4 ms·
"Instead of traveling 10,000 miles or more via cable, it’s only 8,000 miles in a direct line through the center of the Earth." 8k vs 10k -- is it such a big di
by joering2 15y ago
"Instead of traveling 10,000 miles or more via cable, it’s only 8,000 miles in a direct line through the center of the Earth."
8k vs 10k -- is it such a big difference? I see it more as cost efficient -- "powering up" 10k miles long cable may be more expensive than shooting a "beam" through the Earth.
- mrsebastian 15y agoWell, the 10,000 miles is also through multiple routers -- and I think it's probably a lot more than 10k, once you factor in obstacles and landing points and stuff. But yeah, it could also be more power efficient (assuming, of course, we find a way that doesn't require a few-mile particle accelerator to fire the neutrinos :)
- dalke 15y agoPeople are building the Atlantic Fibre Optic Cable connecting Europe to the US, in part to reduce latency. The obvious question is, is someone willing to pay a LOT of money for a low-latency, low-bandwidth connection from Sydney to NYC? The Great Circle minimum time of light in fiber is 74.6ms, while neutrinos (which travel at almost the speed of light) going through the Earth's diameter take 42ms. Thus, you could cut the time in half if you could use neutrinos.
- powertower 15y agoDon't forget about all the repeaters/boosters, hardware, and networks that signal is going to propagate through (that’s going to slow it down at every point). With a neutrino network, you just set it up to point to the receiver, and let the fabric of space-time do the rest.