Asklemmy

43948 readers

496 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

184

Wwyd if you were given a pocket dimension 3m cubed? (lemm.ee)

submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

221 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Rules:

*You can teleport into and out of it at will

*It has a couple of plug sockets and can connect to internet from the region you teleported in from

*You can take objects and people with you

*As already stated, it is (3m)^3 (3m*3m*3m). The walls are plain plaster with a light in the middle of the ceiling. The pocket dimension is topologically toroidal, so if there weren't walls and a ceiling/floor (which you can actually destroy) you would loop if you went more than 3m in any direction. Gravity, then, is artificial and can be altered to anywhere from 0 to 2g from a dial on the wall.

Edit: additional specifications

*You can only teleport out to where you teleported in from.

*Time proceeds at the same rate inside the pocket dimension

*There is an eject button for those inside to get out if something happens to you

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] InnerScientist@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Basically as far as we can tell there there is no information traveling at FTL speed so it just works? All information that is traveling is just as fast as c or slower.

"Certain phenomena in quantum mechanics, such as quantum entanglement, might give the superficial impression of allowing communication of information faster than light. According to the no-communication theorem these phenomena do not allow true communication; they only let two observers in different locations see the same system simultaneously, without any way of controlling what either sees." link

"In physics, the no-communication theorem or no-signaling principle is a no-go theorem from quantum information theory which states that, during measurement of an entangled quantum state, it is not possible for one observer, by making a measurement of a subsystem of the total state, to communicate information to another observer." link

[–] idiomaddict@feddit.de 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Thank you for this, by the way. I was thinking of the two entangled electrons as communicating with each other, rather than people communicating with each other through the entangled electrons, which I think makes a difference, because it doesn’t rely on interpretation, but obviously we can’t measure how or if electrons “communicate.” Is it correct that one of the limitations is in interpretation or am I reading this wrong?

[–] InnerScientist@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Well, yes. We don't know if the measurement we take is the result of a wave form collapse (we caused it) or the result of someone else having measured it, which would giving us the oposite value that they measured. We can't tell if someone "sent" information or if it was the random result and we have no way to chose what value we (or the other end) gets when we collapse it.

This isn't easy to explain over text so I'd recommend watching this video, specifically chapter "How to exploit?" as the visuals make it easier to understand.

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 1 points 9 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

this video

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.