[FoRK] Inertial Mass != Gravitational Mass?

silky michaelslists at gmail.com
Sat Jun 19 03:08:10 PDT 2010

On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Jeff Bone <jbone at place.org> wrote:
> > Fascinating stuff.
> No doubt.  Minor quibble, though:  lots of folks think seriously about that kind of thing.
> Long history of this sort of thing.  Had already seen this particular bit of work.
> Another fun hack:  slow light down.  You can use a Bose-Einstein condensate for that.  Then you can go "FTL" on a bicycle...
> A little extrapolations from existing experiments along that front even get you time travel w/o any significantly advanced technology
> from what we have today.  Curiously, nobody's built a time machine yet.  The Nazis tried, and there's a rather wacky scientist with a
> fixation on seeing his dead cater again that's picking at it, but...  Nobody doing it yet or apparently ever in our future history;  apparently
> we aren't overrun with tourists from the future or T800s or whatever, the occasional prankster notwithstanding.  No hedge funds
> using future data to vacuum out the world economy.

Obviously, you're assuming that time travellers go back into our time.
Which may not be the case.

> Similarly non-locality via entanglement.  Apparent c violation, but no causality violations.
> But:  nothing yet that is even theoretically useful.  You can't even use it to transmit information, for reasons well understood and rarely questioned.

Are you saying that entangelment isn't useful? Because it is, for QKD:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1005.2291 (and I'm sure many other purposes).


> $0.02,
> jb



More information about the FoRK mailing list