/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9906869

What do you think of Nimtz argument against Winful's criticism?

>Recently Winful calculated superluminal transport of pulses with narrow frequency bandwidth [61]. He believes that a superluminal signal velocity would violate the principle of causality and provided a theory to resolve the mystery of apparent superluminality in a strange and incorrect way. He claimed that the incoming pulse is not related to the outcoming pulse and he did not consider the nonlocal property of the tunneling process.

>Superluminal signaling becomes especially obvious in the case of FM signals. Fig. 17 displays an FM signal as described by Eq. (12). The time duration between the zeros of the oscillations represents the information. A computer simulation of the time advance of the demodulated signal of a tunneled FM carrier is presented in Fig. 18. The frequency components of the information of the tunneled signal traveled faster than light. The frequency distribution is at the input the same as at the output which is opposite to Winful's incorrect statement [61]. The output frequencies of the signal are connected by causal propagation to the input frequency components.

Basically Nimtz argues that his FTL experiment does not violate causality. Thoughts?

Source: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-6727(03)00057-0