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
==========================================================================

-------