From: Ross A. Finlayson (extropy@apexinternetsoftware.com)
Date: Fri Sep 20 2002 - 12:26:05 MDT
On Thursday, September 19, 2002, at 08:09 PM, Damien Broderick wrote:
> At 07:48 PM 9/19/02 -0700, "Ross A. Finlayson" wrote:
>
>> Now, being
>> random, over the 3600 seconds in the hour from 12:00 to 1:00, B would
>> expect 360 zeros if none were sent from A.
>
> Plus or minus a couple of standard deviations, or roughly 37.
>
>> However, with A sending each
>> zero, then when B sees around 360+36-3.6 zeros in the hour, about 392,
>> then he knows A has been sending a message for the last hour.
>
> Wouldn't it rot your boots.
>
> Of course, maybe you could send a much larger number.
>
> Can you dial a quantum entanglement gadget to 10 distinct states?
>
> Can you even be sure what you're `sending', or just that its state will
> correlate with the state at the far end?
>
> Damien Broderick
>
The thing with this idea is that it requires being able to send a value
when it reaches a given state. For example, if the sender can only send
a "random" state and then after the fact know what was sent, then that
method would not work because it couldn't influence the distribution of
that or those values reached by the receiver.
However, where the presence of a given random state itself can activate
the teleportation, then it would work. Statistically, many many more
samples would flatten the distribution.
In terms of Many Worlds Interpretation, MWI, I think it wouldn't require
MWI because the message wasn't being sent back in time, it's just a
couple ends of a superstring, or maybe not, I don't know what a
superstring is.
Serafino, I hope you would explain in more storybook detail how the FTL
signalling works as you have noted it.
FTL travel and communications is a staple of science fiction.
Ross
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:11 MST