FTL Travel

Jerry Friedman · 20 Nov 2002, 18:37 · from urth-v0211.mbox · original

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: (urth) FTL Travel
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 10:37:40 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <urth-v0211-2204 at digest.urth.net>
X-Urthmirror-Source: http://www.urth.net/urth/archives/v0211/2204.txt.shtml
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

--- James Wynn <crushtv at HotPOP.com> wrote:
...
> Jerry Friedman bristles at this bowdlerization of the theory of
> Relativity:
> I wouldn't call it simple mathematics.
>=20
> Crush responds to Jerry Friedman:
> Neither would I, as my response to Hartshorn was intended to convey. But
> the
> general concept of why a *possible* implication of FTL travel is that
> one
> would move into his own past is one of the most straightforward concepts
> in
> this realm. I believe Don's question was whether or not all this had the
> scientific pedigree of dililthium crystals. I don't think my answer was
> misleading given the context.

I think it was.  I had the impression that people who didn't know
physics were gathering that FTL means time going backwards, either
visiting your past or "watching the movie in reverse".  There's no
reason to expect that, though I guess if FTL turns out to be possible,
that could be what happens.

(Also, the "simple mathematics", taking the Lorentz factor literally
with a speed greater than c, gives you imaginary time--with a square
root of -1--not negative time.  Whatever either of those would mean.)

> You have heroically attempted to clarify Hartshorn's beautiful
> explanation,
> but I've got a dollar that says that a majority of the readers of this
> list -- still - have no more than the vaguest understanding of what you
> are
> describing or its implications (unless a majority of the people on this
> have
> a B.A. in Physics).

I'm not taking your bet.

As you seem to know, explaining the part about sending a message to
your past takes only high-school level algebra (square roots), but
this isn't the place.  I was just trying to keep people from getting
false impressions.  I don't think I did that very clearly.

> Remember Kypris explaining possession to Silk?

And I'm not even pretty.

Jerry Friedman

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com

--=20

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net