Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Cthulhu]

YOu can't do that.

This is how it works, in my understanding.  You've got two entangled particles, each with an arbitrary imaginary attribute that can be 1 or 0.  It's not, as one would imagine, that you change A to 0 and B becomes 1.  It's that you cannot know what either of them are.  If you look, and you find out that A is 1, then any subsequent observation of B will always reveal it to be 0.  You can't have something watching it to determine when it changes, and then measure the amount of time that goes between the second one. That's not how it works

[fenrif]

You can do whatever you want with anything you want because mass effect fields and eezo.

[mainiac]

Except this isn't mystical mass effects and eezo, this is real life quantum entanglement which we know how it works.  It's like having perfectly normal objects stop following parabolic trajectories or having a binomial distribution suddenly give different values.  It doesn't matter if it's science fiction, this is the science part of that label.

[Darkmere]

Nothing specifically states the quantum pairs are literally pairs of atoms/molecular fragments. Assume the quantum "black box" is a large collection of entangled atoms synchronized within their own data storage framework (like a supremely dense punchcard, for illustration's sake). Measuring spin doesn't disentangle the pair, it merely causes the corresponding pair member to take on measurable properties (spin) of the original measured twin.

Transmission source: Measure each member of the local entaglement block, imparting spin analogous to a set of information on the entangled "punch card".
Reception site: Measure the entanglement block, locally. Measure the entire block to reset each quantum bit to 0 (return spin to the accepted "0" state), then measure it again to impart desired data to the local "punch card".
T: Measure entanglement block again, after a preset delay to avoid interference with the "blank" state imparted at reception site. Perform block-reset measure. Repeat procedure.

It sounds clunky, but each measurement is taking place at c, and current testing indicates the entanglement synchronization occurs at *at least* 10,000c.

There is a problem with this situation, because deriving some form of orthogonal limitations on the vast amounts of physical data present in a given system (in order to convey standard "classical" information) is problematic, even in the unified "punch card" entanglement block above. I don't think it's that much of a stretch to assume sometime between now and the brain cancer future that doesn't exist, that someone has developed a system to orthogonally quantify the physical information in such entanglement blocks to create a working classical information delivery system.

[Pandarsenic]

If you can send any sort of information at FTL with the entangled pairs, which is a necessary premise for the basic idea of having a quantum-entanglement communicator, whether the information is so much as "0" or "1" or even "Something has been sent," then the time-interval-message idea Pnx proposes works. If that doesn't work, you can't have any FTL communication using the entangled pairs at all, because the ONLY requirement of Pnx's idea is that you know you be receiving any information, which is necessarily true for any other system that might utilize quantum entanglement and/or wizardry for the communication.

IF it's going to be taken as possible to send any information in this manner (as the plot demands), THEN it is necessarily the case that Pnx's idea works.

[SeriousConcentrate]

No, that's sort of true. I'm sad that Mass Effect 3 had an ending on par with Monster-A-Go-Go.

[mainiac]

Measuring spin doesn't disentangle the pair, it merely causes the corresponding pair member to take on measurable properties (spin) of the original measured twin.

They are still entangled in the sense that their spins are opposite.  However they are no longer indeterminate.  It's a one shot thing.  Once they are determined you can't make them indeterminate and entangled again, short of bringing them back together.  Once they are indeterminate you can change the spin of one and the spin of the other isn't affected in the least.  It's only the very first measurement that is interesting.

Nor can you decide which spin you want the second particle to have, because you aren't setting the spin of the first, only observing the charge.  In fact you can not control it or alter it's shape in any manner whatsoever and have that data transmitted.  The one and only change you can make is observation.  Nothing except the state of being observed or not being observed is communicated.  If you think that any other data about the state of one of the other pair members is communicated then you are not understanding quantum entanglement.

There is only one binary state of data that is transmitted per quantum pair.  Not a damn thing else is transmitted.

If you can send any sort of information at FTL with the entangled pairs, which is a necessary premise for the basic idea of having a quantum-entanglement communicator, whether the information is so much as "0" or "1" or even "Something has been sent," then the time-interval-message idea Pnx proposes works.

No it does not.  You can not time quantum entanglement.

Consider this analogy.  There is a room.  At some point in the next two weeks, I will put a "message" in the room.  The message will consist of a single piece of paper with no information whatsoever.  This piece of paper is provided by you to me ahead of time.  I do not alter it in any way.  You can't use any forensic techniques on the letter or anything like that.

You are allowed to check the room once and only once in the next two weeks.  When you check it you aren't allowed into the room.  You merely are told whether I have put the message there yet.  You are not told how long ago I put the message.  You are not told how long until I put the message.  It could be a milisecond or a week for all you know.

How much data can you transmit with this system?

[fenrif]

Except this isn't mystical mass effects and eezo, this is real life quantum entanglement which we know how it works.  It's like having perfectly normal objects stop following parabolic trajectories or having a binomial distribution suddenly give different values.  It doesn't matter if it's science fiction, this is the science part of that label.

Except it is, because you're talking about how this works within the confines of a video game about banging blue space chicks and shooting bad guys with space magic. They have spaceships that enter and leave atmosphere willy-nilly. They have hard-light hologram knife computers. There is literally a new macguffin element that basically works as a "whatever is cool happens now" device. Arguing about the technology of the ME universe is pretty much pointless anyway, as the writers basically change how and why things work depending on whatever the plot calls for.

[Pandarsenic]

If you can send any sort of information at FTL with the entangled pairs, which is a necessary premise for the basic idea of having a quantum-entanglement communicator, whether the information is so much as "0" or "1" or even "Something has been sent," then the time-interval-message idea Pnx proposes works.

No it does not.  You can not time quantum entanglement.

Consider this analogy.  There is a room.  At some point in the next two weeks, I will put a "message" in the room.  The message will consist of a single piece of paper with no information whatsoever.  This piece of paper is provided by you to me ahead of time.  I do not alter it in any way.  You can't use any forensic techniques on the letter or anything like that.

You are allowed to check the room once and only once in the next two weeks.  When you check it you aren't allowed into the room.  You merely are told whether I have put the message there yet.  You are not told how long ago I put the message.  You are not told how long until I put the message.  It could be a milisecond or a week for all you know.

How much data can you transmit with this system?

I have no idea if we're talking about IRL quantum entanglement or Mass Effect quantum entanglement any more.

Edit: Or something in between, since those options make it alternately pointless, impractical, impossible, etc.

[fenrif]

I have no idea if we're talking about IRL quantum entanglement or Mass Effect quantum entanglement any more.

I imagine it varies from person to person.

[mainiac]

Except this isn't mystical mass effects and eezo, this is real life quantum entanglement which we know how it works.  It's like having perfectly normal objects stop following parabolic trajectories or having a binomial distribution suddenly give different values.  It doesn't matter if it's science fiction, this is the science part of that label.

Except it is, because you're talking about how this works within the confines of a video game about banging blue space chicks and shooting bad guys with space magic. They have spaceships that enter and leave atmosphere willy-nilly. They have hard-light hologram knife computers. There is literally a new macguffin element that basically works as a "whatever is cool happens now" device. Arguing about the technology of the ME universe is pretty much pointless anyway, as the writers basically change how and why things work depending on whatever the plot calls for.

Look, all I've ever been talking about is the real life practicality of an ansible or whatever name ME uses for it's ansible analogue.  According to the lore, it uses the real life physics of quantum entanglement.  If you want to say a wizard did it that's %100 a-ok and feel free to do it.  But we aren't discussing that because it's a pretty short discussion.

[Darkmere]

There is only one binary state of data that is transmitted per quantum pair.  Not a damn thing else is transmitted.

Then the entire system seems to be a novelty with little/no practical use, barring untold billions of entangled pairs I guess?

Like I said, it's a game with gravity-warping brain cancer. Arguing specifics in real world terms makes no sense. I still prefer this to "Ending sucks" rehash debate #8675309.

[fenrif]

Except this isn't mystical mass effects and eezo, this is real life quantum entanglement which we know how it works.  It's like having perfectly normal objects stop following parabolic trajectories or having a binomial distribution suddenly give different values.  It doesn't matter if it's science fiction, this is the science part of that label.

Except it is, because you're talking about how this works within the confines of a video game about banging blue space chicks and shooting bad guys with space magic. They have spaceships that enter and leave atmosphere willy-nilly. They have hard-light hologram knife computers. There is literally a new macguffin element that basically works as a "whatever is cool happens now" device. Arguing about the technology of the ME universe is pretty much pointless anyway, as the writers basically change how and why things work depending on whatever the plot calls for.

Look, all I've ever been talking about is the real life practicality of an ansible or whatever name ME uses for it's ansible analogue.  According to the lore, it uses the real life physics of quantum entanglement.  If you want to say a wizard did it that's %100 a-ok and feel free to do it.  But we aren't discussing that because it's a pretty short discussion.

But I'm fairly certain that a quantum entanglement communications device doesn't actually exist anyway? I just wiki-ed it and got "There is no currently known way to build an ansible." Which I'm guessing means that since they exist in ME then obviously we don't understand everything we need to make one... So essentially you're arguing fiction. Even better you're arguing about what a fictional thing MIGHT do outside the realm of what is stated in the source. Once you're in that territory saying "but it works like this in real life so it can't do that" is missing the point. Especially in a universe like ME that basically throws the "science" part of sci-fi out the window at the drop of a hat.

[mainiac]

That is not the discussion we were having.  We were discussing real world physics, not magical brain tumor world physics.  Believe it or not but sometimes threads in this forum meander as to their topic.

[Pandarsenic]

Discussion of FTL communication without accidentally the basic principles of causality

We were discussing real world physics

Uh.