posted
It's been a handful of years since I read Ender's Game, Speaker for the Dead, and Xenocide, but I've always remembered the concept of the Ansible's philotic connections.
I recall the concept is 2 particles that are "connected" are separated and stored in separate Ansibles, light years apart. When one is manipulated, the other moves in synchronized way. Thus, leading to instantanious communication.
Well, I believe that has proven to be a real thing in recent experiments in quantum science. The principle is "Entanglement". I read a small article in September 2004 issue of Popular Science on page 54, entitled "Atoms Beam up!".
The article speaks of experiments conducted between Boulder, Colorado and University of Innsbruck in Austria, where they separated two "entangled" quantum particles, keeping one in each location.
I won't try to explain the experiment, but here's the sentence that brought me to think about the philotic connections in Ender's game. "Quantum teleportion - the instant transmission of information - is conducted through a phenomenon called entanglement, the mysterious connection between paired particles in which a change in one particle instantly causes the same change in the other, regardless of the distance between them."
Go find the article!! Or do some web searching with combinations of keywords such as entanglement, particles, quantum, and so forth. I will be doing the same when i get some time.
Has anyone ever heard of this quantum phenomenon? I wonder if OSC has heard of it? I wonder if he realizes that his SF creative thinking years ago is now proving true?
posted
I was thinking this as well, as my hypothesis, adding to OSC's one, is that there is a certain chemical, or part of the atom for that matter that always has a connection to the other.
This is like the synopsis, between two brain cells; they are not connected, but can transmit data, at a very high speed, almost instantaneous.
So we have to figure out a way to replicate this Experiment, on a LARGE scale.
That would be extremely funny if in fact this is true. Not only who Card is a writer, he'd be a Nobel Piece Prize winner. Posts: 37 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
The concept of Quantum Entanglement has a long history. Schrödinger came up with it, in fact it is one of the fundamental properties of Quantum Mechanics. It's also one of the reasons Einstein never liked quantum mechanics as a theory: because entanglement violates the law of causality, creating a paradox (remember, special relativity requires that nothing move faster than the speed of light, including information). Einstein called it "spooky action at a distance". To this day, even though thousands upon thousands of experiments have proven quantum mechanics correct, there are still some physicists who are looking for Einstein's favored idea of a "better" theorem with so-called "hidden variables" that will not only keep in line with special relativity, but also make accurate predictions of the subatomic world.
That said, quantum teleportation is a pretty wicked phenomenon! Experiments entangling photons have already been done in the 80s and 90s. The idea of entangling "trapped" atomic ions was theorized in the mid-90's, but this experiment is the first time I've heard it actually being accomplished. Quantum teleportation is a practical application of quantum entanglement that employs a classical information channel. By classical I mean information flowing through the channel is limited by the speed of light. Because of this, quantum teleportation cannot actually send information faster than the speed of light. So keep in mind that the significant technological breakthrough that everyone's looking for here isn't so much *physical* teleportation like in Star Trek, but *informational* teleportation that brings us one step closer to a viable Quantum Computer.
As for one step closer to the Ansible? Could be possible. I'm still keeping all my chips on String Theory. Posts: 236 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I tried reading the above noted technical paper, but got lost after just a few paragraphs. Not a scientist brain have I.
I am away from my home on business and don't have Ender's Game with me. Go figure. Anyway, when was it originally published? Would OSC have had knowledge about this entanglement theory when he included philotic connections in the book?
Posts: 2 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Absolutely, OSC would have known about entanglement when he first wrote the short story in late 70s and then the novel in 1985. In 1935, Einstein et. al. wrote an article developing the idea of entanglement to explain their "EPR paradox", which apparently showed quantum mechanics to be an "incomplete theory". In defense, Schrodinger issued his own article that same year in which he coined the term "Entanglement" and developed his famous "Schrodinger's cat" thought experiment. Entanglement was debated hotly for years until its practical use in the field of communications was theorized in 1993 by IBM's Charles Bennett and his colleagues. A result of this study is that it is now highly feasible to have quantum microchips and quantum internet in the very near future.
The idea of the ansible, a faster-than-light communication device, actually dates back to 1966 when Ursula K. Le Guin coined the word in her book "Roccannon's World". However it was certainly popularized by Ender's Game, which also predates the 1993 Bennett theory. So how much did OSC influence the work done by NIST, Los Alamos and Innsbruck? One can only say!
Posts: 236 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
One correction about the theory of special relativity. It does not state that no particle can move faster than the speed of light. It only states that particles cannot accelerate faster than the speed of light. Einstein believed there were probably particles somewhere in space that come into existance moving faster than the speed of light. I can't think of the name off the top of my head though, and they have never been proven to exist.
Posts: 2 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
OK, I studied physics and I definitly know a bit about relativity and quantum mechanics, but the idea of the philotes (or whatever you cll the things that make the "ego" in you, and I'm NOT referring to Freud here, rahter the literal meaning), might explain the randomness tha occures.
As I quote: "The more factors you involve, the more accurate your assumption of the future will be." I do know, however, that even if a mind, human or not, could consist of infinate knowledge and intelligence (not to mention the most advanced logical analysis possible), you'd still be left with the impossibility of completely accurate predictions. This is due to eccentricities of randomness - particles that drift around the universe without any specific cause to move mathematically to THIS specific spot or THAT specific location (although exact locations in the universe do not REALLY exist - according to relativity - , let's assume they do). Even if you take into account the gravity of all particles and the forces imposed on all othes by them, you still get randomness. (Like prime numbers.)
May entropy arrive soon (it won't, *sob*).
Posts: 2978 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I HATE posting two replies in a row, but I forgot this:
quote: Einstein believed there were probably particles somewhere in space that come into existance moving faster than the speed of light.
Take this into account: You are in a certain (relative) position in space; 700,000,000 LY (light years) or so away from you there's a galaxy moving away at 90% of the SoL, possible? I say so, theoretically.
In the exact opposite direction (let's simplify it and make only 3 dimentions in space), is another galaxy moving away form you in 90% of the SoL, tha sums up to... ummm... 180%, or so.
180% > 1. There you go. Point proven. Even though very one doesn't ACCELERATE relative to YOU at over the SoL, compared to each other they do. (Now comes the point, what if on the other side of the '90% of SoL galaxy' there's ANOTHER galaxy moving at 90% of the SoL from that galaxy? that's 180% of the SoL and 270% altoether. Haven't prooved that yet.)
posted
Bzzzt. Due to general relativity, while from your POV each are moving away from each other, both at 80% c, if you were in either galaxy, the other galaxy in question would not be moving away at faster than c. Instead some spacetime warping would be occuring such that the glaxies would be going away from each other at less than c, but the would look stretched/shrunk (I forget which), and/or if you compared aclocks between the two galaxies (assuming they were all started at the same time in the past), would not show the same time.
This is what I was taught, but I am not a physicist. There are some Hatrackers that are; I hope they poke in and straighten us out.
posted
Actually, LaDamian, you were right the first time. Nothing can accelerate TO a speed faster than c (speed of light). There are likely some quantum circumstances that could have particles move faster for extremely short periods of time, but they are forced (under current thinking) to return to below the spped of light eventually.
The speed of light is a velocity (actually, scalar speed) that is measured as distance traveled divided by time. Acceleration is the change in speed divided by time, or, but another way, distance traveled divided by time, divided by time.
posted
Bok's entirely right. Two objects moving away from each other at relativistic speeds warp spacetime around themselves.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I ned to remember. University level physics never follows directly 9th Grade advanced arithmatics.
1+1=3. You can't contradict it. Just like you can't argue that i^-i=X^Y when X and Y >0.
Now, let's drop the maths.
The metaphor I read was that the 120 KpH train. A man walks from the back to the front of the train at 5 KpH while it's moving. You'd expect 120+5=125 KpH, right? You's expect the person on the train to see you the way you see him, 125 KpH. Except that he sees you, as you ee him, at more or less 120 KpH. Why? I don't know; I just read it.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
