Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watnot!ccplumb
From: ccplumb@watnot.UUCP
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Accelerating elevator
Message-ID: <12213@watnot.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 23-Nov-86 15:02:28 EST
Article-I.D.: watnot.12213
Posted: Sun Nov 23 15:02:28 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 24-Nov-86 01:23:26 EST
References: <255@sri-arpa.ARPA>
Reply-To: ccplumb@watnot.UUCP (Colin Plumb)
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 44

In article <255@sri-arpa.ARPA> KFL@MX.LCS.MIT.EDU writes:
>1) Motion in a straight line is relative, i.e. no experiment can show
>   which state of uniform motion is at rest (from which it is concluded
>   that the concept of "at rest" is bogus).  This comes from Newtonian
>   physics.
>
>2) The speed of light in a vacuum is the same to all observers.  This
>   can be deduced from Maxwell's equations (1861) and was confirmed
>   directly by Michelson and Morley in 1881.
>
>  It can also be proven that if these axioms are true, that sending
>information faster than light is not possible without reversing
>causality (i.e. time travel).  SF authors would do well to accept time
>travel if they postulate FTL travel, unless they instead explain which
>one of the two axioms turned out to be wrong despite overwhelming
>evidence.  A plausible case could be made that the cosmic background
>noise defines an absolute frame of reference.
>[...]
>I *WANT* FTL travel to be possible but can't bring myself to accept
>reverse causality.  Of course facts are facts, and are not influenced
>by our hopes or fears or misconceptions.

I agree - I want FTL travel too, but physics won't let me have it...

Given the choice you offer above, I'd take 1, and violate 2.  Perhaps this
is due to not having studied Maxwell's equations, but I have hope that
someone will find a way of contorting space-time to violate it.  With 10
dimensions to play with, it might be possible.

Axiom #1 seems too fundamental to play with, but perhaps someone would
like to propose its sacrifice.

	-Colin Plumb (ccplumb@watnot.UUCP)

P.S. Someone once figured out that a super-dense, rapidly spinning cylinder
     could act as a time machine.  I don't know if the proof was invalid,
     but this seems to offer another opening for FTL - accept reverse
     causality!  Stephen Hawking's been giving causality a beating, anyway.

Zippy says:
OMNIVERSAL AWARENESS?? Oh, YEH!! First you need 4 GALLONS of JELL-O
and a BIG WRENCH!!... I think you drop th'WRENCH in the JELL-O as if
it was a FLAVOR, or an INGREDIENT...  ...or...I...um...WHERE'S the
WASHING MACHINES?