Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!edsel!bentley!hoxna!houxm!mtuxo!mtunh!mtung!mtunf!ariel!vax135!timeinc!phri!pesnta!hplabs!sri-unix!AI.Mayank@MCC.ARPA From: AI.Mayank@MCC.ARPA Newsgroups: net.physics Subject: Re: Faster than light Message-ID: <330@sri-arpa.ARPA> Date: Thu, 27-Jun-85 21:43:43 EDT Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.330 Posted: Thu Jun 27 21:43:43 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 2-Jul-85 06:31:32 EDT Lines: 30 From: Mayank Prakash>I assert that in order for Mary's "influence" to raise the probability >of a state transition *above what it would be in the absence of the >influence* (i.e. above random) either: > - the influence must be applied over the entire system, or > - the duration of the influence must be > L/c, where L is > the distance to the other side of the system. Mark, That's correct and is the reason why they cannot communicate faster than light using this setup. I don't see what you are complaining about. Let me backtrack a little - the whole thing started when McNelly wondered how could information be transferred faster than light in the superconducting ring, and I attempted to explain why that is not a contradiction (at least not an empirical one). You can either agree with my explanation, in which case we have no quarrel, or you can disagree, in which case you must at least explain why my explanation is wrong, and perhaps, in addition, also supply an exlpanation of your own, and we will have something to talk about. - mayank. ========================================================================== II Mayank Prakash AI.Mayank@MCC.ARPA (512) 834-3441 II II 9430 Research Blvd., Echelon 1, Austin, TX 78759. II ========================================================================== -------