After reading the article, either the author or the original scientist seems to lack understanding as to what the term "faster than light" actually means. In fact, it appeared that the author lacked understanding of almost everything he wrote about. There isn't enough information there to evaluate the description of the mechanism or process by which the team "abuses radio waves so severely that they finally give in and travel faster than light," but the theories postulated in the article leave gaping holes in reasoning.
First, the idea that you accept that "particles and information" can not travel faster than the speed of light, but that "phenomenon like radio waves" can is faulty on its face- if the radio wave carries information (i.e. an embedded signal or even its very presence), then it will carry that information faster than light if it were to travel that fast itself, invalidating the original assumption. And since the scientist has already accepted that information can't travel faster than light, your cellphone signal STILL won't be able to get to the satellite and back any faster the speed of light. (and a radio wave "the size of a pencil point??")
Second, the scientist allegedly compares this new "superluminal radio wave" to a sonic boom, allegedly showing an example of sound traveling faster than the speed of sound. One slight problem with this is that the sonic boom DOESN'T travel faster than the speed of sound, only the edge of the wavefront. Heck to generate that, you don't even need anything fancy; make an omnidirectional wave- for instance drop a rock into a pond- and you get an expanding wave whose length (circumference) expands at 2 * PI * the speed of propagation of the wave. Use a light source and according to the author you've created a superluminal transmission.
Mike
