1

It seems, one could exploit the Casimir effect to send messages across arbitrarily-large distances with carefully-tuned Casimir plates.

Obviously, relativity would preclude FTL information transfer, but as long as one did not try to measure the signal timing and impose an external reference frame of time, then there would be no violation of the speed of light limit, and would, in theory, be communicated instantaneously (presumably along an extra-dimensional Calabi-Yau surface/"brane").

Mark Janssen
  • 112
  • 13
  • 2
    @lurscher: As other people have said--- extraordinary claims require only ordinary evidence, just more of it, and more carefully analyzed. That's the basic principle of science. On the other hand, there is good evidence that Casimir effect does not allow FTL, because it can be calculated without any "vacuum" mysticism, just by induced polarizations interacting with other induced polarizations (Casimir force and Van-Der-Waals force are one and the same) and these obviously propagate at the speed of light. – Ron Maimon Aug 27 '12 at 21:22
  • Possible duplicate: http://physics.stackexchange.com/q/18835/2451 – Qmechanic Aug 28 '12 at 03:37
  • why would measuring or not the signal delay do anything? is not like the signal delay is part of some nonconmuting observables. – lurscher Aug 31 '12 at 23:22
  • There would be no signal delay, because you're using something like quantum resonance to communicate, not classical wave propagation; as such, the field would be perturbed (by your ontological error) if you attempted a measurement. – Mark Janssen Aug 31 '12 at 23:39
  • 1
    what is quantum resonance? it has something to do with crystals and chakras? – user56771 Sep 01 '12 at 00:39
  • That's really good. In the quantum vacuum, since there is no absolute reference frame wrt spacetime, any sense of measurement is only something applied by observer, not something that is a part of the vacuum. But one could, theoretically, extend "dimensionality" into the light-wave itself, bypassing the limits of one's reference frame. Am I serious? – Mark Janssen Sep 01 '12 at 00:57
  • I guess I didn't answer the question... since there's no reference frame (as long as you don't try to impose a measurement on it), two objects are always finitely apart (that distance could be considered the quantum 1 unit) -- that makes them susceptible to resonance. – Mark Janssen Sep 01 '12 at 02:27
  • @lurcher: edited question per your point on measurement. – Mark Janssen Sep 02 '12 at 03:23
  • @MarkJ, so how you propose the signal propagates? what is being modulated? how other casimir plates sync on the same channel as another specific casimir plate? – user56771 Sep 28 '12 at 21:40
  • Since frequency is fixed, you would modulate on amplitude. As for syncing other casimir plates, presumably a CDMA technology could be used. – Mark Janssen Sep 28 '12 at 21:42
  • @user56771: I'm not actually suggesting it as a viable application, more of a proof-of-concept. – Mark Janssen Sep 28 '12 at 22:12
  • 1
    @MarkJ, so, show us the resonant absortion equation in the receiver casimir plates that describes the amplitude oscillation. – user56771 Sep 29 '12 at 00:32
  • lol, I'm not sure you can really consider one a receiver and one a sender since you're using resonance and outside the normal bounds of human-defined time, so that distinction will be purely human-applied. But you have a point: I don't think you could actually modulate a signal on top of the resonate carrier, you would have to be content with a single packet. – Mark Janssen Sep 29 '12 at 00:43
  • an interesting development, a casimir chip http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.6163 – anna v Dec 25 '12 at 09:34
  • @RonMaimon: back to your original comment. You claim these polarizations "obviously" propagate at the speed of light, but that is not obvious at all. Has there been any experiment with the quantum field to back up your claim? (No.) You say it to bolster your present view of physic. In any case, I have found that there are two physics (cf. refrigerators with A/C). Boom. – Mark Janssen Jul 14 '14 at 18:18
  • @user56771: There isn't such an equation yet, because in order for that equation to settle, several factors of two universes (i.e. black holes) will have to agree and negotiate. – Mark Janssen Jul 15 '14 at 03:36

0 Answers0