How will the interplanetary Internet work?
>>47415680
magic
>>47415680
with huge latency I assume
>>47415680
Webway.
Relays.
Quantum entanglement.
Take your pick from the above, or any other scifi literature/shows. Star Trek had subspace communication, Enders Game had the Ansible effect.
Cloud™
>>47415680
>waiting 2 weeks for a reply to your shitpost
>>47415715
Also parallel laser arrays work for near body communication. Scaled up they could work from one planet to another within the same solar system.
>>47415749
>Cloud
>in space
>>47415754
Relevant.
http://www.nasa.gov/press/2013/october/nasa-laser-communication-system-sets-record-with-data-transmissions-to-and-from/
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/165194-nasa-prepares-to-launch-space-laser-system-that-can-transmit-data-at-600mbps-to-deep-space
The more emitters you have, the more bandwidth you have. Its simple for sending tons of data across great distances relatively quickly.
>>47415778
It's called Nebula™
>>47415680
Ask Hubble faggot
>>47415779
If the laser hits you will you die?
>>47415799
Yes
The only reasonable answer in entanglement
>>47415787
BRILLIANT!
>>47415799
That depends on the energy level of the beam. Lasers can easily burn things, or even cut through an inch of steel with enough power and the right focus. Are beams used for communicating that powerful? Definitely not. I still wouldn't wave my hand in front of one though.
If we manage to figure out how to send data faster than light through some quantum scientific wizardry then it can be real-time, otherwise data will have to go the slow way.
In a solar system it's just a matter of minutes, you can send emails with delays and even grab cached copies of 4chan (got to wait a while for your posts to show up if you are on mars though).
If you are on sirius then you'll have to deal with 8 years old memes
>>47415818
Sounds like you'd need a lot of Wattage for those huge distances though. And the Wattage of a laser determines how strong the beam is.
>>47415799
It would be extremely painful
>>47415698
>>47415753
This
The delay will be too fucking big to do anything other than basic information transfer. No multiplayer gaymen, no video streaming, no web pages with images (if there are conventional web pages that is), no bullshit. We'll be back to late 1960s
>>47415822
>born just in time to explore the galaxy
>born too late to browse dank memes
;_;
>>47415858
>no web pages with images (if there are conventional web pages that is), no bullshit. We'll be back to late 1960s
Wont everything get cached at the local planet?
>>47415854
You're a big guy.
>>47415680
quantum entanglement
>>47415680
1. Play gaymen via neutrinos
2. Play gaymen via wormshole
3. Play gaymen via time travel
>>47415876
Could be
But the thing is, even a half year old cache would be considered old, and it would take a lot more time (more than 10 years easily) to transfer that new cached data
>>47415862
dark memes were better
I just realized that 4chan from sirius would be essentially 9gag
Just take a couple of riverbed steelheads....
>>47415822
The Earth and Mars are 401,000,000km apart at farthest in their orbits, 55,000,000km in their closest. The average distance is around 225,000,000km.
The Sun to the Earth is 149,598,261km.
If it takes around 8minutes and 20 seconds for light from the Sun to reach the Earth, then very sloppily rounded, light speed communication from Earth to Mars would take 22 minutes 30 seconds.
So worst case scenario for a colonist on Mars communicating with NASA is that there could be a 22~ minute delay. That definitely isn't good enough for any sort of emergency communication. Since bandwidth wouldn't be a problem though we could beam them all of earths shitty TV shows, news, and things like that. Average time would be about 12 minutes 30 seconds.
We really need quantum entanglement.
I wonder how much data you could transmit with just 4 paired atoms. Instantaneous, impossibly high bandwidth communication when?
>>47415680
>Humans develop technology to manipulate gravity in small quantities
>Send coded gravity burst back in time so that by the time they reach the destination they will arrive at the same instant they were sent
I call it Gravnet
>>47415889
FOR YOU
O
R
Y
O
U
>>47415966
Go home, Matthew McConaughey.
>>47415980
love is the answer
>>47415966
>at the same instant
why not... before?
negative latency!
>>47416005
Because you risk version incompatibilities and other technical issues.
>>47415911
but dark memes isn't a maymay
Creating miniature wormholes from 1 planet to another, and sending data at whatever photon frequency is most stable. Whilst not instant it will be significantly faster than any typical transmission method.
Since wormholes are essentially sending energy from one location to another producing homogeneity in the Universe, makes sense to utilise it for energy transmission. Obviously kinks related to out of order photons appearing will need to be addressed. And I'm not sure how much power would be needed to sustain such a tunnel though spacetime, but the positives far outweigh the tremendous power requirements if so.
>>47415680
Depends on how interplanetary civilization works.
Considering we'd need technology for that, that we do not have at all, I'm going t o say we will use that technology in establishing communications and eventually the internet too across planets.
>>47415779
So it's like a parallel port?
>MFW if we ever develop a way to send signals ftl than we'll probably be able to send humans as well
>>47416097
Yes
>>47416105
I'll be able to use my old pc without adaptors then! Woot!
>>47415941
>implying we would watch earthian scum shows and not make our own martian entertainment
It would be all porn.
>>47416132
fucking martians.
>>47415680
There will be massive stations that cache shit for you to browse.
Other then that forget anything that needs low latency.
>>47416118
>wanting to limit light speed communication to the io/bus speed of your old computer
I guess it's possible, but why?
>>scrambles for quantum computers
>>scrambles for dark matter
why in the fuck would I wanna read a Twitter post from Mr Musk, from FUCKING mars?
>>47416037
you got to take into account the delay of the local network, so let's say you have a 100 ms ping to the server that then sends the packets through gravity, then calculate how much is the latency and send it 100ms earlier
bam, you got instantaneous data to your computer
>>47415680
Slowly and bad, unless somebody contradicts Einstein.
>>47415901
Maybe this
>>47415906
Wut? I assume we mean Earth-Mars when we talk about interplanetary Internet, and Mars is only .00000589429108 light years away.
>tfw on mars
>tfw it takes 2 hours to get dank memes
>>47415858
we would have to rethink the internet for internet on different planets, wouldn't we?
>>47416285
So basically quantum applies to earth only?
(I knw I am an arsehole)
>>47416285
no need to contradict Einstein, just to circumvent him. Do some silly shit with space, and instead of making the signal faster, make the distance smaller. That is (theoretically) possible.
>>47416327
Quantum entanglement shouldnt be able to send data ftl, because our current understanding of physics says that data cannot move faster than light. Only things that dont carry information can. And besides, can quantum entanglement send useful data? dosent it just allow you to know the state of the other atom if yours is known?
Depends on how fast is needle cast
>>47415889
>>47416352
>>know the state of the other atom
>>implies its not a pointer
>>implies valency patterns are not complex enough for voice quantization, a la nyquist rate
>>47415680
>900000 ping
Quantum entanglement.
>>47416452
Is bullshit
even though there is no known means for such information to be communicated between the particles, which at the time of measurement may be separated by arbitrarily large distances
>>47416352
>dosent it just allow you to know the state of the other atom if yours is known?
So if it has 2 states
Its a 0 or 1.
Where have I seen that before...
>>47416510
Thats too simplistic to do it justice. One paired atom suspected in a cell could have any number of positions. It could be moving constantly. Varying patterns of motion could all be expressed as separate values. Oscillate them in a wave form and you now have a single atom signal carrier operating at whatever frequency you can physically manipulate the atom at. Every additional paired atom gives you more lanes/bandwidth.
The only downside is that this is essentially point to point communication, nothing like a radio, though it could easily be used as a repeater, to carry on the same signal to another array of entangled atoms.
>>47416576
It would be too complex too repeat. Dont ask me how, its fucking fact. Why encrypt a person specific language decided on impact
>>47416611
It wouldn't be too complex to repeat. You're just having entangled atoms behave as electrons do in a circuit.
>>47416622
I am sorry and mean no disrespect, but what you say is bullshit. Can I ask you to repeat exactly why you love your wife?
>>47416285
>I assume we mean Earth-Mars when we talk about interplanetary Internet
Then how will the intergalactic internet work?
Now notice that, that, is encryption within itself
>>47416641
Look, if you don't understand the basics of an eye pattern in signaling then I'm not about to explain it to you.
>>47416659
Too many variables, revert when you can assembly, and not just binary you pleb
>>47416611
>>47416641
>>47416674
The fuck am I reading?
>>47416738
You are reading hypothetical fucking bullshit the massive fucking faggot op asked for, jeses fuckibg Christ u think u get the recipe for methane
>>47416738
A schizo from /x/ I guess.
>>47416318
In some ways.
On the other hand, we do have the technology for caching & handling delayed responses, regional CDNs and so on already.
There could be an internet, but obviously it'd be very significantly different in access time and bandwidth as compared to the local planet's local segment of the internet.
>>47416758
Either that or some teenager who decided it would be funny to post lel so randumb non sequiturs.
>>47416792
Probably a teenager
>>47416652
Closest star is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxima_Centauri , a bit over 4 light years away.
Your query to the "internet" will take over 8 years and broadcast news will take over 4 years to arrive, unless we get FTL somehow.
But I'm pretty sure we'd broadcast information for cultural reasons.
>>47416821
Sorry its the fuckup schizo teen here, but what if the internet knew what we wanted to query?
>>47416839
It would be an even bigger advancement for mankind if you knew when to stop posting.
>>47416821
PS: Most other stars we couldn't even think about reaching yet.
Many are very, very far away indeed. Even halfway across the milky way (~100,000 LY in diameter) would be something that we couldn't really imagine doing as a project with a generation ship and computers and all, even if all of mankind was aboard.
The closer ones are here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_Group
Further away is... uh, much, MUCH further away. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_galaxy_groups_and_clusters
>>47416839
It wouldn't know, but the broadcasting of select parts of the internet's information would be a "best guess" what people outside want to know about earth, for example.
It'd still arrive 4 years after events happened on the original planet in the *VERY* best case (closest known star - we don't really expect habitable planets in the space between, though I guess maybe we could have some habitats or ships there eventually).
Might be 80000 years for a colony at the far end of the milky way, and ~13.3 billion years at the furthest away galaxy that we've spotted. [Not that we can get there - as I already said before, right now, we can't imagine a trip that long to be succesful.]
>>47416922
I was told its better not to reply
>>47417035
Not by me. But do as you prefer.
>>47417084
PS: If we could pull off 1G constant acceleration for a century on a ship, we might reach the actual border of the universe that we can currently observe in 1 - 2 human generations (left-hand side of graphic).
But earth might very well be actually gone when we -or news from the arrived expedition- come back, as you can see in the graph on the right-hand side.
where's dupont when we need him
What if we make a really long silver or gold wire between Mars and Earth. Electrons in the wire don't move from one end to the other, but all of them shuffle along at a slow pace. The time taken for each electron to do one shuffle in the wire would be the ping, which I imagine would be smaller than the time taken for light to travel all the way from Earth to Mars and vice versa. All we need to do is get Musk to make a 225,300,000km long cable. To reduce resistance it'll need to have a decently large diameter so its going to take a lot of silver/gold to make. It's probably not going to be able to handle much bandwidth so the wire could be used only for things that need ping but not much bandwidth. For stuff the needs bandwidth, the data can be transfered with light.
>>47417426
>which I imagine would be smaller than the time taken for light to travel all the way from Earth to Mars and vice versa.
No.
>>47415787
10/10 post
>>47417443
Why not?
>>47417478
Because the force between two repelling electrons is actually transmitted by photons, which can only move at c. It will be even slower than c, by a lot.
>>47417478
what is orbiting?
We'd have to somehow invent a protocol that would guarantee 100% of arrived packets and not rely on sending "Acknowledged" for every X bytes.
>>47415680
>How will the interplanetary Internet work?
slowly
>>47417426
Electricity moves slower than light, retard.
Very slowly, large bandwidth perhaps but the latency would be absurd.
We'd have to figure out how to manipulate wormholes in order to reduce the latency issue, any data transfer would be limited by the speed of light essentially. "Voices Of A Distant Star" gives a good idea of how bad the latency would be.
>>47416285
>Wut? I assume we mean Earth-Mars when we talk about interplanetary Internet, and Mars is only .00000589429108 light years away.
no dude you're not thinking logically
Even at that distance, it would take a long time (>10 minutes easily) to send and recieve a message. That is theoretical, but irl there would be a massive packet loss, more than third worlders experience today. it would take multiple broadcasts to transmit a message and receive it whole. TCP would be hard and slow to use, because of the time it would take to transmit, send a reply and retransmit.
That all not taking in account the collosal amount of noise that god knows what radiations would offer
Its pretty complex
>>47415778
> Oort cloud
>>47417778
That's mostly made up of comets, not gas. Technically it's not a cloud then.
>>47417801
If you want to be technical, clouds aren't made of gas at all. They're small drops or solid particles.
>>47415680
Interplanetary, assuming in the same solar system. Lasers, probably.
>>47417721
>TCP would be hard and slow to use, because of the time it would take to transmit, send a reply and retransmit.
Hard and slow yeah, but it wouldn't use 10 years.
There would certainly be a Interplanetary TCP congestion control compensating for stuff, and the send window increases quite drastically.
>>47417842
#rekt
Well space is a vaccum, so if you put a router (Cisco) in space it should go everywhare.
>>47416057
The existence of wormholes has only be proven mathematically. You have extremely high expectations to think we could actually create useful wormholes.
>>47417995
So when will we be able to create micro black holes to transmit information through wormholes and across galaxies?
What if we change the orbit of Mars so that it is closer to Earth, possibly by moving asteroids so they crash into the planet altering its orbit. That would make the data connection between the two planets better.
>>47418022
Why dont we move all continents together to make latency lower?
also interplanetary internet is redundant. it should be interplanetary net.
>>47418022
>>47418041
Continents don't have awful latency, planets do.
> internet is redundant. it should be interplanetary net.
What do you mean?
>>47418050
I seriously feel this :^)
>>47418006
We don't even know if it's possible to create wormholes at all, let alone stable ones that would allow for information transfer - it could very well be that they're merely a quirk of General Relativity that'll go away once we understand better how gravity and quantum mechanics interact(and even then, stable wormholes apparently require negative energy to keep open - good luck getting that). And even if they ARE possible(both theoretically and in practice) that still doesn't mean we'll be able to easily make them. So, not soon. Maybe in a century or two at the earliest.
>>47415787
>>47418080
INTER planetary INTER net.
double inter.
>>47418006
>implying the energy needed to create an even small black hole is worth transmitting a picture of titties to some neckbeard
>>47418123
You just repeated yourself, that doesn't help even slightly.
>>47418146
It should be pretty obvious.....
are you stupid, by chance?
>>47418163
Yes, I'm an idiot, sorry. I won't understand your point if you don't explain it in clear English. It's your choice, do you want to be understood or not.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/06/04/1304481/-Looks-like-Einstein-was-Wrong-about-Quantum-Entanglement
Quantum entanglement is a hoax
>>47415799
>>47415854
>>47415889
>>47415974
>>47415680
Slowly.
>>47415779
But you cannot get past the speed of light issue.
>>47415858
I think the bigger issue is not the weight of the page, but the delay. Gaming would not work, bu video streaming? Sure. You just need to announce that you are going to watch this video a hile before you watch it.
That is, if it is not already storred locally.
>>47416057
>Creating miniature wormholes from 1 planet to another, and sending data at whatever photon frequency is most stable.
Most stable, you say? That sounds like someone in ancient Egypt postulating about the performance of jet engines verus propellers for driving aircraft. Why do we trust you?
Once quantum wi-fi is developed, latency issues should be resolved. Bam. Interplanetary internet will be faster than it is now on Earth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_Quantum_Information_Transfer
>>47415858
>We'll be back to late 1960s
Just like in muh old sci fi movies.
>>47418022
This + data transfer with light is probably the best solution given the tech we have now and what we actually know.
>>47418272
Bandwidth would still be an issue with quantum entanglement.
Assuming we can increase bandwidth or compression id say that massive database dumps would happen at scheduled interval since having real-time connections are mostly impossible for the foreseeable future.
>>47415680
Since they WONT change all the legacy software they'll do a new data link and physical protocols to interespacial data exchange, and maybe IPv10/A since well have access to the network even through our anuses.
Can not wait for that shinny new future with quantum computers the size of a satellite being programmed in COBOL for the space Jews.
And since this shit never happens as you predict it I'll go with something crazy and say they'll have some future peeking technology and fetch and send your stuff before you begin to think about it.
>>47415799
There's no point in increasing the throughput when the critical factor is the latency.
>>47418384
>IPv10
IPv6 has so many IP addresses we won't need anything higher
And it's not a matter of "640k memory"
>>47418408
>IPv6 has so many IP addresses we won't need anything higher
Yeah, that's what they said about v4, at this point I'd rather go with adding another field in the lower levels to tell the size of the network address and get this shit fixed once for all.
>>47415901
Quantum entanglement does not carry information.
Here's a really shitty analogy that might be useful to laymen:
I have a pair of dice. When someone rolls their die and it comes up with a number, the other die is guaranteed to come up with the same number when rolled. However, the first number rolled is random and you cannot decide what the second roll will produce. Worse yet, the second person has no way of knowing when the first person rolls the die.
So you have two dice which are guaranteed to come up with the same random number. You have no way of deciding what number will come up and no way of knowing when the other die is rolled. So it's completely useless for communication.
As I said, that's a shitty analogy. But I think it gets the point across.
To become interplanetary you need either FTL or Cryo. If FTL then we'll have space bending technology so we can just send the signal from A to B instantly which would basically make internet even faster no matter what the distance.
If we go Cryo first then yeah you'll have shit tier internet you'd be better off just using a database to gain access to information you need.
>>47418408
>4 gigs of ram is enough, nobody will need anything higher
This is the future thread dude, no autism allowed
>>47417985
Underrated post
>>47418466
You have NO IDEA how big IPv6 is. If we exhaust it within the next thousand years, I'll be shocked.
>>47415715
>Quantum entanglement.
this. so this.
>>47418466
Mate, I just told you it's not a matter of saying things because opinions
IPv6 has 2^128 possible addresses.
That's
340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456
That's A FUCKING LOT
That's 40 times less then the estimated amount of ATOMS in the universe.
>>47418566
>>47418466
Also we could assign an IPV6 address to EVERY ATOM ON THE SURFACE OF THE EARTH, and still have enough addresses left to do another 100+ earths. It isn’t remotely likely that we’ll run out of IPV6 addresses at any time in the future.
>>47418566
>More than a decillion addresses
Jesus FUCK.
>>47418508
It only takes a few years to get from Earth to Mars, bro. And that's with our current chemical rockets. For interstellar travel, generation ships are more likely than cryogenics, since we still don't have anything CLOSE to working cryogenics - we can freeze people in a way that's theoretically survivable, but we can't thaw them.
>>47418197
Not him but shit boy you're dumb. It's semantics not jargon
>>47418596
>generation ships
Never ever. We don't even have a spacedock yet and no plans of making one either.
>>47418566
40 times? No. Forty orders of magnitude.
That's still huge, though, certainly vastly overkill without hugely speculative shit like FTL travel and self-replicating nanobots. And if we run out, 256 bit addressing will last us literally forever because that would allow us to give an address to every group of a few thousand atoms.
>>47418603
Sorry I meant 10^40
>>47418597
I understood the meaning of the words. I don't understand his point. The fact that its semantics not jargon doesn't tell me what he was on about, so I'm just going to assume you're as stupid as me.
>>47418617
That doesn't really get the point across. Saying it's 10^40 times smaller makes it seem tiny.
What I think is better is to say that 512 bit addressing could provide trillions of trillions of addresses to every atom in the universe, and 512 bit addressing is to IPv6 as IPv6 is to IPv4.
People don't realize that doubling the number of bits has a HUGE effect, far beyond anything humans are really equipped to understand with our monkey brains. Even people who understand it intellectually can't grasp the scale.
>>47418648
Oh he's just saying that we should called it interplanetary net instead interplanetary internet for the sake of saving syllables. I say his idea is fine but I prefer this anon's, personally
>>47415749
>>47415787
>>47415858
>tfw the only viable way to to play multiplayer with people from other planets is to organize an interplanetary video game league, where teams of the best players from each planet get to travel through space to compete in a zero-latency environment on other planets
That actually sounds kind of cool.
I'm sure that someone will come up with an interplanetary MMO or something with very low latency requirements at some point, though. Even if it has to be designed around several minutes of lag.
>>47418681
I never mentioned interplanetary internet so I guess he mistook me for someone else. Thanks for clearing that up.
Computing power to achieve the perfect Star Trek game when?
>>47415680
it wont
you will never leave earth
enjoy your pointless existence
>>47418768
You're no fun
>>47418086
>require negative energy
So something that somehow absorb heat without ever changing it's temperature or emitting it back?
Gentlemen, get your nets ready and a thermos of hot coffee, we're going to Gensokyo to bag us a fairy in 24 hours
>>47418272
>Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name. Please search for Wireless Quantum Information Transfer in Wikipedia to check for alternative titles or spellings.
Top keek
>>47418272
>>47418803
Isn't wireless kind of redundant?
Who the hell would use a wire for quantum transport?
>>47418582
>>47418566
You underestimate human greed & stupidty, for what would your average chump need over a hundred mail addresses? For the the same reason he'd get a trillion IP's of course, after all there's a lot of them and they're free.
Single bloody addressed devices? What is this, the year 21XX?
Reusing old addresses? But what if, what if we actually create a COLLISION!? Better give him a new one.
What?! The niggers on Uranus are asking for the whole 75.72.61.6e.75.73.XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX range for themselves?
Etcetera. I truly believe well find a way to exaust them regardless of how many do we create.
>>47416318
It would be the extranet.
Like in Mass Effect.
>>47418596
>It only takes a few years to get from Earth to Mars, bro
Actually it would be more like 6 months with current tech but you do have to wait for windows where the orbits line up properly. This window is only available about every 26 months so you better be pretty committed and ready to stay there a while.
Orbiters and rovers tend to take much longer because its cheaper and easier to take a slower route so they can use less expensive rockets to send them on their way. A human crew would make travel time important though so they would have to use a much higher delta-v trajectory.
>>47418824
Well can you give us a reasonable solution to transfering data between planets faster than the speed of light?
>>47418852
yes
make a really big torchlight and turn it on
wen u turn it off the shadow (cause its not physical )appears instantenously on the other planet, repeat 2 make instant information
>>47416510
>it has 2 states
no it's actually both and neither and every other state at the same time, we talked about quantum calculators a while ago:
"A classical computer has a memory made up of bits, where each bit represents either a one or a zero. A quantum computer maintains a sequence of qubits. A single qubit can represent a one, a zero, or any quantum superposition of those two qubit states" -wikipedia
TL;DR no it doesn't have two state but instead a lot more, so you probably will never have it and quantum entanglement is too expensive go for laser with satellites relays
>>47418842
Wrong, it would be the outernet
>>47415680
Subspace
Hyperspace
Quantum Entanglement
>Tfw the only Quantum Entanglement supplier on your colony has a data cap.
>>47418863
sounds legit
>>47418863
>wen u turn it off the shadow (cause its not physical )appears instantenously on the other planet
Give this guy a Nobel Prize
>>47418882
> Quantum Entanglement
Does not enable faster than light communication.
And it's the only science thing on your list.
>>47418601
No-one is saying that it'll happen anytime soon. But unless we can get FTL travel, they're the most likely way for us to ever reach other star systems.
>>47418840
>turn on IPv6
>realize my ISP is handing me out a /32
Thanks, I totally needed over 4 billion addresses for my local network.
>>47418881
Like in ...?
>>47418840
It's not like they can't do NAT for the whole planet
>>47418899
but it enable to transfer more data at one time we could send the whole fucking Internet with it in one transfer, it is interesting for interplanetary data transfers.
>>47418924
No, we can also do with slower than light but relativistic travel.
The crew aboard the ship can reach almost anywhere with "only" 1G acceleration, see >>47417084
But a lot of time will pass outside the ship.
>>47418899
>Does not enable faster than light communication.
I've heard something different.
The issue is that GETTING that particle there can't be faster then FTL
But once it's there you can.
>>47418940
I don't think it works that way. Pretty sure you realistically will transport less information than on a classical channel, it's just safer since only the owner of the entangled quantum can use the classical information in a meaningful way.
>>47415822
Tfw you're from sirius and have to wait 8 years to browse dank memes.
>>47418545
>>Quantum entanglement.
>this. so this.
What is Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle?
Also, absolutely any method of transferring information faster than light can be used to send information back in time by special relativity. That is a way big problem that probably rules it out. There's several effects that propagate faster than light, but none can transfer information.
>>47419001
>I've heard something different.
By who?
> But once it's there you can.
Nope. You can't.
>>47419001
See >>47418481
Realistically paired particles could likely be used for encryption or authentication because of the way they work in tandem but there is no way to influence a particle to actually send data over the pair without breaking the system.
>>47418947
We're pretty far from being able to accelerate something the size of a spaceship at a continuous 1 G for years, too.
>>47415715
Quantum entanglement can't be used for communication, see no communication theorem.
Do you think the Internet would be less cancerous if the le funny maymays couldn't spread as fast? I imagine browsing the net on Titan would be pretty fun, at least until all the newfag colonists arrive.
