You could turn invisibility on and off as you like and there would be no time limit. Your clothes would turn invisible too, and you could decide whether the items you are holding would be visible or not.
There would be no limits on how many times or where you could teleport. The items you hold while teleporting would be teleported too. You would also have the ability to know if the place would be safe to teleport to, so you wouldn’t teleport and get impaled by an icicle or teleport inside a wall and get your insides filled with concrete or something.
Personally, I don’t know which one would I pick. Invisibility would be awesome for pranks and stuff, but teleportation probably would be more useful for everyday life.
Me being able to teleport would prove that FTL is possible so I think I’d have to take it for that alone. Invisibility in comparison is tricky but very grounded in existing physics.
Why would teleportation necessarily be faster than light?
Some assumptions are common with teleporting.
If it takes the same time to travel 10 meters or 10000 kilometers that kinda implies faster than light.
To light, there’s no difference in those times, as I understand. A light particle doesn’t experience traveling at all. From its own perspective, it exists where it is created, then immediately where it is absorbed, in the same instance. So you could say it doesn’t experience time at all. All of its energy exists in its velocity, and none of it in its movement through time.
Don’t ask me to prove or explain this, because I don’t remember where I heard it or if I even remember it correctly. 😅
Actually light does experience time in its own frame of reference. For somebody observing(us in this example) the light or any object that moves at the speed of light in vacuum, it would seem that object is not experiencing time at all, that is, if there was clock on the object and we tried to measure the time that clock reads, it would give the same number as the result of the reading irrespective of when or where we measure it in our frame of reference.
It was my understanding that light does not experience time.
And yes it does experience time from our dimension because the speed of light is finite, making the lifetime of a photon as observed from a different frame of reference, non-zero.
I think the point I was trying to make was that the lifetime of the photon is nonzero to us, from our perspective, but zero to the photon, from its perspective. All of its energy is in its velocity.
Remember in Interstellar when they slingshot around the black hole and it cost them like 80 years or whatever? The time around them went by faster as a result. Well a photon going at c would see time around it going by at max time speed as well, so it would arrive at its destination immediately after it departed. (From its perspective.)
That’s how I understand it.
By what you’re saying, it sounds like you’re confirming what I said, just in a different way. A photon experiences time, but in its own frame of reference, the time experienced is zero. From its perspective, the time it takes to travel from one destination to the next, is zero. Just like the clock following it would show, from our perspective. Or am I misunderstanding?
Are you referring to dark matter? What kind of invisibility is grounded in physics?
It would require matter (including the inter-particle interactions) involving no absorption or emission of photons.
According to some models, subatomic particles exert action at a distance by exchanging photons.
This is what bothered me about the notion of a “black domain” in the Three Body series