posted
I did search the site for something like this, but I didn't look very far, so sorry if this has already been mentioned, although I'm sure it must have been.
Although in modern times we would certainly use an ansible-like device if we could, the Earth is not big enough, compared to the distances in the Ender serieses, to make that much of a difference in communication lag time. However, since the ansible is made of a split philote (right?), not only would communication be immediate, but also, the "transmission" would not be in waves, and so it couldn't be intercepted. Besides being a more practical feature for our time than the instantaneousness of the ansible, this means that in the future, there would be no way to intercept conversations, like wiretaps and such we use today.
Although I guess since the ansibles use the computers, all they would need is a system to monitor the computers. Which I guess is the whole point of Jane, but...what about in the Shadow series, before her? I guess then the ansibles would be too large and expensive for Bean to just carry one around with him to avoid detection by Achilles.
So, in conclusion, if this even makes any sense ( ), there's probably a post about it already, but if by some miracle there's not, let me know what you think.
P.S. Sorry for using starting two of my paragraphs with "although," and using it in the first one.
Posts: 20 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Imagine what could be done once quantum computers are realized. I believe that they would embody basically what the ansible is in OSC's work. They would also be so much more. You hit on one with uninterceptible communications. Another use would be remote piloting. Imagine being able to remote pilot a drone on Mars from the comfort of your office on Earth, all with no time lag. There are probably any number of scientific uses ranging from deep space exploration and deep ocean exploration to tracking populations of animals. I've been brain storming about uses for quantum computers for story ideas and the more I think about them the more implications I see. Imagine combining quantum computer communications with nanotechnology to create tiny probes to search for weaknesses in structures or perfom noninvasive biopsies of tumors.
Posts: 148 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I believe that they would embody basically what the ansible is in OSC's work. They would also be so much more. You hit on one with uninterceptible communications."
Sadly, the quantum mechanism you're referring to here is completely useless for communications. Quantum computing is not the same thing, and does not rely on the same mechanism, as spin pairs.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, right, just go ahead and spoil EVERYTHING.
Besides, it's dangerous to say things like "impossible." I remember when lasers were first invented, and I read serious statements from scientists that "No, these are NOT ray guns and they have no practical military application. For one thing, they are too bulky to carry around."
Posts: 2005 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well Tom, I will definately need to go back and research quantum computers some more then. Regardless, spin pairs would make a good basis for a "quantum modem" linking two computers in the way I described in my previous post.
Posts: 148 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Regardless, spin pairs would make a good basis for a "quantum modem" linking two computers in the way I described in my previous post.
No, they would not. This is a common misconception: that by somehow changing the spin of one of the pair, you would instantly change the spin of the other -- and that this would allow you to communicate FTL by modulating the spin pairs.
But here's the problem: when you change the spin of one of the pair, you break the pair. It ceases to be a pair at that point; the particles are now part of a different system and operate under different rules.
It's true that when you observe one of a spin pair, you can derive from the observed spin the spin of its partner. But since you can't actually affect the spin of either partner without breaking the link between them, this is an intellectual curiosity without, as yet, any practical application.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok... I've gone from thinking I understood what I was talking about back in my first post to not really having any idea what any of you are talking about. But if changing the spin breaks the pair, couldn't you have a whole system of pairs that, when broken in a certain pattern, could be changed into language? Kind of like Morse code.
*Disclaimer: The author of this post reserves the right to make no sense whatsoever, but would appreciate it if someone could inform him why this would never work, since surely someone else has thought of it.
Posts: 20 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's okay, I found out that I was laboring under a misunderstanding of the concept anyways. I will either need to do more research on quantum communication to determine how my instantaneous communications device for my story might be tied to existing lines of research or retink my story idea so that it doesn't use instantaneous communications across astronomical distances. In rethinking the story idea I may even strengthen it.
quote:But if changing the spin breaks the pair, couldn't you have a whole system of pairs that, when broken in a certain pattern, could be changed into language? Kind of like Morse code.
But would the reciever even know that the pairing had been broken? If so then maybe it would work as a one time communication device, but that doesn't really work for the particular idea I am thinking of.
Posts: 148 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:But would the reciever even know that the pairing had been broken? If so then maybe it would work as a one time communication device, but that doesn't really work for the particular idea I am thinking of.
I don't know if it's possible to create a device that can monitor the actual link, but if when you affect one of the pair, does the other continue the way it was, or does it do something like just slow to a stop, since it doesn't have the other one to keep it going? If that was the case, then a device that monitors the ends of the link sounds like it would work.
That's a good point about the one time use. I guess if the devices were small someone could just carry around pocketfulls of them... but that seems a little too impractical.
Edit: If these were for emergency use only, then not only would you not have to worry about the one time use problem, but you also would only need one single link, since the only possible thing a severance could mean is some kind of problem. I guess with such a limited use, though, that they would be more trouble than they're worth to make...now this one time use thing is gonna bug me...
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Quantum computing is not the same thing, and does not rely on the same mechanism, as spin pairs.
