Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 09/16/2002 7:26:53 AM PDT by aculeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last
To: maxwell; Robert A. Cook, PE
max, is this the kind of stuff you play around with all day?
2 posted on 09/16/2002 7:29:28 AM PDT by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aculeus
This is weird BUMP.
3 posted on 09/16/2002 7:31:10 AM PDT by mercy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aculeus
Amazing! Faster processing time means another step towards meaningful artificial intelligence. This means another step towards autonomous battlefield "robots". (Pretty scary in way)

(If Bell Laboratories can hire these guys, maybe Lucent stock will become worth something again.)

4 posted on 09/16/2002 7:31:58 AM PDT by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aculeus
Signals also get weaker and more distorted the faster they go, so in theory no useful information can get transmitted at faster-than-light speeds, though Robertson hopes his students and others can now rigorously and cheaply test those ideas.

Given that the peak can be observed, and its speed measured, this statement seems to be incorrect. A frequency modulation scheme would seem to offer a way of transmitting information.

5 posted on 09/16/2002 7:33:55 AM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aculeus
Signals also get weaker and more distorted the faster they go, so in theory no useful information can get transmitted at faster-than-light speeds,

That is not true, since by accurately timing the distortion you could take it into account. As well, sending a known test signal down the line before transmitting data would allow you to adjust for any slight differences due to temperature, etc.

6 posted on 09/16/2002 7:34:35 AM PDT by ikka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aculeus
Alot of the slowdown in the future is not going to be the rate at which our computers receive data, but at how it processes it. You throw 200 GB in one second at your computer and see what happens.
7 posted on 09/16/2002 7:35:43 AM PDT by dogbyte12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aculeus
bump .... so where's the warp drive already ? ;)
8 posted on 09/16/2002 7:36:59 AM PDT by Centurion2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aculeus
Speed of light broken with basic lab kit...

Wasn't me, I was taking a shower!

I hope this isn't series.

9 posted on 09/16/2002 7:37:01 AM PDT by FreedomFarmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aculeus
Ha! And I've been snickering at my six-year-old son's plan to build his own rocket. When I explained that he'd have to study and then work for NASA, he said, "No, we can just go shopping at Home Depot." Maybe the kid is right.
11 posted on 09/16/2002 7:45:20 AM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aculeus
"In a related announcement, the staff of Middle Tennessee State University have 'solved' the Unified Field Theory utilizing six soda straws, three empty beer cans, a ten-year-old Timex man's watch (leather band), twenty feet of plastic tubing (1/4" diameter), and duct tape."
13 posted on 09/16/2002 7:47:41 AM PDT by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aculeus; xsmommy
Well, of course this isn't really news....

The National press corpse used to get their daily fax followup questions and spin briefing from the dnc even before the the media broadcast the first batch of lies from Hillary's White House.
14 posted on 09/16/2002 7:54:20 AM PDT by Robert A Cook PE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aculeus
I knew that appointing Jethro Bodine to the Middle Tennessee faculty would finally pay off!
17 posted on 09/16/2002 8:00:00 AM PDT by ArcLight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aculeus
QUESTION TO ALL:
 
Doesn't Einstein's theory imply that if something travels faster than the speed of light, it would travel backward in time?
 
That means if an electronic signal is traveling along a certain length of cable then the signal would arrive at it's destination at a point in space time prior to the point in space time that the switch was thrown to SEND THE SIGNAL in the first place. (Theme to jeopardy playing in background) 
 
Any thoughts?.....And the SURVEY SAID?: 

20 posted on 09/16/2002 8:02:25 AM PDT by webboss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Physicist; RadioAstronomer; longshadow; general_re
Anybody got a clue here?

And I don't see how the oscilloscope can show squat here. Is this just another phase shift masquerade?

21 posted on 09/16/2002 8:03:38 AM PDT by balrog666
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Carry_Okie
ping for science fun.
22 posted on 09/16/2002 8:07:04 AM PDT by farmfriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aculeus
Light doesn't travel the same speed through coax as it does through free space. There is a characteristic called "velocity factor". Light travels at about 2/3 the speed through coax compared to free space in RG8/U coax. I don't think the parties writing the article finished their basic electricity/electronics courses.
28 posted on 09/16/2002 8:17:26 AM PDT by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aculeus
When someone builds a spacecraft that goes 100 times the speed of light, the "science" community will still act like spin doctors in their attempts to save face for their pagan god, Einstein. It's pathetic. Science is rooted in the laws (known and unknown) of nature, not in some crotchety dead guy with a white beard.
34 posted on 09/16/2002 8:23:12 AM PDT by You Gotta Be Kidding Me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aculeus
While the peak moves faster than light speed, the total energy of the pulse does not.

It must have been a slow news day.

The article is describing the faster-than-light travel of phase velocity, not group velocity. It is the latter that would be useful in transmitting information. The article even states this, though the press seems not to have cared.

A faster-than-light phase velocity has been around for a very long time. A more pedestrian analogy would be ocean waves striking the shore at an angle. If you followed the crest of the wave as it struck the shore, you'd find it was traveling faster than the velocity of the wave itself.

40 posted on 09/16/2002 8:30:06 AM PDT by bcoffey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aculeus
For Sale: Electronic test equipment, slightly used.
42 posted on 09/16/2002 8:30:58 AM PDT by Crowcreek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aculeus
"Speed of light broken with basic lab kit"

UNless they measured something wrong, or measured by a previous wrong measurement or maybe their equipment was not calibrated correctly or maybe.....nevermind
and now for my secund secound 2nd cup of mornin coffee....

"If you reach total enlightenment while drinking beer, I bet it makes beer come out your nose.
Deep Thoughts- Jack Handy

52 posted on 09/16/2002 8:40:34 AM PDT by hosepipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson