Precisely, we like a bit of hand-wavium - future tech is faster/better but Frontier keeps some limits - no antigrav etc. It 'feels' fine
Heat sinks right now are appalling
- Thread starter Gamel0rd1
- Start date
Seriously, what? How can you say that? How do you know what is inevitably?
FTL transmissions of data already happens daily. Mass isn't far behind, we've been getting some good hints on how to do it lately.
Yay Science.
http://phys.org/news/2014-07-scientists-quantum-entanglement-amplified.html
As for mass, just refresh your memory on what the Higgs Boson is and what it's confirmed existence implies. People are still studying it's possible applications, so you won't find much written on it regarding FTL travel. It is a good candidate for an Alcubierre drive though.
Last edited:
What do you mean FTL than light transfer data? If you mean quantum entanglement, then it doesn't work the same as no information is sent. Sorry if you didn't mean that.
Information is sent. Quantum entanglement transmits information perfectly. It is, after all, the crux of the huge amount of interest behind it's study.
Because it literally is a perfect transmission of information. If the information is intercepted, corrupted or lost the entanglement is broken. So even when the desired data isn't transmitted, you always receive the 100% reliable information that it was not transmitted.
Seeing is believing right?
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1401/1401.4318.pdf
There. That's the simplest example I can be bothered to dig up.
I'll read that now, but my understanding was that once you observe one of a pair in one state, by inferring, you then know the state of the other, thus no data has travelled. I'll be be honest, I don't know.
Yup, you're not wrong there but also when you then change the state of one the other changes at exactly the same time - that's when the information gets transmitted
the cat silhouette was inspired
The opposite. You've had a dyslexic moment. If you know the state of the other particle, which could be anywhere else in the universe, you have observed that other particle without receiving information from it directly, thus the information contained in that particle has been immediately transmitted to you faster than the speed of light.
Scientists are really pushing quantum entanglement. It has a lot of practical uses.
Here's some heavier reading.
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1506/1506.04231.pdf
Last edited:
But they exist it all states until viewed thus the information is transfered by you, not faster than the speed of light?
Windowscreen smudge that PDF won't open on my phone so will take a look tomorrow, thanks.
Last edited:
What about the distance between the particles? They can be anywhere. Scientists have been having fun running experiments with them between China and the United States, sending the entangled photons across the pacific over fiber optic lines and then studying the effects experiments on one side or the other of the pacific has on it's counterpart.
Yes but data (communication) was sent via the internet, not FTL.
This sort of explains my basic knowledge of it
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/ab...-faster-than-light-communication-intermediate
Last edited:
She's still under the assumption that there hasn't been an accurate Bell test done that couldn't have had a plausible error caused by other phenomena.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell's_theorem
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1508.05949v1.pdf
Since you're on your phone here's a simple video about that article. Sorry about the obnoxious music, I can't be responsible for what Dutch Nerds find appropriate to post on Youtube.
[video=youtube_share;AE8MaQJkRcg]https://youtu.be/AE8MaQJkRcg[/video]
All I learned from that is the universe is conclusively weird
Must learn more then, thanks again, I'm out on this one then.
You seem to have missed a cruicial point or two within the game, OP. Firstly when you use the heatsink function the game states "purging coolant". This infers that either a fluid or a gas containing a bunch of engine heat is being pumped out (that's what purging means in this context). It stands to reason that cool, fresh, new coolant is also being pumped in. That explains why it doesn't happen immediatley, and why it makes the noises it does.
Don't get too hung up on the name, it's not a heatsink in the sense of a metalic object clamped to the engine, the way a cpu has a heatsink, it's just a slang term for it, same as "silent running" also doesn't do what the name infers that it should (it just closes the radiator covers allowing heat to build up instead of being disbursed, rather than reducing the heat created by disabling modules). The heatsink it ejects is actually a tank of super hot coolant, so the designers don't care that space is a poor thermal conductor... they only care that they've quickly flushed the system out and removed the hot coolant from the ship. Why is it in a tank and not just squirted out a nozzle? Who knows, maybe it's corrosive?
Finally you'll note the scale says zero PERCENT, not zero DEGREES. This is a non-defined scale which simply implies that the engine's cooling system is currently storing zero percent of it's total safe heat storage capacity while offering no information as to what temperature various bits of the ship are actually running at (other than the canopy which is of course exposed to space). That's why when it goes over 100 you start taking heat damage. It can't be degrees (celsius or kelvin) as it'd be ludicrous to suggest that the engine gets damaged when barely hot enough to boil an egg.
There's a bunch of suspension of disbelief required here... space radiators? Uhh... no... space doesn't conduct. Perhaps they convert heat to light? Glass canopies on space ships in the 33rd century? We already have the technology today to have external cameras on the ship and line the cabin with monitors, why would they include the weak spot of a glass canopy that shatters and freezes up? Why these and many other inconsistencies? Because game, that's why. Same reason as iron man can fly from little energy pads in his hands and feet, spiderman can shoot webs, and a pair of glasses prevents the entire world identifying clark kent as superman.
Last edited:
Clark Kent is Superman?!
Next you will be telling Santa isn't real!
Yes Virginia, there really IS a santa claus.
Sorry, but all this is bunkum. The articles aren't, don't misunderstand me, but the idea that this implies FTL communication is. It's a fundamental law of the universe that no information can be transmitted FTL. Any amount of you or anyone else wanting it otherwise don't make it so. When you instantaneously change the state of a particle via entanglement, you have to find out by other means (sub-FTL) what the state of the _other_ entangled particle is to be able to tell what the state of the _first_ entangled particle is. This is inescapable, and a picture of an entangled cat doesn't change it.
Not necessarily saying that FTL is and will always be impossible, because you can't say absolutes in science. But _nothing_ indicates anything else. If you can find, in a peer reviewed article, where someone is saying something else, then fine, show me. Physorg and arxiv don't cut it (also, the articles you posted didn't say anything about FTL information transfer anyway). I also read the recent Nature article about the loophole-free Bell test and surprise, no mention of FTL information transfer there either.
Last edited:
Nope. It's a "fundamental law" of classical physics. Quantum physics gives plenty of options to break that rule. The last paper I linked was a successful test proving it. Read up.
An unsuccessful, loophole-free Bell Test IS FTL transmission of information. The test was designed to debunk the idea that it was possible because proponents of Einstein's theory of relativity didn't like entanglement being predicted in it any more than he did. Instead of being used to prove that quantum entanglement doesn't allow FTL transmission of information, it's been used to do the exact opposite time and time again. People still refused to believe it and kept denouncing the failed Bell tests as being flawed, with only hypothetical guesses as to why the experiment could possibly be flawed, until within the last decade or so people started closing the loopholes and got the same results.
The "Fundamental Law" that you're thinking of? It's not actually a law. There's no hard science or mathematics to disprove the use of quantum entanglement for FTL transmission. Everybody has just been riding on Einsteins assumptive oral statement that it shouldn't be possible, which was never investigated in detail by him.
Last edited:
Better to cite the peer-reviewed final published version of a paper than the arxiv one, though I get that you did that because arxiv is free to access: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v526/n7575/abs/nature15759.html
But the point is, the violation of the Bell inequality does not imply FTL communication! COMMUNICATION! Something might have gotten there FTL, but you can't know without interrogating it with sub-FTL methods. And you almost certainly never will be able to, either.
As for my fundamental rule being 'classical physics': That is just not true. Classical physics has nothing to say about FTL travel. Quantum physics is an incomplete description of the universe, the incompleteness of which leads to these kinds of wrong conclusions. We know this and have done for ages; unifying quantum physics and relativity is one of the biggest challenges in theoretical physics. Observing violation of the Bell inequality is a demonstration of this, not that FTL communication is possible.
Entanglement has been known about for ages and we're getting to the point of using it for security, because you can't tamper with one end without it being evident at the other. But, while that part happens FTL, it is simply not the case that you choose the spin of one electron and its entangled friend over the road has the other spin. You don't get to choose, is the point. If you do spin filter the electrons, you break any entanglement. Random initial spin is part of entanglement. So you send a list of the measured spins along with your message, and the guy at the other end checks that his spins were opposite, and if so he knows the message is secure. But you SENT THE INFORMATION using sub-FTL methods, because there simply isn't any other way.
Last edited: