Sunday, November 27, 2005

Faster than light?

Begin forwarded message:

From: Jack Sarfatti
Date: November 27, 2005 2:24:57 PM PST
To: Doc Savage
Subject: Re: Your STAIF paper FTL communication in orthodox QM?

On Nov 27, 2005, at 2:07 PM, Kim Burrafato wrote:
This very much reminds of similar schemes, a number of which employed MZ interferometers, that you came up with back in the late 70s and early 80s! I remember a number of designs very close to this one, with a MZI on one end and various detector arrangements on the other side. Weird!

Yes, but I never had it exactly right in terms of the apparatus, but I did have his eqs. 5 & 6! I was trying to "disentangle" his eq. 1 to get his eq 3. So I had the same formal idea for sure, but did not really know how to implement it in the total experimental design as he seems to have done. However, let's see what Stapp et-al have to say about this.

On Nov 27, 2005, at 1:52 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

The key is his fig 2 & eq. 3. At the moment, without thinking about it very much, I cannot refute what he claims about eq. 3. Does anyone see the error there? If there is no way to tell which path photon 2 takes then there should be local interference according to Feynman. And it seems there is no way to tell what state photon 1 was in on the left. So why won't it work? Any opinions?

On Nov 27, 2005, at 1:30 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:


Probably this paper is wrong, but I have not yet had time to read it carefully. Any opinions? The author is aware of Stapp's et-al objection.

Begin forwarded message:

Date: November 27, 2005 1:14:36 PM PST

Subject: Re: Your STAIF paper

enclosed is a copy per your request. Thank you for your
interest. Sincerely,

Ray Jensen


No comments: