The Analogy Trap

While I've aimed to maintain a low level of complexity on this web site through a casual tone and familiar analogies to radio communications, it's important to recognize the limitations of such comparisons. Analogies can initially aid in grasping complex topics, but their overuse may lead to misunderstandings. As super-communication is not the same as radio, relying too heavily on analogies  can introduce errors that eventually need correction, a process that can be both challenging and time-consuming.  

 

Understanding P2 Probability Waves

Contrary to traditional electromagnetic wave transmission, where information is superimposed on waves and then extracted by a receiver, P2 probability waves operate differently. For instance, unlike radio signals where bandwidth correlates with information capacity, P2 waves exhibit what seems like an inverse relationship. Surprisingly, reducing the bandwidth to near zero could theoretically increase the information flow to near infinity. This paradox is resolved by distinguishing between two bandwidth types: connection bandwidth and information bandwidth. Connection bandwidth only refers to the conditions needed to establish a stable link. Connection bandwidth is also multi-dimensional. Each dimension used further stabilizes the superluminal link. Looked at in this way, frequency is a dimension of control. Waveform is another . These two dimensions are the most important. However, there are others, such as amplitude, which is a secondary dimension of control. There are actually many others, which I call tertiary dimensions of control, such as temperature (environmental), and even chemical such as how transiting electrons interact with the various elements that comprise the quartz resonator... now you understand the reason I was forced to spend time and money on making sure the quartz resonators in my ovenized oscillators matched as closely as possible. Do all these various properties need to match to the 9th digit...no... for sure any primary dimension absolutely must match as close as humanly possible. Possibly a secondary dimension doesn't need to be as closely matched, tertiary dimensions even less so... BUT the more you can match, the more success you will have. Fine tuning in this regard is a positive thing.

Connection bandwidth refers only to the establishment of the FTL pipeline. Only after a superluminal pipeline is established can you define the information bandwidth. Also while they are not the same thing, they are not totally separate entities - the amount of information you can transfer vitally depends on the quality of your connection, hence the great effort to provide as much external control as possible.

So, how do you do this in practical terms? There are several ways. The first method is straightforward. To reduce noise in a conventional transmitter, you simply make the bandwidth narrow. This comes from the fact that there is a certain amount of noise produced when you make a carrier. By limiting the carrier to as narrow a range as possible, you in effect, are also reducing the total amount of noise being transmitted. In a regular radio, this isn't critical - as long as the range of frequencies being sent is not so wide that it overlaps another channel, it is not worth doing because the receiver isn't affected much by this type noise. Not so in a super-communicator. This is why it is advantageous to limit your DMC input frequency to a single cycle or lower - outside of a lab environment and cryogenic temperatures, don't even bother using waveforms higher than around 10-15 Hz. If you are lucky enough to actually have a cryolab to play around in, have fun - and be sure to publish your results!  You'll want to use sine waves simply because of their high spectral purity -it means less distortion. Limit the peak-to-peak voltage to as low as you can, for the same reason. Sounds kinda easy as I am writing this, but you wouldn't believe just how viciously difficult making a sine wave like this can be... but it can be done.

 

 

 

Further Considerations

If you think the transmitter of P2 waves is non-intuitive, then the receiver will really be headache material. A hint: from clues given about the transmitter, the receiver also would require no antenna, be completely self contained, and require ultra precision components, amongst other things.  But, the process of transmitting and receiving aren't commutative. Just because you know how to build a transmitter does not mean you know how to build a receiver. For example, how can you 'tune' a receiver when the transmitter has an effective bandwidth of  plus or minus 0.5 Hz? How do you do this tuning when there is no external signal to lock onto? Conventional radios self tune by looking at the signal strength, but that is radio. In an FTL receiver, there is never anything for a phase locked loop to lock onto.  Enter the "Hunter-Seeker" circuitry. Then, there is the problem of translating the imaginary signal back into a complex signal electronics circuitry can work with - the complex regeneration of the original signal. This is the opposite of what the DMC does in the transmitter and is a job for the Reintegration Logic Block...  I mentioned before that creating P2 waves is the easy part. Well, receiving them is NOT. In 22+ years of experimenting, maybe one year (and that is a generous overestimation) was spent figuring out how to create P2 probability waves and overlay them with meaningful information. The other fifth century was spent attempting to detect them.  It ain't easy working with Nothing...