From: Party of Citizens (citizens@vcn.bc.ca)
Date: Sat Jul 12 2003 - 13:03:17 MDT
What about replacing the expression "speed of light" with "speed of
information transmission"? It is begging the question to say that light
speed MUST be the maximum speed at which information can be transmitted.
POC
On Fri, 11 Jul 2003, Joao Magalhaes wrote:
> new directions?)
> Sender: owner-extropians@extropy.org
> Precedence: bulk
> Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org
>
> Hi!
>
> Though I'm not exactly an expert on astrophysics, I do remember reading how
> one of Einstein's predictions was that the speed at which gravity
> propagates is the speed of light. So the propagation of gravity is not
> instantaneous or otherwise gravity could be used to transmit messages
> faster than light--which obviously goes against Einstein's theory. In fact,
> I vaguely remember reading about an experiment where gravity was measured
> somehow and the conclusion was that the propagation of gravity occurred at
> roughly, though not exactly, the speed of light. That is, I believe--though
> I can be wrong--the speed of the graviton, the particle that mediates
> gravity just like photons mediate light. Am I right here?
>
> All the best.
>
> At 19:29 10-07-2003 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
> >This is also my view , that gravity being instantanious gives an
> >unbeatable method of information transfer. That is of course depending on
> >the propgation speed. Everything I have read thus far states that the
> >propogation is istantanious. I do have some serious worries about this and
> >will closely watch the results of any experiments that are performed.
> >The only way I can easily except that the propogation is instananious, is
> >that every particle in the universe that exerts gravity. Is entagled with
> >every other particle. I can 'kind of' except this, baring in mind that all
> >the particles came from the sub-atomic soup that existed pre big bang.
> >
> >I did spend a few brain cycles on a possible experiment utilising the
> >apparent ability of cryogenic superconducters to reduce gravity. I didnt
> >get very far due to the math and the constant nagging in the back of my
> >mind that if we mess around with gravity, we also mess with time and have
> >to somehow factor this into the eqautions.
> >
> >Alex
>
> Joao Magalhaes (joao.magalhaes@fundp.ac.be)
>
> Website on Aging: http://www.senescence.info
> Reason's Triumph: http://www.jpreason.com
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jul 12 2003 - 13:13:32 MDT