In the hushed ambiance of an ancient library, a seasoned philosopher held up a blank parchment. He turned to his curious apprentice and asked, “What do you see?”
The apprentice, striving to grasp the philosopher's intent, responded cautiously, "Nothing, master. The parchment is blank.”
The philosopher, his eyes glinting with insight, replied, “Ah, but is it truly empty? Consider its possibilities—it may appear blank, yet it holds the potential for every word yet to be written.” He paused briefly, then added, “In the same way, our minds hold the capacity for every thought yet to be conceived.”
The apprentice, deep in thought, finally understood. “So, our knowledge is never complete. There’s always more to learn, more to discover.”
The philosopher nodded, “Exactly. The pursuit of knowledge is a journey without end. Remember, the wisest are those who know that they do not know everything.”
The lesson of the day was profound: True wisdom lies in the recognition of our own ignorance.

 

 

 

 

 Introduction

This website aims to offer a novel perspective on the concept of super-communication at speeds faster than light (FTL). For an extended period in history, the scientific consensus was that nothing could exceed the speed of light. The idea of FTL phenomena was relegated to the realm of fiction, deemed impossible in the real world. Interestingly, the very theories these claims were based on did not entirely dismiss the possibility of FTL phenomena. The scientific community maintained, “Theories alone are insufficient.”

However, the landscape began to shift in the 1970s. The advent of affordable, high-speed electronics enabled many researchers, even those with limited resources, to conduct experiments. These experiments started to reveal that certain FTL phenomena could indeed occur. Faced with undeniable evidence, the scientific community had to adjust their stance. They conceded, “FTL phenomena can occur, but it will never be harnessed for communications purposes…”

Now, neither science nor scientists are evil, nor do they devote their every waking hour to suppressing useful ideas they don't agree with.  This is not how science works, but because it is a human endeavor, non-scientists are often left with the impression that either the process is flawed, or establishment scientists are trying to keep some 'secret'. Science is a confluence of many things, a mixture of human traits and non-human fact. This complexity might make the scientific method difficult for a layperson to understand, but there's no malintent involved. People must be shown -- especially scientists -- before they can admit to a possibility that was  taboo in the past. Think of the following pages as the beginning of a journey.

I know faster-than-light communication is possible, and I want you to know that too. But, as I construct these pages, two thoughts persist: Firstly, you must progress gradually, in small steps. Learn to crawl before you can walk, then walk before you can run, then run before you can fly. The second being the simple fact that anything handed out on a gold platter will be underappreciated. I want you to begin to crawl, and also to appreciate the fact that you can  crawl...   Should you sense that there might be additional insights or key points that aren’t being fully addressed, your intuition serves you well. As you embark on this journey and start to explore on your own, you’ll naturally uncover these hidden layers of understanding. The beauty of discovery is often in the journey, not just the destination.

 

 

Einstein:  Father to both Relativity and Quantum mechanics

As I mentioned earlier, it is commonly believed that the concept of FTL information transfer is strictly within the realm of science fiction. However, this is not entirely accurate. Some of the greatest minds of the 20th century have seriously pondered the possibility. Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955), delivered several relevant papers  in the early parts of that century. Most people are familiar with his 'theory of relativity', which has become one of the fundamental branches of physics today.  Many people outside the field may not realize that Einstein also published another paper on how light interacts with matter, known as 'The Photoelectric Effect'. In this paper, he concluded that light must exist in 'packets' that exhibit both wave-like and particle-like properties.  This is a significant simplification, but it was for this paper that Einstein was awarded the Nobel Prize in physics in 1921. Many consider this work as the starting point for the second major branch of 20th-century physics, known as Quantum Mechanics.

 

 A tale of two theories that refused to play nice

In those early years, no one knew that these two new branches of physics, despite providing answers to long-standing questions, were not compatible with each other.  Not straying from the topic of this web site, quantum mechanics suggests the possibility of instantaneous information transfer, whereas relativity limits the speed of information transfer to the speed of the medium carrying it.  Relativity establishes the speed of light in a vacuum as the ultimate speed limit, thereby limiting the speed of information transfer to the speed of light, maximum. The irony was that Einstein started the ball rolling with both these ideas - relativity physics, with both his special and general relativity papers, and quantum mechanics, with his paper on the photoelectric effect. This caused a bit of consternation in his life... the battle lines were being drawn.

For sure, he never liked the implications of quantum theory leading to faster than light phenomena. He spent much creative juice attempting to show the world just how wrong the conclusion that quantum theory can allow any form of superluminal information transfer really was. Towards this goal, he co-authored a paper titled "Can Quantum Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?"  [Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., & Rosen, N. (1935). Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? Physical Review, 48, 696-702.] This paper caused quite a commotion when it was first published. A funny aside, when I was a wee lad attending University, I was told to never include a question mark in the title of any paper I wanted published. The question mark meant 'philosophy' to an editor, and meant the paper automatically would get tossed. That wasn't the way Einstein  rolled- he had the stature to be a rule breaker and get away with it. Anywho, the actual title of this groundbreaking paper is often shortened to 'The EPR Paper'. 

Currently, numerous websites discuss the E-P-R thought experiment. These websites detail how proponents of quantum physics addressed the ideas the paper contained, also delving into complex mathematics and discussing subsequent experiments outlining even more esoteric and philosophical physical concepts, such as the Aspect experiments of the 1970's and more.

 

And the winner is...

In the end, the quantum theorists triumphed. Had Einstein  lived longer, he might have reluctantly accepted the experimental evidence about the nature of reality, though I'm sure it would have been a tough pill for him to swallow. This, however, doesn't invalidate the principles of relativity physics. Today, just about the only thing separating relativity from quantum physics is the force of gravity. 

But, there is still a hurdle to overcome. While experiments support instantaneous action at a distance, it's inherently random.  This randomness poses a problem for anyone trying to create a FTL (faster-than-light) radio. Think of it like a radio where the carrier wave is random, indistinguishable from noise. Modulating noise results in more noise. Although we can conduct FTL signaling experiments, success can only be verified retrospectively when the sender and receiver compare notes later, often over a cup of Java. This  necessity for post-experiment comparison at sub-light speeds complicates the creation of a usable FTL radio. 

This current state may seem disheartening... unless we view the results from EPR-type experiments as indicators of something more exciting ahead. FTL signaling is indeed possible. The universe constantly employs this instantaneous transfer of information.  The world, and indeed the universe, would be vastly different if this mechanism were not allowed.

On the bright side, listening to noise can surprisingly be quite relaxing, especially when you need to focus. Radio noise - what we otherwise call static - acts as an effective sound masker and can sound like a gentle rain. As a kid, I can remember tuning my portable AM radio to an unused part of the dial just to listen to the static. Sometimes, it was the best thing on. However, it’s impossible to overlay a meaningful signal, like music or speech, onto a random carrier wave and still be able to hear it clearly. The inherent randomness of nature scrambles our best efforts. This holds true for both regular radio signals and those that travel faster than light. So, if you want to catch the news or your favorite show FTL, we'll need to find another way.

 

Where we are now

At the beginning of the 20th century, scientists faced a major paradigm shift as they had to transition from viewing events in the 'continuous' to the 'quanta'. Despite the initial shock, humanity's resilience prevailed, and we adapted to this new understanding. Today, we face a similar scenario: the axiom that nothing can go faster than light is being challenged. Change is occurring even as you read this, and we are better positioned than the 19th century scientists were for the 20th century. They had little warning that the seemingly inconsequential experiment-related storm clouds on the distant horizon would eventually upend their world view. Now, we have warnings in the form of hard data from well-conducted experiments, provided we are willing to listen to what the universe is telling us through these results. FTL (faster-than-light) communication exists, and awaits someone to put it to use. Is this impossible?  The historical record suggests otherwise. Every natural phenomena we observe, we have managed to exploit. It wont be easy - it may require a shift in how we think about fundamental aspects of life, but there is no reason to suppose we have hit the proverbial dead end.

This web site follows a specific path. To ensure clarity, I will repeat important points multiple times. I won't be overly pedantic in my treatment of many topics. If you seek detailed information on subjects like  hidden variables, the EPR paper, or others, numerous websites delve into these areas extensively. My goal is to transfer concepts and ideas into your mind, not numbers. With that in mind, I aim to maintain a low stress level. If you read through to the end, I can't guarantee that you will agree with me, but you will at least  start thinking about these issues, which is the most important outcome.  Read on...