3 ms·

Interesting, care to elaborate more? I haven't found that it's even possible with long distances like that. If corporates are literally blowing holes to mounta

Interesting, care to elaborate more? I haven't found that it's even possible with long distances like that. If corporates are literally blowing holes to mountains to get faster and more direct data links between trading places. Then it sounds like just a question of time when the technology matures enough (if it's possible already).

Evidlo 6y ago
Here's an article about communicating with neutrino beams: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/message-encoded-in-neutrino-beam-transmitted-through-solid-rock/#:~:text=Neutrinos%20are%20having%20a%20moment.&text=Neutrinos%20have%20been%20proposed%20for,screen%20out%20most%20other%20particles https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/message-en.... In short, they were able to achieve about 0.1 bps with hardware that costs hundreds of millions of dollars.
- ClumsyPilot 6y ago
  Also note that the distance transmitted is a mere kilometer. Carrier pigeons are more practical
- est31 6y ago
  That's only two orders of magnitude away from a 100bps line, which would incur 10 ms latency due to the transmission method (in addition to the latency of the neutrinos actually having to get there), and that's for reliable communication. Unreliable communication that gives you an advantage over mere chance 1% of the time can already be advantageous, you'll be right 51% of the time.
  - macintux 6y ago
    Three orders.
    - est31 6y ago
      Thanks, got that wrong. My comment was more of a thought experiment than an expression of actual belief that it might work.
afthonos 6y ago
That image was captured over 503 days of exposure, with a detector the size of a swimming pool. I won’t claim it’s impossible, but I’ll give you fantastic odds against it in the next, say, twenty years.
- drdrey 6y ago
  And that's with a pretty decent source of neutrinos
- lokedhs 6y ago
  Surface area, yes. But it's 40 metres deep, so significantly larger volume.
ClumsyPilot 6y ago
Blowing holes in miuntains is junior league for nuclear physics. The exact same factor that allows neutrinos to pass through a planet make them impossible to work with. The detector here weighs 50,000,000kg, and still like 99.9..% of neutrinos pass though it without being detected - imagine that kind of signal loss in a data link. This detector does not notice tiny amount of neutrinos produced at particle accelerators. It would have to placed right next to a 4GW nuclear powerplant to detect neurinos at any kind of reasonable rate. The only man made source of neutrinos you could detect from another continent is a massive thermonuclear blast. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405601415010494 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S240560141...
- prawn 6y ago
  "The only man made source of neutrinos you could detect from another continent is a massive thermonuclear blast." So, you're saying there's a chance?

Evidlo 6y ago

Here's an article about communicating with neutrino beams: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/message-encoded-in-neutrino-beam-transmitted-through-solid-rock/#:~:text=Neutrinos%20are%20having%20a%20moment.&text=Neutrinos%20have%20been%20proposed%20for,screen%20out%20most%20other%20particles https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/message-en.... In short, they were able to achieve about 0.1 bps with hardware that costs hundreds of millions of dollars.

ClumsyPilot 6y ago
Also note that the distance transmitted is a mere kilometer. Carrier pigeons are more practical
est31 6y ago
That's only two orders of magnitude away from a 100bps line, which would incur 10 ms latency due to the transmission method (in addition to the latency of the neutrinos actually having to get there), and that's for reliable communication. Unreliable communication that gives you an advantage over mere chance 1% of the time can already be advantageous, you'll be right 51% of the time.
- macintux 6y ago
  Three orders.
  - est31 6y ago
    Thanks, got that wrong. My comment was more of a thought experiment than an expression of actual belief that it might work.

afthonos 6y ago

That image was captured over 503 days of exposure, with a detector the size of a swimming pool. I won’t claim it’s impossible, but I’ll give you fantastic odds against it in the next, say, twenty years.

drdrey 6y ago
And that's with a pretty decent source of neutrinos
lokedhs 6y ago
Surface area, yes. But it's 40 metres deep, so significantly larger volume.

ClumsyPilot 6y ago

Blowing holes in miuntains is junior league for nuclear physics. The exact same factor that allows neutrinos to pass through a planet make them impossible to work with. The detector here weighs 50,000,000kg, and still like 99.9..% of neutrinos pass though it without being detected - imagine that kind of signal loss in a data link. This detector does not notice tiny amount of neutrinos produced at particle accelerators. It would have to placed right next to a 4GW nuclear powerplant to detect neurinos at any kind of reasonable rate. The only man made source of neutrinos you could detect from another continent is a massive thermonuclear blast. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405601415010494 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S240560141...

prawn 6y ago
"The only man made source of neutrinos you could detect from another continent is a massive thermonuclear blast." So, you're saying there's a chance?