Talk:Faster-than-light
Latest comment: 1 month ago by Johnjbarton in topic Static fields
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Faster-than-light article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
‹See TfM›
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
 | This talk page is only for discussing improvements to the article. If you have science questions, please ask them here, at the reference desk instead. |
Index
|
||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 100 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Unreferenced claims in GIF caption.
editThe cool GIF Tachyon04s.gif is captioned as
- Because the sphere travels faster than light, the observer sees nothing until it has already passed. Then, two images appear: one of the sphere arriving (on the right) and one of it departing (on the left).
But what is the justification for this description. Indeed what is the justification for the image at all? Well other than being colorful? Johnjbarton (talk) 22:19, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
L. Gavassino and M. M. Disconzi
editI removed all references to
- Gavassino, Lorenzo; Disconzi, Marcelo (2023). "Subluminality of relativistic quantum tunneling", Phys. Rev. A 107, 032209 https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.107.032209
This primary ref has only two citations, one by the authors, one disputes the work. Clearly this is an example of WP:TOOSOON. Johnjbarton (talk) 21:02, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Being in the field, and not associated to the authors, to me their analysis looks not only correct but also extremely clear and simple. The criticism is inconsistent, more here: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.107.032209 Anyway, it is probably better to wait for a bit more, as the paper is very recent. AliceHarding23 (talk) 22:14, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
Static fields
editUnder quantum mechanics there is a parenthesis "(see section on static fields above)" while there is no such section. It was removed years ago in [1]. Pkoppenb (talk) 11:33, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
