• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Verify FTL signal propagation using.....

CurtC said:
OK, I read more carefully. Let me summarize what I think you're doing, and please check that this understanding is right. You're taking the output of a function generator, then passing it through a large network of Rs, Ls, and Cs, in order to reduce its rise time (limit its bandwidth). Then you pass that into a lumped-element model of a 1-m long RG-58. You have a switch that terminates that with a 50-ohm resistor.

You then look at the end of the transmission line, and compare the output when the resistor is there vs. when it's not there. Is this right?

May I suggest an enhancement to improve your simulation's accuracy? Instead of modeling the line as a single L of 205 nH and a single C of 42 pF, could you model it as ten Ls and Cs, each with values of 20.5 nH and 4.2 pF? A lumped-element model is just an approximation of a transmission line, and the more elements you break it into, the more accurate it will be. Instead of using single big lumps, model the cable in 0.1 m segments.
Click to expand...

Yes, that is correct.
I have done so already with ten RLC lamp circuit in chain.
And there was no noticeable difference.
And why that is so you can learn from transmission line theories
that describe so called "Electrically short open ended transmission lines".
Here are the keywords when searching Google:
+"Electrically short"+"transmission lines"

If you look down below on my FTLSPEED page you see
simulations done using LTspice Tline distributed model.

You can download free LTspice software and the example from my page and do all kind of tests and learn about the FTL signal propagation phenomena.

Sincerely,

Mathew Orman
ps. I do provide free samples of my FTL data transmission lines for the evaluation providing that I would get a copy of test results.

www.ultra-faster-than-light.com
www.radio-faster-than-light.com
 
MathewOrman said:
An I have invented the World's most advanced 6D Laser Tracking System US Patent No. 5,767,960.
and NASA is using it
Press released at: http://www.ascension-tech.com/news/press_032503.php

But that has nothing to do with the subject

You are correct.

and the unanswered questions is:
Do you know the theory behind what is called "Electrically short open ended transmission lines"?

Certainly. What would you like to know?

Sincerely,

Mathew Orman
www.ultra-faster-than-light.com
www.radio-faster-than-light.com
Click to expand...

However, on the laser "you invented":

(Form the site you linked to)
Researchers at four NASA field installations have been working with the FAA and aviation industry on the project for three years.
Click to expand...

Which of those researchers were you? And how is it your invention?

Hans
 
MathewOrman said:


*snip*
Look at LTspice examples.

*snip*

Sincerely,

Mathew Orman
Click to expand...

The output of a simulation program is not reality. Even the best and most expensive simulation programs are notoriously unreliable for time-domain simulations of high-speed signals.

Simulations are uninteresting. Hard facts are what counts, but you could start by explaining the theory (without false premises).

Hans
 
MRC_Hans said:


The output of a simulation program is not reality. Even the best and most expensive simulation programs are notoriously unreliable for time-domain simulations of high-speed signals.

Simulations are uninteresting. Hard facts are what counts, but you could start by explaining the theory (without false premises).

Hans
Click to expand...

Yes you are right.
The physical evidence is what counts.
And that is why I decided to market my invention.
Also I have an independent verification pending by group of scientist in
Mountain View, CA.
When the test are done the results will be published on my website and Randi will get a copy so we can talk about
one mega-dollar price.

Mean time this week I will be selling my first ever built FTL data transmission line Serial Number 1 at EBay starting price $10,000.00

I will post the auction number here if the moderator has no objection.



Sincerely,

Mathew Orman
www.ultra-faster-than-light.com
www.radio-faster-than-light.com
 
Re: Re: Verify FTL signal propagation using.....

Crossbow said:


Good for you! If you are right, then you would have introduced the world to a whole new science.

Publish your work in a peer reviewed journal and then proceed to make some serious money.
Click to expand...

Thank You!
The proceedings are in motion.
The paper will be ready in the beginning of September.

Sincerely,

Mathew Orman
www.ultra-faster-than-light.com
www.radio-faster-than-light.com
 
MathewOrman said:


Yes you are right.
The physical evidence is what counts.
And that is why I decided to market my invention.
Click to expand...
Your simulation seems to make no differentiation between the RG-58 cable and your FTL cable. They are modeled in precisely the same manner, one is terminated and the other isn't. So if there is no difference, how is it you charge so much for the cables?

Walt
 
MathewOrman said:
Yes you are right.
The physical evidence is what counts.
And that is why I decided to market my invention.

Sure. Only, I'm afraid the market potential is limited. After all few people will care if their signals are delayed a few nanoseconds or not.

Also I have an independent verification pending by group of scientist in Mountain View, CA.

Could you be a bit more specific?

When the test are done the results will be published on my website and Randi will get a copy so we can talk about
one mega-dollar price.

No, that is not the way to publish a scientific break-through. I suggest Nature or New Scientist. Nobody will hear about if it is only on your website (at least nobody who matters). Since you do not claim it to be supernatural, the Randi Prize is not relevant.

Mean time this week I will be selling my first ever built FTL data transmission line Serial Number 1 at EBay starting price $10,000.00

Well, good luck! We all know how selling on e-bay is proof of sincerity :rolleyes:

I will post the auction number here if the moderator has no objection.

Sincerely,

Mathew Orman
Click to expand...

I conclude that you do not wish to engage in further technical discussions. Undoubtedly a wise decision.

Hans
 
MRC_Hans said:


I conclude that you do not wish to engage in further technical discussions. Undoubtedly a wise decision.

Hans
Click to expand...

False assumption.

The RLC circuit theory does not need my approval.
And what you need to learn is the theory behind
what is called "Electrically short open-ended transmission lines"

Sincerely,

Mathew Orman
ps. I need to go to bed!

www.ultra-faster-than-light.com
www.radio-faster-than-light.com
 
OK, this is fun. Mr. Orman has come up with a trick, like a good magician. The difference is that most magicians have tricks where the effect is simple to spot, even though he keeps how he did it a secret. To even understand what you're supposed to see, an observer of this trick needs to invest some time to see it. I'm sure you're getting some enjoyment out of having people straining to see how your obfuscating circuit does its thing.

I believe the output of the SPICE model, and that this is what you would actually see with a real circuit. I've installed LTSpice (I always wanted SPICE on my own PC anyway), and I'll be playing with it to understand the effect more.

I don't understand it fully yet, but I'm completely confident that we're not witnessing FTL. Hell, the SPICE model is done with a propagation time built-in. In your circuit, the one question that I have at this point is this. With a 28 ns rise time, and an FTL cable, why do you have to wait more than 40 ns to see the center of the pulse at the output? That seems to be a killer for your application where you put a bunch of these things back-to-back for a long-distance FTL application. What good is an FTL cable with the circuit driving it takes forever to respond?
 
Mr. Orman,

We have previously discussed your claims. This link discusses your measurement error.
 
CurtC said:
OK, this is fun. Mr. Orman has come up with a trick, like a good magician. The difference is that most magicians have tricks where the effect is simple to spot, even though he keeps how he did it a secret. To even understand what you're supposed to see, an observer of this trick needs to invest some time to see it. I'm sure you're getting some enjoyment out of having people straining to see how your obfuscating circuit does its thing.

I believe the output of the SPICE model, and that this is what you would actually see with a real circuit. I've installed LTSpice (I always wanted SPICE on my own PC anyway), and I'll be playing with it to understand the effect more.

I don't understand it fully yet, but I'm completely confident that we're not witnessing FTL. Hell, the SPICE model is done with a propagation time built-in. In your circuit, the one question that I have at this point is this. With a 28 ns rise time, and an FTL cable, why do you have to wait more than 40 ns to see the center of the pulse at the output? That seems to be a killer for your application where you put a bunch of these things back-to-back for a long-distance FTL application. What good is an FTL cable with the circuit driving it takes forever to respond?
Click to expand...

You have to wait 40ns to see the center of the input signal as well.
The example describes the 10MBit/sec FTL data transmission line.
It does not show the commercial circuitry which also contains the
compensation network and high impedance buffers.
I can deliver 30km long 10MBit/sec FTL transmission lines.

Sincerely,

Mathew Orman
ps. I need to go to bed!

www.ultra-faster-than-light.com
www.radio-faster-than-light.com
 
Roger wrote:
We have previously discussed your claims. This link discusses your measurement error.
Click to expand...
Not exactly. In that explanation, Kess said " If his cable were truly capable of FTL speeds then he should prove it be injecting a single event - such as a pulse - into the cable."

But in the circuit that he's posted in this thread, he's using a pulse stimulus, not a sine wave. And the trick still works.
 
MathewOrman said:


Yes you are right.
The physical evidence is what counts.
And that is why I decided to market my invention.
Also I have an independent verification pending by group of scientist in
Mountain View, CA.
When the test are done the results will be published on my website and Randi will get a copy so we can talk about
one mega-dollar price.

Mean time this week I will be selling my first ever built FTL data transmission line Serial Number 1 at EBay starting price $10,000.00

I will post the auction number here if the moderator has no objection.



Sincerely,

Mathew Orman
www.ultra-faster-than-light.com
www.radio-faster-than-light.com
Click to expand...

Wow! That sounds like a really sweet deal you ought to post in the JREF auction section as well. Just think, someone might be able to buy a product that can do something that has never been done and that demonstrates a whole new science for a mere $10,000!

Of course, the product in question has not actually been tested, however there have been some computerized simulations of it which look very favorable.

That sounds all very good to me, but I do have a couple of questions before I max out one of my credit cards.

If does not work, do I get the actual $ 10,000 back or would I get a computer simulated $ 10,000 back? Or better yet, could I pay you 10,000 computer simulated dollars (I could send you three of those new $3,333.33 notes that have a picture of President Bullwinkle on them plus one penny).
 
Slow down, Crossbow. The thing actually does what the SPICE simulation says it does. Not that anything is travelling FTL.

In fact, at the voltage just above the center value, like maybe around 280 mV, the output of the circuit achieves that voltage just a little *before* the input gets there. So FTL wouldn't explain it - I guess clairvoyance would be more like it. Or maybe that there's a funny resonance going on that I don't have the full explanation for yet.

But make no mistake - if you string a bunch of these together with the "compensation network" and "high impedance buffers," it will not send a signal FTL for the whole group. It just is a trick, that the voltage at the output of the transmission line goes up as fast as the voltage on its input. It has something to do with how the voltage on an open line doubles, so it starts rising later but goes up faster, than the input.
 
Measure the current going into the coax, instead of the voltage at the coax insertion point. The current pulse will occur before the pulse at the output no matter what kind of useless junk is added.
 
Yeah, I was trying to figure out how to view the current in LTSpice. If nothing else, I would put in a small series resistor and look at the voltage across that. If anyone knows how to put in a current probe, please let me know!
 
MathewOrman said:
*snip*
And what you need to learn is the theory behind
what is called "Electrically short open-ended transmission lines"

Sincerely,

Mathew Orman
*snip*
Click to expand...
You are repeating yourself.
I am thoroughly familiar with open ended transmisison lines of any length, and in my first post here, I explained how it could cause the effect of propagating the event of a pulse through a cable at a speed faster than light. This does not, however, mean that you can propagate information through the cable faster than light.

You have not presented ONE technical argument since the beginning of this thread, and the arguments given then have been shown to be false. The ball is in your court, sir, and we are waiting for your new arguments :rolleyes:.

Please present a technologically correct explanation on how FTL is supposed to work. Or else I shall have to assume that you do not have any.

Hans
 
Crossbow said:


Wow! That sounds like a really sweet deal you ought to post in the JREF auction section as well. Just think, someone might be able to buy a product that can do something that has never been done and that demonstrates a whole new science for a mere $10,000!

Of course, the product in question has not actually been tested, however there have been some computerized simulations of it which look very favorable.

That sounds all very good to me, but I do have a couple of questions before I max out one of my credit cards.

If does not work, do I get the actual $ 10,000 back or would I get a computer simulated $ 10,000 back? Or better yet, could I pay you 10,000 computer simulated dollars (I could send you three of those new $3,333.33 notes that have a picture of President Bullwinkle on them plus one penny).
Click to expand...

The buyer will have two options:

1. He pays only $500 down and gets the merchandise, evaluates
it's performance and if it works as specified he pays the remaining $9,500.00. If it does not work as specified he gets $1,000.00 back and that is 200% what he would had put down.

2. He pays $10,000.00 and if it does not work as specified
he gets $20,000.00 back.


Sincerely,

Mathew Orman
www.ultra-faster-than-light.com
www.radio-faster-than-light.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom