Bay 12 Games Forum

I would be quite satisfied with just any form of FTL communication as currently even that does not appear to be ever possible.

Even if we will have those FTL neutrinos in the end there will likely still be no even a theoretical way to transmit information at FTL with them.

Suppose you have something net-charged inside your warped-space bubble. It will still have non-zero EM field outside of it and the bubble as a whole will emit Cherenkov radiation and lose momentum and energy until it stops being superluminal, right? Unless it's total mass is negative or zero, in which case it would uncontrollably gain more [negative]energy. I think that could mean something about a possibility to wrap any charged particles into something like an Alcubierre drive.

If there for some reason was a short-cut in space-time - I bet it would locally warp the metric so much that it would be no weaker disturbance than a black hole of a comparable size. Not likely travellable trough or even send-some-particles-trough.

No one serious was aiming at a rewrite. Principles and equations that work would continue to work regardless of this, just in a slightly more bounded region. But the tsunami wall of theoretical publications on why FTL neutrinos may be possible is quite noticeable. A simple sum of all proposed mechanisms would probably produce speed of 3 c.

Either non-differentiable or constant is exactly the same as not strictly monotonous everywhere. And since we can go f(x+1)->f(x+2) that is for both/any intervals.

It can still be constant almost everywhere (in mathematical sense) but that doesn't help at all in determining if it can exist.

A Cantor function is a non constant continuous function that is rational outside of Cantor set. Its construction gave me the following idea:

Let f(x)=π*x on [0; 1]. Let f(2)=4. Take a random number x₁ in (0; 1) and if it is rational (irrational) - define f(x₁+1) as any random rational (irrational) number in the middle third between π and 4. Take a second random number x₂ and define f(x₂+1) to be a random number in the middle third between f(x₁+1) and the value of f(x) at the other side of the interval to which x₂+1 belongs with appropriate rationality.
In general at ith step x_i+1 will land between some x_k+1 and x_l+1 (or 1, or 2). There will always be an interval of finite length between f(x_k+1) and f(x_l+1) (or π, or 4) in which we will be able to choose either rational or irrational number in its middle third part for f(x_i+1).

All random choices above can be substituted with some well defined rules but that would leave uncountable many points never to be visited.

I am not sure if uncountable number of steps is allowed in construction of functions and suspect that the axiom of choice is required to make a function based on the above idea defined. If allowed - the function f(x) will be defined on [0; 2] and be not only continuous but also monotonous just like Cantor function but (like the question mark function) never constant.

Since it is still unknown (unproved) whether π-e is rational or irrational and there is no general irrationality testing algorithm - I suspect that an explicit construction of required function is not possible. As in the function in question probably exists but is not strictly definable.

Here you can see some graphs related to the official results of the last Russian elections.
http://samarcandanalytics.com/?page_id=39
Based on officially published data. To anyone remotely familiar with statistics what happened is quite clear.

The reasons why the results of the election were skewed by thousands vote-counting officials are quite complex but the most common is based on fear to lose their job in paid by government position like a school director. Add some region level unlawful pressure by regional Governors that are all now appointed from Moscow instead of being locally elected and you get whatever numbers you like. Central Electoral Committee doesn't even have to make its own hands dirty. They just have to shut their eyes to what their subordinates are doing.

P.S. I doubt that many people here would be happy about the Communist party of Russia gaining majority in Russian parliament at a perfectly honest elections. And you thought that being forced to choose between the Democrats and the Republicans without any other real options is bad, didn't you?

An interesting special case is if the spot moves at exactly c. Than all the photons from the past reach you simultaneously in a kind of a very bright flash (assuming flat Earth and heightless observer of course).

What you refer to is a supplemental global hit points system that at least undead use in addition to usual ways to die. All other damages do not stack. If you are not physically able to decapitate a creature with a lucky first hit than no amount of repeated hacking its neck will accomplish it.

As far as I know it was put into place as a temporary fix and causes its own problems. Like not properly registering a kill for historical purposes and killing skeletons with a single hit to a lover leg with a _really sharp crossbow bolt_.
Something like [SEVERE_ON_BREAK] is not working and cutting limb muscles and tendons of a living creature do not impair its functions unless a nerve was also cut. Only damage to hands and feet has some consequences, not to anything between them and the body.

Formally mass can be only either pure real or pure imaginary. In the complex case you have to be prepared to deal with complex length and time distances. In the simplest case of purely imaginary mass - the less energy a particle has - the higher it's speed. Neutrinos from supernova of 1987 had energy of about 1000 times less than CERN-OPERA ones and were travelling at a speed much closer to C than what is reported in this experiment. So it rules out the case of neutrinos having just some imaginary mass. (Common modern astrophysical models also favour cold relic neutrinos being slower than relativistic.)

By the way one of the interesting open problems with neutrino masses is that it can has Dirac mass, Majorana mass or contribution from both. Unfortunately it is too complex to explain here.

One of the minimum requirements to send backwards-in-time messages with a particle that is 1/100000 faster than C in all reference frames is to have one of the detectors travelling at γ=1/(1-v²/c²)^1/2>100000 relative to us. The OPERA detector has a mass of 1.766 ktons. Getting something like that to such ultrarelativistic velocity may very well be out of reach of humanity for the remaining of Solar system life out of general physical principles. Do not count on it for the next 200 years.