FTL communication within the next 50 years?

Exonerate · Post by **Exonerate** » 2003-01-04 08:53pm

I'm wondering if this is feasible... I've been looking into using Quantum Entangelment *coughansiblecough* for this function... Would it be feasible in 50 years?

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-01-04 09:01pm

Watching TechTV right now. Some physicists have already used quantum tunelling to send Mozarts 40th at 4c

btw, it was straight through a block of material the signal should not have penetrated, let alone travelled FTL through.

Exonerate · Post by **Exonerate** » 2003-01-04 09:03pm

kojikun wrote:Watching TechTV right now. Some physicists have already used quantum tunelling to send Mozarts 40th at 4c

btw, it was straight through a block of material the signal should not have penetrated, let alone travelled FTL through.

Yes... I think I remember hearing that from somewhere.

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2003-01-04 09:07pm

Hrug?
Sounds like Scalar waves or torsion fields, some weirdness related to quantum spin and PSI powers... Totally warped but kewl if it's real...

jaeger115 · Post by **jaeger115** » 2003-01-04 09:08pm

I know that in quantum mechanics one subatomic particle can "communicate" with another one like it at instanteous speed. Could we take advantage of that and make an "ansible device" like these in Ender's Game?

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-01-04 09:11pm

theyve tried entanglement and i think it worked but not enough to transmit Mozarts 40th

What a shame we wont be getting FTL internet anytime soon! XD!!!!!!!!!!1

Exonerate · Post by **Exonerate** » 2003-01-04 09:13pm

jaeger115 wrote:I know that in quantum mechanics one subatomic particle can "communicate" with another one like it at instanteous speed. Could we take advantage of that and make an "ansible device" like these in Ender's Game?

Actually, thats pretty much what I was talking about. Quantum entanglement is when you have 2 particles that behave exactly identically.

ArmorPierce · Post by **ArmorPierce** » 2003-01-04 09:20pm

Yes I've heard about that. Didn't hear how long it would take to develop it if it can be used for ftl communication.

jaeger115 · Post by **jaeger115** » 2003-01-04 09:22pm

Actually, thats pretty much what I was talking about. Quantum entanglement is when you have 2 particles that behave exactly identically.

We can take advantage of that to make one particle move in a specific pattern, which stands for one letter of the alphabet. then another pattern, another letter. And so on.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-01-04 09:34pm

btw, the method i saw was not cesium vapor as in the tests to get light to go FTL. it was what looked like a 8 inch long block of bronze meant to STOP signals.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-01-04 10:15pm

Radio free Sentinal!

IT'S FULL OF STARS!

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-01-04 10:26pm

.. que?

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2003-01-04 10:49pm

Exonerate wrote:I'm wondering if this is feasible... I've been looking into using Quantum Entangelment *coughansiblecough* for this function... Would it be feasible in 50 years?

Hahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahah . . . . hahahahaha . . . no.

It may certainly speed up quantum computing, but any attempt to observe either particle will cause the quantum superposition to collapse. So, checking the machine for messages will destroy the superposition. For that matter, so will stray cosmic radiation entering the machine. So, quantum entanglement is not a way to cheat Einstein.

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2003-01-04 10:58pm

kojikun wrote:btw, the method i saw was not cesium vapor as in the tests to get light to go FTL. it was what looked like a 8 inch long block of bronze meant to STOP signals.

All these experiments to get things to go FTL are actually tricks. I remember reading somewhere that physicists had gotten light pulses to travel faster-than-light. Unfortunately, the fact that you can observe the pulse as apparently going FTL doesn't mean that any information conveyed will travel FTL as well. Here is a link discussing what I am saying:

http://www.if.ufrgs.br/ast/ftl.htm

My point is that though we can do strange things on the quantum level that seem to go FTL, we can't use these effects to usefully convey information any faster than plain old c.

ArmorPierce · Post by **ArmorPierce** » 2003-01-04 11:18pm

I remember reading somewhere that they were working in a way to measure the particle and then some how change it back to the original state. I don't remember where I read it from, don't remember most of what it said, so I don't hold merit to it.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-01-04 11:48pm

--All these experiments to get things to go FTL are actually tricks. I remember reading somewhere that physicists had gotten light pulses to travel faster-than-light. Unfortunately, the fact that you can observe the pulse as apparently going FTL doesn't mean that any information conveyed will travel FTL as well. Here is a link discussing what I am saying:

http://www.if.ufrgs.br/ast/ftl.htm

My point is that though we can do strange things on the quantum level that seem to go FTL, we can't use these effects to usefully convey information any faster than plain old c.--

Ah. I guess Mozart's 40th doesnt count as information.

I'll get you the names of the scientists you did the experiment.

And the link you provided is to the cesium vapor experiment not the one im talking about.

Dennis Toy · Post by **Dennis Toy** » 2003-01-05 12:02am

I like this, i also see other applications, like a new form of computer storage and processing.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-01-05 12:26am

Being that the speed of light defines the permeability of free space (meaning that the speed light travels through it is the fastest possible speed through that medium), it's highly unlikely that we'll find a way to send faster-than-light particles through free space.

Raptor 597 · Post by **Raptor 597** » 2003-01-05 03:04am

Interesting note VDSL can be travelled at speed C. Bean had the story a few months ago. The University of Tennesse made this discovery and 5 years from now or later ADSL will be 5 times slower then VDSL.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2003-01-05 03:06am

Feasible FTL communications won't be around until at least, I'd say 400 years. 600 is a more sensible figure.

Cthulhu-chan · Post by **Cthulhu-chan** » 2003-01-05 04:52am

Given the rate that technology has improved itself over the last hundred years, that seems rather pessimistic.

Warspite · Post by **Warspite** » 2003-01-05 07:20am

Well, GrandMasterTerwynn Already did most of the explaining, I would like to add this point:

Heisenberg's Principle is what allows quantum tunneling/entaglement/whatever.
Until we read the properties of a particle, we don't know anything about it, and so, the particle can have any state/property we want, even a simultaneous property as another particle. It's those changes that are related to quantum (insert name here), we change the properties of a particle, and another will change those same properties, irrespective of it's position in space-time. BUT, we need to know what those changes are, that is, an investigator A sending a message to an investigator B, has to send also the properties parameters, in order for the investigator B to read the properties on it's particle, and that can only be done on good old methods.
It's an interesting property, and maybe it can have useful aplications, but given our current tech level, it's not possible to send FTL messages through quantum tunneling/entaglement/whatever.
Not that any advanced civilization couldn't have solved the problem...

Pu-239 · Post by **Pu-239** » 2003-01-06 03:50am

There would be no point to FTL comm anyways, except for communication to the moon/mars/etc to eliminate latency for remote controlled applications, since FTL travel is impossible. Signals travel to wire or fiber optic pretty fast already. The problem is how many times you can modulate a signal per second (baud), and the encoding used. I thinks the fastest baud rate is 2400 and anything faster is just the result of a different modulation scheme. (BTW I'm talking about analog modems) Even with fiber optic/radio/etc information travels nowhere near light speed. Latency will still be reduced slightly. If quantum entanglement allows instantaneous switching that would improve things dramatically though, I don't know. However currently quantum entanglement can only transfer useless random messages (perhaps usable in some form of encryption I read somewhere though) . Anyways even if it was possible, you probably couldn't pay for it. I mean if you can't afford an OC-3, what makes you think you can afford a "ftl" internet connection.

Exonerate · Post by **Exonerate** » 2003-01-06 10:51pm

For my group, we need to communicate from the asteroid belt to Earth. I doubt if you'd like a latency of 1200000.

jaeger115 · Post by **jaeger115** » 2003-01-06 11:14pm

Why don't we make a small wormhole and send messages through? I know, I know, wormholes require extremely advanced tech, but it's plausible.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

FTL communication within the next 50 years?

FTL communication within the next 50 years?

Re: FTL communication within the next 50 years?