F.T.L. Morse, the Forgotten Descendant

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Patrick, I am sure that ideas popping into the head "seem" fast but they are slow and measurable physiologically. The best easily observable situations of FTL travel are still observations on the speed of gravity versus light between the sun and the planets.

A system based on gravity could possibly be made to exploit FTL gravitons. SR and GR are hard fast rules ---- for light!
Make a system that doesnt use EM and there you go!
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

I disagree on both points. One, the physics of instantaneous communication between living cells (that would include, for example,
the brain cells of twins separated by vast distances) has been documented, but not as yet understood. I would agree with you to the extent that we don't
yet have very sophisticated tools for measuring or manipulating such phenomena.

Point two: EM is one of the daughters of electrogravity. Gravity is the other. Just as Maxwell joined the electrical and magnetic fields in a single, experimentally verifiable theory, our task is to join
EM and gravity. This does not necessarily mean that we will not
succeed in measuring FTL electrogravitational effects experimentally
before the theory is fully formed. Granted, my idea stated above, concerning an experiment involving Saturn and Jupiter, is beyond present capabilities.

It is within our capabilities to design an experiment
in time for the next total solar eclipse, however. What I envision is an apparatus which would seek to detect and measure statistically
significant gravitational *OR* EM effects originating from the sun's *actual* position, i.e., by training the apparatus on the point in the sky where the sun would be seen 8 minutes and 19 seconds in the future. Mainstream physics says there will be no measurable effects (or they would in effect be surrendering and admitting that FTL does indeed exist). Then again, has anyone bothered to verify this?

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote><b>Then again, has anyone bothered to verify this?</b><hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
Now you're talking Wilson. Make sure the apple is an apple before you take a bite.

I have a suggestion that we could get playing with gravity and Hover and ground ourselfs a lot easier like if we could ground our houses better by multiplting gravitiews forces on the bolts!! It is off the wall but a po0ssibility.. and further more i think we need to perfect FTL communication outside to adapt it to planes, cell phones, and communication devices( that would include wireless internet)

[Mark, it seems to me that I saw an article about c^2 being the speed of gravity. It had somehing to do with E=mc2 m=E/c2 and c2=E/m.
Any thoughts out there?] [/quote]

i am hard to come up with a better solution for the rate of gravity as c^2 except for the standard 9.8mps^2(meters per second/second). I agree with c^2 as telling gravities force on an incomplete level. I want to stretch out and say that the medium also affects the speed of gravity, anybody want to help with last statement.

The intuitive mind

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Mark, it seems to me that I saw an article about c^2 being the speed of gravity. It had somehing to do with E=mc2 m=E/c2 and c2=E/m.
Any thoughts out there?
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

With all due respect, the term c^2 by itself is not useful as a physical expression. c is the velocity of light. c^2 is only meaningful in the context of a whole physical expression, but by itself has meaning only as a mathematical term.

We need to be more precise if these boards are to make any sense to the outside world.

Sorry been off for a few rounds of posts.

Lets summarize. I read that we need better evidence for timing the speed of gravity

We would like unification of EM and gravity (lets make this a separate strand)

We would like to view biological FTL communication.

We would like to show speed of gravity in the context of engineering applications.

Am I correct in this summary? If so, then lets take each separately for the sake of organization. MV

I say we take engineering first and the rest of you can say as well



The intuitive mind