Tag Info

New answers tagged

-1

As I don't belong anymore to this site, my answer will be very brief. I apologize for not being interested to give explicit details, only certain hints. 1) Nature is local. 2) FTL signals are not only self-contradictory, as explained in my protocol, the nature doesn't use them. I repeat, they are not the way the nature works. (By the way, this is why we ...


2

Entanglement isn't about interaction or information transfer betweeen entangled particles. Consider spin-entaglement of two spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ particles: Let them be in singulet-state relative to an arbitrary axis (say z-axis): $$ |\Psi \rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (\ |\uparrow_z, \downarrow_z \rangle - |\downarrow_z,\uparrow_z\rangle \ ) $$ The ...


1

Let me first say that I do not work in quantum foundations, really, so I might have a few misconceptions myself. I beg anyone to correct me, where I err and I will try to provide more references upon request. After the question seems to have cleared up in chat, let me rewrite my answer: You basically seem to ask: What if entanglement would allow ...


2

I saw a some videos about the information paradox aka Hawking paradox. My understanding of it was that as soon as something is unable to leave a black hole (the event horizon where light cannot escape) that it's information is then represented as surface area (2d) on the outside of the black hole rather than our standard idea of volume (3d) and believing ...


5

A black hole does not have an infinitely strong 'gravitational pull'; the spacetime curvature is finite at the horizon. However, the proper acceleration required to hover above the horizon diverges at the horizon. That is to say, the weight of an observer, hovering above the horizon, goes to infinity at the horizon. Nonetheless, to an observer hovering ...


26

does it mean that at a blackhole, an object will fall at an infinite speed because of the infinitely strong gravitational pull of the blackhole? No. Actually, defining exactly what you mean by the speed an object falls into a black hole is a tricky problem. In relativity you generally find that different observers observe different things. But we can ...


0

Quick short answer, someone else will give you a better one Nobody, not the best people we have, nobody, knows what goes on inside a black hole. There is no way to look inside because no light comes out. So we can guess anything we want about infinite speeds etc.... till the cows come home, but no measure means no proof of your guess being correct. Hope ...


0

I'm not aware of any reason that nonlinearity necessitates superluminal signals. I disagree with the existing answers. Certainly classical field theories can be nonlinear without inducing superluminal signals, e.g. General Relativity. I also see nothing in the quantization procedure of a classical field theory that would add superluminal signals. The ...


2

If by "Lorentz ether theory" you mean something like a philosophical interpretation of special relativity which is in principle impossible to distinguish experimentally from SR (akin to the Bohmian interpretation of quantum mechanics), then this indistinguishability would require that all experimentally testable laws of physics be Lorentz-symmetric, ...


0

The impossibility of rewriting the past is a principle so general that it doesn't depend on the branch of the physics, electromagnetism, Q. mechanics, whatever you want. Is that LET compatible with FTL communication . . .? For building an FTL communication scheme you have to show a phenomenon that while in some frame of reference (at rest with respect ...


0

Suppose the particle is in a state of $\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}$up + $\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}$down. There is a 50% chance of measuring it up and a 50% chance of measuring it down. If you run this through the imperfect cloner multiple times, it won't have half the clones be up and half be down. Suppose the first clone is up. Since it measured the particle spin up, it is ...


1

No, the photon would still go at c. E = hf for a photon. E is energy, h is a special number called Planck's constant, and f is frequency (also sometimes people use v instead of f). Instead of speeding up the photon, the gravity would increase the frequency of the light. For example, a red beam of light, pulled by gravity, might have its frequency increased ...


6

In this answer we'll basically repeat Leandro M.'s good answer using formulas. Let us for simplicity use units where $c=1=\hbar$. Consider a spinless relativistic complex scalar field $$\tag{1} \left(\partial_t^2-\partial_x^2+m_0^2\right)\phi(x,t)~=~0 $$ in 1+1 spacetime dimensions. The Lagrangian density for a spinless relativistic complex scalar field ...



Top 50 recent answers are included