Instant communication between planets theory

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Andromerius
People tend to talk about quantum entanglement while disregarding the most pertinent question/mystery.
The changing characteristics of one particle must be transmitted to the other. It does so instantly regardless of space between them. Meaning, it is FTL.


Actually, it does not mean that. Nothing is "transmitted". It's like putting two cups in front a fan and turning it on. Both are effected. Same thing here. You don't effect one, and have that effect transmitted. Both are effected at the same time. Nothing is being transmitted.




posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 05:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by Andromerius
People tend to talk about quantum entanglement while disregarding the most pertinent question/mystery.
The changing characteristics of one particle must be transmitted to the other. It does so instantly regardless of space between them. Meaning, it is FTL.


Actually, it does not mean that. Nothing is "transmitted". It's like putting two cups in front a fan and turning it on. Both are effected. Same thing here. You don't effect one, and have that effect transmitted. Both are effected at the same time. Nothing is being transmitted.


I get what you are saying, but for the sake of the argument, i chose to say "transmitted". I know its a crude expression but its better then Einstein's "Spooky action at a distance".

Something needs to happen so the other half of the particle moves or changes it's characteristics. Yes, it is instant, but we are nowhere near discovering how it is done. BUT it is done!



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by seriousskeptic
reply to post by Steffenfield
 


I have a vague rememberance of the show of which you speak.
The analogy of the tuning fork caught my attention.
If I am remembering correctly, the theory for the communications was based on generating gravity waves at a set frequency. It was assumed that only the more advanced cultures would recognise these waves and would be capable of responding to them.
The use of quantum entanglement had not, at that time, been widely put forward and would require the use of particles from a single source to be moved from one location to others in order to operate properly. This could take several years before implimentation and would almost defeat the idea of instant communications.
edit on 3-1-2013 by seriousskeptic because: (no reason given)


Omygosh!

That's correct Skeptic!


Hey, is there anything at all you could possibly provide me with to track down that TV episode?

Anything you can remember, even if it's incorrect.

As of right now, you're the only single lead that I have on finding this again.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:32 AM
link   
the only TV or movie presentation that i recall which had any 'instantaneous communication' involved in it was the show K-PAX

where the mental patient claiming to be an alien talked/communicted with his home planet, some several
Light Years distant... instantly

but the rescue ship for him could only travel at hyper- lightspeed, hence his couple days of delay in the psych ward


maybe your thinking of this story :
en.wikiquote.org...
edit on 4-1-2013 by St Udio because: (no reason given)
edit on 4-1-2013 by St Udio because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:47 AM
link   
Changes in gravity are actually changes in space. To modulate intelligence (your message) into focused gravitation permits instantaneous transmission throughout the Universe primarliy in that focused direction(s). Thus, why the CERN is so trying to obtain a controllable black hole. Not just for the modulator/xmtr, but the same technology is required to de-modulate/RCV.

It is theorized there are billions of gravitational modulated messages bombarding Earth from advanced civilizations. We want to eavesdrop and extract knowledge from the advanced ones. We want to take a bite out of the garden of Edens apple.
edit on 4-1-2013 by tkwasny because: Typo fix



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:52 AM
link   
reply to post by dorkfish87
 


I think he is talking about quantum entanglement, but in line with what you say. at this point it doesn't seem to work for FTL comms yet... (Check the news regarding teleportation also)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by tkwasny
 


That is truly remarkable tkwasny if what you are saying is indeed true.

Do you have a online link to how you have found this information?



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dispo
I'm not entirely sure it's what you're thinking of, but quantum entanglement is the most promising concept for FTL communication at present.

Basically, in any two particles which have interacted physically and been separated in such a way that they're still connected, changing a property of one will have the opposite effect on the other.

So say I had an electron on earth which was paired with an electron on Zeeblebrox-40, and my electron had a clockwise spin and yours had an anti-clockwise spin, if I changed my spin, yours would change too!

It would be possible to transmit binary messages in this way using a large number of entangled pairs, instantaneously, over any distance.

en.wikipedia.org...



Very awesome. Posts like this are why I like this site.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by tkwasny
Changes in gravity are actually changes in space. To modulate intelligence (your message) into focused gravitation permits instantaneous transmission throughout the Universe primarliy in that focused direction(s). Thus, why the CERN is so trying to obtain a controllable black hole. Not just for the modulator/xmtr, but the same technology is required to de-modulate/RCV.

It is theorized there are billions of gravitational modulated messages bombarding Earth from advanced civilizations. We want to eavesdrop and extract knowledge from the advanced ones. We want to take a bite out of the garden of Edens apple.
edit on 4-1-2013 by tkwasny because: Typo fix


Glad we are on the same page, at last, someone that knows what they are talking about.
You are more right then you imagine regarding the messages being bombarded to Earth.



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Andromerius

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by Andromerius
People tend to talk about quantum entanglement while disregarding the most pertinent question/mystery.
The changing characteristics of one particle must be transmitted to the other. It does so instantly regardless of space between them. Meaning, it is FTL.


Actually, it does not mean that. Nothing is "transmitted". It's like putting two cups in front a fan and turning it on. Both are effected. Same thing here. You don't effect one, and have that effect transmitted. Both are effected at the same time. Nothing is being transmitted.


I get what you are saying, but for the sake of the argument, i chose to say "transmitted". I know its a crude expression but its better then Einstein's "Spooky action at a distance".

Something needs to happen so the other half of the particle moves or changes it's characteristics. Yes, it is instant, but we are nowhere near discovering how it is done. BUT it is done!



Well your argument is premised on a false idea, just so you can argue it. The change is instantaneous, thus negating the idea it proves FTL. There is no speed involved, nor time. You are correct, we aren't sure exactly what is going on. It in no way proves the possibility of FTL, and as of now it is deemed impossible to be used as a means of communication as it requires information to be passed on by traditional methods to use it as communication, in which case we will always be limited by however fast our traditional method is.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 12:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Andromerius
 

Andromerius, hey, good thread, maybe we are looking at the wrong tree, gravity, and split particles and so forth may be reasonable, FTL may be obtained from the time end of the problem, on a limb, but if light speed is the boundry, then time has to be the answer, I used to stand by the "linear" theory, not anymore, if light speed is 186k/mi/s, and you could manipulate the time within that light conduit...hey, we are all theorist.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by Andromerius

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by Andromerius
People tend to talk about quantum entanglement while disregarding the most pertinent question/mystery.
The changing characteristics of one particle must be transmitted to the other. It does so instantly regardless of space between them. Meaning, it is FTL.


Actually, it does not mean that. Nothing is "transmitted". It's like putting two cups in front a fan and turning it on. Both are effected. Same thing here. You don't effect one, and have that effect transmitted. Both are effected at the same time. Nothing is being transmitted.


I get what you are saying, but for the sake of the argument, i chose to say "transmitted". I know its a crude expression but its better then Einstein's "Spooky action at a distance".

Something needs to happen so the other half of the particle moves or changes it's characteristics. Yes, it is instant, but we are nowhere near discovering how it is done. BUT it is done!



Well your argument is premised on a false idea, just so you can argue it. The change is instantaneous, thus negating the idea it proves FTL. There is no speed involved, nor time. You are correct, we aren't sure exactly what is going on. It in no way proves the possibility of FTL, and as of now it is deemed impossible to be used as a means of communication as it requires information to be passed on by traditional methods to use it as communication, in which case we will always be limited by however fast our traditional method is.


Nowhere in my previous post did i say anything about FTL. I am just saying that for any action there is a reaction. In this case, changing caracteristics here will instantly change them there. There is a mechanism at play here that makes this happen, we don't know what it is, maybe it will be hundreds of years until we do, who knows, but it is there. Still, i'm way over my head with this one since i am no expert.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by teslahowitzer
reply to post by Andromerius
 

Andromerius, hey, good thread, maybe we are looking at the wrong tree, gravity, and split particles and so forth may be reasonable, FTL may be obtained from the time end of the problem, on a limb, but if light speed is the boundry, then time has to be the answer, I used to stand by the "linear" theory, not anymore, if light speed is 186k/mi/s, and you could manipulate the time within that light conduit...hey, we are all theorist.


Yes, time and space manipulation might be answer, but then, you cannot do it without gravity



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 01:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Andromerius
Nowhere in my previous post did i say anything about FTL.

I bet to differ. This is what you said. Emphasis mine.

Originally posted by Andromerius
People tend to talk about quantum entanglement while disregarding the most pertinent question/mystery.
The changing characteristics of one particle must be transmitted to the other. It does so instantly regardless of space between them. Meaning, it is FTL.

Clearly you did talk about FTL and you stated this is proof FTL is possible.


I am just saying that for any action there is a reaction. In this case, changing caracteristics here will instantly change them there. There is a mechanism at play here that makes this happen, we don't know what it is, maybe it will be hundreds of years until we do, who knows, but it is there. Still, i'm way over my head with this one since i am no expert.

I doubt it will take very long at the rate science is progressing. I am on the edge of my seat though wondering what advances knowing will lead to!



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 02:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by Andromerius
Nowhere in my previous post did i say anything about FTL.

I bet to differ. This is what you said. Emphasis mine.

Originally posted by Andromerius
People tend to talk about quantum entanglement while disregarding the most pertinent question/mystery.
The changing characteristics of one particle must be transmitted to the other. It does so instantly regardless of space between them. Meaning, it is FTL.

Clearly you did talk about FTL and you stated this is proof FTL is possible.


I am just saying that for any action there is a reaction. In this case, changing caracteristics here will instantly change them there. There is a mechanism at play here that makes this happen, we don't know what it is, maybe it will be hundreds of years until we do, who knows, but it is there. Still, i'm way over my head with this one since i am no expert.

I doubt it will take very long at the rate science is progressing. I am on the edge of my seat though wondering what advances knowing will lead to!


You really have a problem reading don't you?

I said PREVIOUS POST, not PREVIOUS POSTS, since you were answering my PREVIOUS POST, not my PREVIOUS POSTS.

Besides, with the little information we got on the subject, how the # do you know there is no speed involved or time?
edit on 6/1/2013 by Andromerius because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by AndromeriusYou really have a problem reading don't you?

I said PREVIOUS POST, not PREVIOUS POSTS, since you were answering my PREVIOUS POST, not my PREVIOUS POSTS.

Besides, with the little information we got on the subject, how the # do you know there is no speed involved or time?
edit on 6/1/2013 by Andromerius because: (no reason given)


I am sorry, but the post that began the exchange does not go away because you want it to,

Show me there is speed or time involved. Thanks.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 02:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by AndromeriusYou really have a problem reading don't you?

I said PREVIOUS POST, not PREVIOUS POSTS, since you were answering my PREVIOUS POST, not my PREVIOUS POSTS.

Besides, with the little information we got on the subject, how the # do you know there is no speed involved or time?
edit on 6/1/2013 by Andromerius because: (no reason given)


I am sorry, but the post that began the exchange does not go away because you want it to,

Show me there is speed or time involved. Thanks.


The post where i spoke about FTL is there, i might be wrong about it or not, that's not the point, more people have pointed out to me the flaws in it, i don't really care much since i'm no expert, i just theorizing. I cannot show you there is speed or time any more then you can do the reverse. We simply don't know. Is it that hard to say "i don't know" ?

Anyway, we can only speculate at it, it seems instantaneous, but we don't know the mechanism behind it, it might be something that would blow our minds away. Might even be something related to the stopping of time and diminution of space in a split second that your reality does not even register but that took thousands of years to accomplish across different multiverses (lol).
So what?



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 05:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Andromerius
 


Well we can keep arguing, or we can agree that regardless it's a mindblowing thing to consider, flies in the face of logic, and we both can't wait to find out what it leads to. I would prefer we go that route.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by tkwasny
Changes in gravity are actually changes in space. To modulate intelligence (your message) into focused gravitation permits instantaneous transmission throughout the Universe primarliy in that focused direction(s). Thus, why the CERN is so trying to obtain a controllable black hole. Not just for the modulator/xmtr, but the same technology is required to de-modulate/RCV.
For a long time we didn't really know what the speed of gravity was, and in a centuries-old idea it was thought that gravity might be instantaneous. But about a decade ago, we measured the speed of gravity for the first time, and it's not instantaneous, and the measurement supports Einstein's idea that gravity travels at the speed of light:

Speed of Gravity Measured for First Time

Taking advantage of a rare cosmic alignment, scientists have made the first measurement of the speed at which the force of gravity propagates, giving a numerical value to one of the last unmeasured fundamental constants of physics.

"Newton thought that gravity's force was instantaneous. Einstein assumed that it moved at the speed of light, but until now, no one had measured it," said Sergei Kopeikin, a physicist at the University of Missouri-Columbia.

"We have determined that gravity's propagation speed is equal to the speed of light within an accuracy of 20 percent," said Ed Fomalont, an astronomer at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO) in Charlottesville, VA.



Originally posted by Steffenfield
That is truly remarkable tkwasny if what you are saying is indeed true.

Do you have a online link to how you have found this information?
Regardless of any link that may or may not be posted, it's not true that the speed of gravity is instantaneous, and it's probably not any faster than the speed of light (The measurement says it travels at the speed of light give or take 20%).


Originally posted by Andromerius
You really have a problem reading don't you?

I said PREVIOUS POST, not PREVIOUS POSTS, since you were answering my PREVIOUS POST, not my PREVIOUS POSTS.
Each individual post is a previous post, it is not necessary to refer to the plural if one is referring to only one previous post. So, you did refer to FTL in a previous post.

And based on this misunderstanding, you accuse someone else of having reading problems?

Please, show some manners.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 12:20 PM
link   
AND none of you have ANY idea how this
work in real life.
So prove this and prove that is TOTALY irrelivant.

Its cool non the less...





new topics
top topics
 
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join