Quatum entanglement and FTL

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "Lucio de Souza Coelho"
wrote:
>
> It has not been tested, but I think that your opinion about it being
> junk science is a sense evaluating the situation "backwards". :) There
> are many loopholes in physics that might allow - at least in theory -
> an FTL "radio", or even FTL travel - tachyons, wormholes,
> Alcubierre-type warpdrives, and so on. However, the implication that
> things allowing faster-than-light transmission/travel might allow the
> violation of fundamental laws like causality or mass conservation hint
> that probably those loopholes do not exist in practice.
>

Sometimes, you guys, make me feel like an idiot :)
Simply I can't understand why FTL radio breaks the laws of causality.

Yes, it is true Einstein defined the horizon (or cone) of simultaneus
events as a cone that travels at the speed of light. But is that true
or just a problem of interpretation of its own theory?

Let me illustrate by an example. Imagine the cone of simultaneous
events is defined by the speed of sound instead of light. Then, I can
make a device that send information faster than sound. Next storm I put
a mic and radio transmmiter close to the place a thunder strikes and
send the sound by radio to an observer. The observer has a radio
receiver and he hear the "sound of the thunder" before the sound itself
reaches him. Has he travelled back in time? The answer is no because
THERE IS NO WAY he can send a signal back to the transmitter BEFORE the
device send the original thunder's sound.

In short, to breaks laws of causality, the condition is that if you
send a signal from A to B in instant to and an answer comes back from B
to A en instant t1, then must hold to < t1 + Q, where Q is a possitive
delta of time.
Now, Einstein says the formulation should be to < t1 + 2 * D / C, where
C is the speed of light and D is the distance between A and B.
Now, a signal could very well have a Q where 0 < Q < 2 * D / C and stll
PRESERVING the laws of causality. Therefore FTL Radio doesn't mean
travel back in time from the logic point of view (outside relativistic
thought)

Where is the hole in my arguments? I simply can't get the idea.

Thanks.