Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

dcRoWdYh OP t1_j0ije06 wrote

Reply to comment by This_Username_42 in What if a quantum computer could navigate a hypersonic missile?? by dcRoWdYh

You missed the point by miles, I was suggesting we could communicate with the projectile indirectly with a quantum computer, as we can't with normal communication equipment because of plasma

−139

drLagrangian t1_j0ijv8u wrote

I see the question now.

But that sort of info is exactly the kind of thing one should put in the "text" portion of the post.

Otherwise everyone will miss the point entirely.

108

dalnot t1_j0ilyr9 wrote

Lmao OP thought they had this brilliant idea and rushed to post it on r/space for some reason then got all pissy when people took it as a question

72

drLagrangian t1_j0in1pf wrote

Is it just me, or has there been a lot of that kind of thing here lately? (And other similarly science subreddits)

25

wikideenu t1_j0in0yx wrote

Bro maybe suggest that then. I definitely did not get that from your title.

31

LaunchTransient t1_j0ip4kd wrote

You mean the whole "Let's use quantum entanglement as a method of communication" idea? It's not a new idea, I'm afraid.

Unfortunately, it doesn't work because of the basic fundamentals of quantum physics. If you observe one of your entangled pairs, that is you interact with it to take a measurement, you break the entanglement.
There's no way for you to know whether that state it collapsed into was a result of your interaction, or of a manipulation of the entangled partner.

To give an analogy, you have a box which contains a magic ball that changes colour, blue to red, or red to blue if its partner ball is observed, and vice versa. The partner ball is in an identical box held by a friend, and you go to opposite sides of the town and open your boxes. Neither of you know the colour of your ball before opening.

Your ball is red. But is that because your ball was originally red and you just flipped your friend's ball? or is it because your friend opened their box before you and flipped your originally blue ball to red? You don't know without communicating with them, but that defeats the whole purpose of trying to use entangled states to communicate.

22

armorhide406 t1_j0nt3cb wrote

I wonder if there is a workaround, without sending information but more a matter of assigning meaning. Like red means one thing and blue means another.

And then maintaining strict discipline with who observes and what so you can take it as assumed it wasn't your friend opened your box before you.

1

LaunchTransient t1_j0pc8r3 wrote

Yeah, but the thing is that you don't know what the colour of the ball is going to be. You can't control that aspect of it. As a result, you don't know if the ball is going to collapse into the state you want it to or not.

Furthermore, due to relativity, what is your timeframe is not necessarily the time frame of another.

2

ZaxLofful t1_j0it2eq wrote

Have you even read the latest development of wormhole in a quantum chip?

They figured out a method to do the exact thing you are talking about, you are out of date my friend…

The paper talks about how they are able to push information thru another version of space time, essentially another dimension that only this QBits interact with and not us.

Edit: Here is a better explanation of what happened:

https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/physicists-observe-wormhole-dynamics-using-a-quantum-computer

^that one talks about how ER = EPR, which is really the most important part of the discovery and how Einstein initially disregarded it^

−3

orbita2d t1_j0iwgun wrote

Quantum teleportation still requires you to send classical information. They didn't send information outside of its light cone.

3

ZaxLofful t1_j0iy1rt wrote

As far as we are currently aware, there are no limitations on this effect; we understand it more and more everyday…It’s really only a matter of time until someone figures something out.

−4

orbita2d t1_j0izcbu wrote

If you can prove violation of the chronology protection conjecture, I would put a bet on a Nobel prize for you.

2

ZaxLofful t1_j0izooj wrote

That theory itself states that time travel is possible at small scales…IE Quantum Particles

−1

armorhide406 t1_j0ilzur wrote

Yes but you ignored the information gathering and the physical limitations of said vehicle. Because it's so fast it's hard to maneuver. It can't guide itself or beam ride with a target illuminator. Plus it'd only be hypersonic in high altitude to be able to use its scramjet. On terminal it'll probably still be unpowered and subsonic

16

Itsworthoverdoing t1_j0iraa7 wrote

You're talking about quantum entanglement, not a quantum computer. You don't need a full computer to communicate, you just need the communication bit. We are still miles away from accomplishing anything like what you're talking about.

11

dcRoWdYh OP t1_j0it9j2 wrote

That's what I was asking, Thanks! I'm Still not 100% on the workings of the quantum world, obviously lol

−11

Itsworthoverdoing t1_j0ixsuh wrote

See what we needed to answer your question? You needed to ask a question, get it answered, notice you didn't ask the correct question, and then give a bit more information so someone could help you. Next time that happens try to be a bit nicer to the people in the chain because we all needed to come together to figure out what you were talking about :)

8

dcRoWdYh OP t1_j0iy03i wrote

Nicer? All i did was ask questions.

−7

HuntyDumpty t1_j0jgfrx wrote

You said he missed the point by miles, but you did not state the point as you clarified it to be in your initial response in this thread. They didn’t really miss the point, you really failed to provide the most crucial information in the text part of your post. Some would consider blaming him for a mistake that is really yours rude.

1

HuntyDumpty t1_j0jgieq wrote

You said he missed the point by miles, but you did not state the point as you clarified it to be in your initial response in this thread. They didn’t really miss the point, you really failed to provide the most crucial information in the text part of your post. Some would consider blaming him for a mistake that is really yours rude.

Edit: meant to respond to comment beginning with “nicer?”

1

AbeRod1986 t1_j0it8bb wrote

You made no point for him to miss. Next time be clear.

7

dcRoWdYh OP t1_j0iu1cw wrote

Now I have to say, there is a very large conversation to be had, here

−8

Loki12241224 t1_j0jo4dr wrote

Jesus Christ your grammar is the same as your questions. tons, of pseudo intelligent, shit; that doesn't make any sense when you think about it at all

2

maxionjion t1_j0imma7 wrote

It should be called quantum communication, then.

5

LiamtheV t1_j0ip4t8 wrote

How would a quantum computer better transmit the information in that case? If the problem is the transmission itself (radio), then changing the thing hooked up to the radio wouldn't address the problem at all.

5

ZaxLofful t1_j0isx6u wrote

It still wouldn’t matter…First, because of what was already said.

Second, because that’s not how a quantum computer even works…The recent “wormhole” stuff also called “spooky action at a distance” by Einstein, requires to complete quantum entangled entities to function. To send even a small amount of data it requires you to destroy the connections at one end, to receive the data at the other end. Which means at best you could receive one small burst of data.

Third, there really is just no need; we use missiles on stationary targets or at least semi-stationary.

Simple is almost always better in the case of technology like this, heat seeking missiles only need a small amount of data.

The missile would need to be able to relay its position back to this quantum computer in real-time, for it to be effective.

4

dcRoWdYh OP t1_j0itvv6 wrote

Yeah my understanding was that the communication window was super super tiny, I'm just wondering if it'll be possible in the future as we scale up quantum entanglement projects

−1

ZaxLofful t1_j0iu4xl wrote

Not really, as stated by the other commenter it would be like sticking a 50K single use battery in a missile you intend to destroy.

What would really make sense is to find a different way of overcoming the plasma interference.

Like with StarLink or something similar.

5

dcRoWdYh OP t1_j0iumb1 wrote

You can't. That's the purpose of suggesting quantum entanglement. Its all these other people that are making this a sour thing though, I just wanted to poke around, but apparently free thinking is discouraged on Reddit

−1

ZaxLofful t1_j0iv4xc wrote

It’s not that it’s discouraged, it’s that there are clear and absolute barriers to what you are talking about…Ones that are much more insurmountable that the option I just provided.

Yet you still think it’s everyone else’s fault for having more info on the topic than you, instead of just realizing that your thought was neither correct nor complete.

Either take the opinions you are given, when you post on an opinion board; or just stop caring…

While it may technically be “possible” at some point in our future, we have given you clear reasons why it would not be used for this type of scenario.

People use to think quantum entanglement was a joke or not something useful, even Einstein was confused by it…now we are using it more and more.

If something like that can be overcome, then it would stand to reason there is a different way that we are yet unaware to overcome the plasma problem…

Edit: You are using absolutely terms like “it can’t”, but no one else talking to you is doing so. They are telling you why it would be impractical for use on something that is intended to blow up.

7

Embarrassed_Bat6101 t1_j0ity54 wrote

How would a quantum computer allow us to communicate through plasma?

3

dcRoWdYh OP t1_j0iu82n wrote

Quantum entanglement, and it's really annoying that these people are swarming with down-votes, for simply trying to have a conversation

−5

dcRoWdYh OP t1_j0iuaph wrote

It's really embarrassing for you guys

−7

Loki12241224 t1_j0jogdp wrote

holy shit i think i just witnessed peak 14-year-old-child-comment-ness

3

bradland t1_j0iu4ux wrote

The quantum effects used in quantum computing only work over extremely short distances. A quantum computer is not the same as a (this is totally made up) "quantum entanglement transceiver". Quantum computers also must be kept extremely cold. A hypersonic missile is about the worst imaginable environment for quantum computing... Which doesn't solve any communications problems on its own.

3

lopedopenope t1_j0izj2a wrote

I guess the biggest challenge with that is the datalink then

1

This_Username_42 t1_j0jpx0x wrote

Then put that in the post lol

But also that’s an even less reasonable answer because a quantum computer isn’t a communication device. If you’re talking about quantum communication, that won’t be somehow unphased by other effects, it just pertains to fidelity of communications

Furthermore my points still stands as the limitations are not onboard computers, but rather physical realities of the missile as an aircraft

I like your level of condescension after reading a handful of articles on quantum computing

1

This_Username_42 t1_j0jpzsv wrote

Then put that in the post lol

But also that’s an even less reasonable answer because a quantum computer isn’t a communication device. If you’re talking about quantum communication, that won’t be somehow unphased by other effects, it just pertains to fidelity of communications in the face of intercepting a signal

Furthermore my points still stands as the limitations are not onboard computers, but rather physical realities of the missile as an aircraft

I like your level of condescension after reading a handful of articles on quantum computing

1