IBM slows light, readies it for networking

TalkBack 48 of 48:

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

RE: IBM slows light, readies it for networking

Einstein didn't define a 'speed of light', when explained in english (instead of math) what he defined was more robust then this. Light itself can travel superluminously, but the information (spin-state, or whatever quantum attribute of the particle in questions) it is carrying cannot exceed its defined speed in a vaacuum.
That is to say that light travels c/N where N is the refrative index of the material it is travelling through. If a particle can go through a medium with c/N faster then light can go through that same medium c/N, it is effectively going 'faster then light', but the information is not carried by the particle faster then light. To 'catch up' so to speak an example would be the generation of Čerenkov radiation. In nuclear reactors, particles are accelerated to speeds faster then light would travel in that medium (same in particle accelerators), the result is a blue glowing radiation around the reactor, this can be seen on just about any reactor in the world, and is definitive and unquestionable evidence that a particle can travel faster then the SPEED of light, its not speed which is relevant.

Also, speed is defined by the structure of spacetime, if I alter spacetime so that two points 1000 light years apart are now within close proximity to each other, the definition of 'velocity' changes to reflect the modification i've made to spacetime. In other words, the SPEED of light is the distance travelled over time, but distance is just an observed attribute of spacetime, if I alter spacetime I alter what 'distance is in reality'
Time can travel in both directions, there is no restriction in general/special relativity stating otherwise.
We have just yet to understand the time dimension well enough to even contemplate methods of altering this parameter of dimensionality.
Furthermore, we are so far away from any real understanding of time that we do not know what effects would be observed by the observer or the observee. It could be that we would enter a parrlel brane, or that to avoid symmetry breaking we would enter another mode of the multiverse. Which of course then requires there to be branes, or a multiverse, both being theories that we are quite far away from probing (in other words, we know **** about reality ... we've only really been looking at it for 100 years ). An extension to the multiverse would also eliminate the time, or distance dilation effects of relativity, because, since the multiverse is an infinite number of overlapping universes, we can provide the infinite acceleration, or time, necessary to circumvent time/distance dilation effects that currently prohibit us from exceeding the speed of light in our spacetime. Its all relative

Posted by: guitarguy10   Posted on: 06/16/08 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Three Steps You Need to Know to Stop Data Loss Varonis Sensitive data exposed to misuse or loss... it is the stuff of nightmares ... Download Now
• Reducing Server Total Cost of Ownership with VMware Virtualization Software VMware VMware virtualization enables customers to reduce their server TCO and ... Download Now
• Virtualization: Architectural Considerations And Other Evaluation Criteria VMware Of the many approaches to x86 systems virtualization available in the ... Download Now