3 ms·
Fair enough, your calculation seems valid. But my point still stands -- are we going to build enormous LHCs all over the world to get a (maximum) 24 millisecond
by hungryforcodes 5y ago
Fair enough, your calculation seems valid. But my point still stands -- are we going to build enormous LHCs all over the world to get a (maximum) 24 millisecond advantage in global communications via neutrinos?!
- ithkuil 5y agoI assume the story is "if we find a magic new tech that is otherwise similar to our existing tech in terms of cost effectiveness, size, bandwidth, reliability, etc, and it also could pass straight through earth, then we could shave off 25ms and that would be useful"
- zodiac 5y ago> If there were a way to reliably detect neutrinos in sufficient quantities they'd be ideal since you could send messages through the earth and at near light speed, I suppose. > As opposed to how we communicate now globally? From this interaction I thought you'd missed the point that "send messages through the earth" is something we're currently not doing. Of course you're right that the "if there were a way to reliably detect neutrinos" is doing a lot of work.