Einstein told us that the speed of light must always, not only appear, but BE the same in every frame of reference no matter how fast we are moving towards or away from it. So even if you are moving at half the speed of light towards a light beam, the entire universe must conspire to either "speed up" or slow down your "time" to account for this difference.
If that makes sense to you, you are no longer sane. You cannot create scenarios of two mutually exclusive events at the same time and call that reality. This is fundamental to reason.
To show this contradiction, consider you are running away from a light beam and towards another at the same time. You move at half the speed of light. Of course in real life you will encounter the light you are moving towards first, but in Einstein's universe both beams MUST (in your world) hit you at the same time. However, in Einstein's universe, someone else will see them hit you at different times because they also MUST see light travel at a certain speed. This is just plain fucking stupid.
At best you can have an illusory effect, but to confuse that with a real difference in simultaneity is to truly give up on reason itself.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1003.3944 and references.
And so on.
No, we don't. Tachyons are ugly crutch to specifically satisfy special relativity dogmas. They are not necessary if you are not sticked to Einstein dogmas.
FTL does not violate casuality. That infamous Minkovsky diagram is total bullshit based on unfounded dogma of speed of light as dogmatic limit. FTL is just a path with higher angle than light cone and nothing more.
Imagine, you have supersonic plane flying toward you and observe it with your hearing by ears. You will definitely observe "casuality violations". Like you will hear sound of touch-off after the sound of landing. But is absolutely does not mean that there is any real casuality violatons. Plane for sure still arrive after departure, but it moves faster than information you use to observe this events from your frame.
Same with FTL. If someone who use EM waves with specific speed of light to observe FTL processes should just account a simple fact that he use "slow" EM waves to observe faster process and fix his observations using that knowledge to get a real picture. And not to try to pass his observations for reality.
Principle of accounting for influence of method used for observations is unseparable for any measurement. F.e. when you measure resistance with ommeter, you adjust your measurement by resistance of wires and probes. Especially if you measure resistance close to the resistance of ommeter probes. You get observation of 0.1Ω. Your wires and probes have 0.05Ω resistance. So, you correct your observation by that 0.05Ω and find real measured object resistance as 0.05Ω. But somehow Eistein sect is absolutely unable to do exactly same thing when they do their observations. And come up with all that Minkovsky space bullshit and "casuality violations".
It's really insane, if you look at all that relativity stuff from the point of a regular engineer.
FTL does not make effect happen before the cause. It does not lead to time travel or any other garbage. Just effect follow the cause faster than some ignorant observer will do its observations and that's all.
If you have FTL data transmission line between Berlin and Los Angeles and it takes twice less time than conventional one to transmit a message, message still will arrive after sending, just two times faster, and that's all. Fact, that some side observer could see events of departure and arrival in different order means that this observer just choose bad means of observation that need correction to find real way of things and nothing more.
I just don’t see how this isn’t true.
But these are the key points here. An outside observer perceives information at a different rate than the interior one. But information can’t move faster than itself. You can’t perceive landing before takeoff, regardless of the reference frame, because nothing can move faster than the initial information. At best you could perceive them near-simultaneously from an external (or even internal) reference frame. But you can’t have landing without takeoff, so you can’t move faster than the limits imposed by the reference frame itself. The pilot can’t experience the ship landing before it has taken off, otherwise he wouldn’t take off in the first place–he wouldn’t need to.
Thiotimoline sounds good, but it can't work in practice.
I agree completely. However… nothing can move faster than light in a vacuum. Not mass, not gravity, not information. It’s a hard limit imposed by physical reality. So when your measuring stick is “light in a vacuum,” there can’t be a faster process (that carries mass, gravity, or information).
But that means the “existence” of FTL is irrelevant, then. Because changes in quantum states of entangled particles do happen instantaneously irrespective of distance, that means the entanglement exists outside of classical space-time, where physical rules of speed apply. But since that quantum state change cannot convey unencrypted information, a second transmission must occur–slower than light–that carries the “decryption key” to explain what the specific state change meant. You can’t physically move (mass) at those speeds, nor can you carry observably discernible information at those speeds because you need an STL codebook to come later and explain what the information was.
Easily. You persieve a supersonic plane flying toward you with your ears. First you hear landing near you. Then you hear sound of flight. Then, finally you hear sound of takeoff.
Yes, you persieve all sequence in reverse order. Does that mean that nothing could travel faster the sound? Absolutely not.
But when you take in account speed of observation, then everything become completely normal. Takeoff, flight, landing. Just faster than speed of sound.
Exactly same with speed of light. You can persieve landing before takoff using vision, but that does not make cause follow effect. Use something FTL to observe events of moving close or faster than light, and there will be no any "paradoxes" or whatever.
If you could use zero time information transfer, then there will be no any relativistic effects observed at all.
I already told you - you could see how information travel faster than light in your garage. No ultimately expensive instruments or devices needed.
Not at all. You could perfectly measure anything you want with "light in a vacuum" stick. Just never forget that there is always that "speed of light in a vacuum" thing. Even when you look at different ends of your stick. Especially when you look.
There is no change in quantum states of entagled particles. Say, you have two particles entagled with different spins. If you change spin of one, then you still have equivalently entagled particles, but now they entagled with same spin. (and still don't know spin of your particle.) Entaglement is not some "connection" between particles. It is guaranteed state relation that does not change if nothing done to particles pair. Simple as that. Entagled particles does not magically obtain their state on measurement, we just don't know their state before measurement, but know it is opposite (or same). Measurement destroy entaglement. This allow sharing of secret keys securely, f.e. but such sharing does not mean remote side somehow receive information from you when you measure your group of particles. Information is shared since the beginning, just both parties don't have it before measurement.
And the calibration for measurement must travel slower than light, otherwise you don’t know what to look for when measuring.
Funny, but calibration not necessary change the results of measurements. F.e. if your voltmeter is offset to a standard for whole 1V, i.e. shows 1V more than you really have, this does not prevent you from correct measurement of voltage difference.
Really, in measurements repeatability (instrument shows same result measuring same object) is often much more important than absolute precision.
Speed of travel of calibration information does not matter. What's matter is validity and preservation during transmission.