.A friend of mine was researching something and was asking me about relativity, so like any good 2+2'er I hit the MS paint. Then my friend was too busy to look at it, so I came here for validation of my work. In other words, I hope you find this interesting.

My MSPaint Pic (http://img48.imageshack.us/img48/4601/fasterthanlight1fk.png)

[/ QUOTE ]

Intuitively, your way - the light actually travelling backwards in time - makes more sense to me than the explanation in the original article.

Note: I have no formal education in any form of science.
Logically, the creation of two new light photons, then the collision + destruction of them just doesn't work for me. This seems more unnatural than your example.

One reason for this is that I have a hard time picturing something creating two new photons - considering that to do so seemlessly would mean the optical fiber is essentially "acting" at the speed of light.

It's all very interesting.

[yukoncpa]

[ QUOTE ]
Intuitively, your way - the light actually travelling backwards in time - makes more sense to me than the explanation in the original article.

Note: I have no formal education in any form of science.
Logically, the creation of two new light photons, then the collision + destruction of them just doesn't work for me. This seems more unnatural than your example.

One reason for this is that I have a hard time picturing something creating two new photons - considering that to do so seemlessly would mean the optical fiber is essentially "acting" at the speed of light.

It's all very interesting.


[/ QUOTE ]

This whole matter got me wondering about the double slit experiment. How does the electron make it through two slits at once? Is it possible that a single electron is traveling forwards, then backwards in time ( then repeat) until it traverses all possible paths?

[ScottHoward]

the animation on that link doesnt make sense to me?
it shows a pulse leaving the fiber before the original pulse reaches the fiber? or am i really dumb?

[Cyrus]

Any physicists get hot and bothered when double slit experimenting ?

[yukoncpa]

[ QUOTE ]
Any physicists get hot and bothered when double slit experimenting ?



[/ QUOTE ]

Richard Feynman seemed to love it as evidenced by “Six Easy Pieces”. I’m not a physicist, but the one time I was faced with double slits, I was very much hot and bothered. . . Until I said the word “switch”, at which point I had much work to do and forgot about my state of awe and anxiety.

[HP]

[ QUOTE ]
the animation on that link doesnt make sense to me?
it shows a pulse leaving the fiber before the original pulse reaches the fiber? or am i really dumb?

[/ QUOTE ]

No that is exactly what's happening! It's f'in nuts

[MaxWeiss]

This whole thing just reinforces my previous beliefs about our science. We have so many people who think we "know" what is going on---they don't seem to grasp that we are just deriving more math from what we have already. I said in an earlier post that light speed is just another barrier to be passed--not because I think that current science is wrong, but because it seems clear to me that we will soon realize that nature is what it is, regardless of how we try to define it, and that we will soon stumble on another mathematical "breakthrough" which must necessarily (though for some reason many will find it surprising) have physical ramifications as described by the math.

Remember, we aren't describing nature. We are just trying to find more accurate equations for what is already there.

[cambraceres]

[ QUOTE ]


This whole matter got me wondering about the double slit experiment. How does the electron make it through two slits at once? Is it possible that a single electron is traveling forwards, then backwards in time ( then repeat) until it traverses all possible paths?

[/ QUOTE ]

I know this is kind of a highjack to answer this question and not the original, so I beg your pardon in advance.

The essential mystery of the double slit experiment is the same as that of all of Quantum Field Theory. The two slit experiment was devised and carried out by an english physicist named Young. The measurable results of this experiment are not all that incredible on the surface, but the implications are absolutely intriguing.

The actual mechanism by which a particular photon appears at the measuring device is unknown. There are many pretty analogies and devices to help you learn the nature of physical law as it is presently understood, but to make the mistake of attempting to visualize quantum phenomenon is criminal. The photon(s) in the aforementioned experiment can be addressed only at the point of measurement, only then is anything actually known about this entity. When it is still "in transit", nothing meaningful is known, not even the general nature of it's physical manifestation.

According to QM, the wave aspect of a particle is deterministic, that means the future of the system can be told with certainty. That is, you can tell the future of this system so long as you don't verify anything. Verification implies measurement, and measurement changes the system. The act of measurement, or observation, changes this system from one that is defined and classical, to one that is stochastic in nature. The term Stochastic refers to an entity that is governed by the rules of probability, like QFT. Classical theories are non-stochastic, generally speaking. So long as you do not measure the position of a particle, the system is classical.

This means that you know what is going to happen so long as you don't look at what happens, and you have no idea what is happening when you aren't looking.

Where's metric?

Much Love

Cambraceres

[yukoncpa]

Is it the white lightning that makes you so smart?

[ QUOTE ]
This means that you know what is going to happen so long as you don't look at what happens, and you have no idea what is happening when you aren't looking.

Where's metric?



[/ QUOTE ]

Well now you got my curiosity up again. My T.V. screen is nothing more than an electron gun rapidly firing particles at the cathode tube. When my t.v's tuned to it's customary porn station, but no one's looking, do the undulating bodies suddenly turn into a wave function?

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
Is it the white lightning that makes you so smart?

[ QUOTE ]
This means that you know what is going to happen so long as you don't look at what happens, and you have no idea what is happening when you aren't looking.

Where's metric?



[/ QUOTE ]

Well now you got my curiosity up again. My T.V. screen is nothing more than an electron gun rapidly firing particles at the cathode tube. When my t.v's tuned to it's customary porn station, but no one's looking, do the undulating bodies suddenly turn into a wave function?

[/ QUOTE ]


They dont suddently turn into anything..they are always just wave functions. Its your filthy mind that turns them into undulating bodies. /images/graemlins/grin.gif


[ QUOTE ]
What do you want from life?
Someone to love and somebody you can trust?
What do you want from life?
To try and be happy
While you do the nasty things you must?


[/ QUOTE ]

[cambraceres]

Oh yeah Yukon, any intelligence or lack thereof on my part is clearly due to the barbarity of the OH group. If you guys want some extra brain candy non-locality is pretty easy to grasp but still just as bizzare as anything in QFT. Some feel the discovery that physical reality behaves non-locally is the most important in the history of science, and yet not one disaffected student or morose intellectual I have discussed science with even knows about the experiments or who performed them.

Another good topic would be the shift from visualizable reality to unvisualizable formality.


By the way, does anyone know if Punnet squares are still used?

Much Love,

Cam

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
Oh yeah Yukon, any intelligence or lack thereof on my part is clearly due to the barbarity of the OH group. If you guys want some extra brain candy non-locality is pretty easy to grasp but still just as bizzare as anything in QFT. Some feel the discovery that physical reality behaves non-locally is the most important in the history of science, and yet not one disaffected student or morose intellectual I have discussed science with even knows about the experiments or who performed them.

Another good topic would be the shift from visualizable reality to unvisualizable formality.


By the way, does anyone know if Punnet squares are still used?

Much Love,

Cam

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes sir, we still use Punnet squares in freshman bio, and actually we still use them quite extensively in first year med school. Probably 50% of our Genetics class was understanding and using Punnet squares. Which I'm proud to say I'm expert at! /images/graemlins/grin.gif