Slashdot Mirror


Instant Messaging With Neutrinos

An anonymous reader writes "A group of scientists has for the first time sent a message using a beam of neutrinos – nearly massless particles that travel at almost the speed of light. The message was sent through 240 meters of stone and said simply, 'Neutrino.' From the article: 'Many have theorized about the possible uses of neutrinos in communication because of one particularly valuable property: they can penetrate almost anything they encounter. If this technology could be applied to submarines, for instance, then they could conceivably communicate over long distances through water, which is difficult, if not impossible, with present technology. And if we wanted to communicate with something in outer space that was on the far side of a moon or a planet, our message could travel straight through without impediment.'"

36 of 262 comments (clear)

  1. Link gives 404? by base2_celtic · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Pretty early on in the piece to be slashdotted. Pulled for some reason?

    --
    Using the holy grail of OSes...
    1. Re:Link gives 404? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Obviously the neutrinos, with which the http reply was sent, passed straight though your computer.

    2. Re:Link gives 404? by Ruie · · Score: 4, Funny

      404 just means "cross section too low, send more packets"

    3. Re:Link gives 404? by Wolfling1 · · Score: 4, Funny

      No. Its just that the article summary arrived before the article.

      boom boom

    4. Re:Link gives 404? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 4, Funny

      My bad, the GPS cable was loose.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  2. Dead link by gadzook33 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The link doesn't seem to work but the article is here

    1. Re:Dead link by base2_celtic · · Score: 5, Informative

      Also here.

      --
      Using the holy grail of OSes...
    2. Re:Dead link by FrootLoops · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Science Daily article is much better; I wouldn't even bother with the ars technica one since it's short and misleading. For instance,

      Neutrinos are nearly massless and travel very close to the speed of light, so they can pass through substances, including entire planets, with little disruption.

      That neutrinos are nearly massless and travel close to the speed of light is not the reason they interact so little with other matter. For instance, photons are often stopped by pieces of paper yet they're massless and travel at the speed of light. Neutrinos (for whatever reason) are only affected by two of the four fundamental forces, the weak nuclear and gravity, leaving out the electromagnetic and strong nuclear forces. This limits their interactions significantly.

      eventually, they could provide a stable alternative to the electromagnetic waves we use now.

      The implication of replacing most current hardware with neutrino-based communication is almost certainly ludicrously optimistic. Neutrinos don't interact with other matter very often (kind of the point), so you have to send huge numbers of them to get your message heard. They're also hard to generate. The scientists actually say,

      Neutrino communication systems would be much more complicated than today's systems, but may have important strategic uses.

      implying that a few highly specialized communications systems might conceivably use neutrinos one day. Maybe in the future vastly improved neutrino detectors and generators could be constructed, but the sun generates large numbers of neutrinos constantly, so you'd at least have to get some filtering mechanisms or similar in place.

    3. Re:Dead link by RsG · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I doubt we'd use them in general communication applications anyway, for the simple reason that what we have right now isn't broken, and thus doesn't need to be fixed. Hell, if we're still using telephone wires in 2012, good money is on there still being cell towers in 2112.

      They mention submarine communications, and that upon reflection makes absolutely perfect sense to me. Subs are hard to reach with radio (baring ELF radio, which is a pain in the ass). Likewise, if we ever found it necessary to communicate with man made objects deep beneath the earth, neutrino communicators would make sense.

      Space based communication is also mentioned, and that struck me as a little more suspect. Vacuum is the one environment where you can use practically anything to talk, and line of sight is rarely an issue when the objects in the way are tiny compared to the distances involved. How often do astronomical bodies get in the way, and wouldn't it be simpler to use a relay for the rare occasions when they do?

      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
    4. Re:Dead link by TuringCheck · · Score: 5, Informative

      Neutrinos are also generated in vast numbers by the fission reactors of the submarines that would most likely benefit from this communitation method.

      Somehow I don't believe sending Morse code by rapidly turning on and off the reactor is a feasable way of communication ;-)

    5. Re:Dead link by Raenex · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I doubt we'd use them in general communication applications anyway, for the simple reason that what we have right now isn't broken, and thus doesn't need to be fixed.

      If it was actually feasible, it would be very useful for intercontinental telecommunication. Current methods are both expensive and have high latencies (either satellite or laying fiber across ocean floors).

    6. Re:Dead link by izomiac · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not sure if "benefit" is the right word... Being able to detect neutrinos (and subsequently the sub) might be the end for nuclear powered submarines.

  3. Neutrino Broadband? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Once we get cheap narrow-beam neutrino transmitters and receivers that can do gigabit/terabit speeds, I'll buy several thousand and set up true point-to-point peer-to-peer networking with my neutrino-enabled peers all over the planet! Fiber optics required? Hah! Just point and shoot!

    1. Re:Neutrino Broadband? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I imagine you have to have one helluva lot of neutrinos being pushed out for any detector to even catch a small fraction of them.

      I actually went to RTFA (and some of the links provided by others) but this is the exact problem I was thinking of. The reason neutrinos penetrate stuff so well is they barely interact with anything. The fact they barely interact with anything makes them hard to detect. Even places like the LHC need to generate assloads of neutrinos to see them.
      Barring some radical new neutrino detector technology, I don't see this taking off.

    2. Re:Neutrino Broadband? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's approximately equal to 1.5 arseloads, due to the relative volume of the American and British behinds.

  4. Working link by artor3 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Since the link in the summary gives a 404, here's what appears to be the same article direct from the school's website:

    http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=4022

    The title of the article is a verbatim match to the URL in the summary, so I'm pretty sure it's the same article.

  5. Submarines? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I, for one, think that anything with the potential for better internet access X feet below the water is an excellent idea.

    1. Re:Submarines? by EdIII · · Score: 5, Funny

      I, for one, think that anything with the potential for better internet access X feet below the water is an excellent idea.

      Damn straight.

      There is no reason why there should be any place on Earth that a man can't download some Internet porn. In the Mariana Trench? porn. Bermuda Triangle? porn. 1 mile underground trapped in a mine? still porn. Far side of the Moon? more porn.

      Of course there will always be some other benefits, like search and rescue beacons that can cut through any interference and touchy feely crap like that.

    2. Re:Submarines? by Jeremi · · Score: 4, Funny

      In the Mariana Trench? porn. Bermuda Triangle? porn.

      Didn't Mariana Trench and Bermuda Triangle star together in "Deep Diving III: Plumbing the Depths"?

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  6. SETI with Neutrinos? by norcom · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Should SETI switch to monitoring neutrino transmissions now?

    1. Re:SETI with Neutrinos? by Beelzebud · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not sure, but it does illustrate the challenges SETI faces.

  7. Yeah, OK , so ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you can do that, well, that just means you can now detect a sub's nuclear reactor super-easy. Don't they give off neutrinos?

  8. High frequency trading by itamblyn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The first person who figures out how to do this reliably will make a huge profit. There are already undersea cables which exist for the sole purpose of reducing latency between NY and UK stock exchanges. Neutrinos going _through_ the earth (arriving at the Nikkei for instance) would have a significantly shorter time of flight and would give traders a massive advantage.

    1. Re:High frequency trading by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There are already undersea cables which exist for the sole purpose of reducing latency between NY and UK stock exchanges.

      What a waste of effort and resources.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  9. Re:So... thick skulls CAN be penetrated? by artor3 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Unfortunately, it would be in one ear and out the other.

  10. Not true by should_be_linear · · Score: 5, Funny

    they sent word "neutrino" but on the other end, they recieved message "Thanks fucking god you _finally_ figured this out. Lets just say that Milky Way contains four intelligent civilizations, and yours is not among three smartest".

    --
    839*929
  11. Will Neutrinos collide with other Neutrinos? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I am not that good in Physics, so I'll post my questions here:

    I heard that photons don't collide with other photons, that's why two beams can cross path and still behave as though they were travelling without any hindrance

    Will Neutrinos behave like photons? Or will Neutrinos collide with other Neutrinos?

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Will Neutrinos collide with other Neutrinos? by chefmayhem · · Score: 5, Informative

      Neutrinos can collide with other neutrinos. Thing is, it's just really rare. The probability for a neutrino to interact with normal matter is small. The probability for it to interact with other neutrinos is smaller still. But it is non-zero. The only time when you're likely to be able to measure this kind of interaction is during a supernova, when the dying star makes an incredible number of neutrinos all at once.

    2. Re:Will Neutrinos collide with other Neutrinos? by justforgetme · · Score: 5, Informative

      Don't know about neutrino generation but the receiving end has its own limitations
      the article talks about submarines and satellites, with the mass of current high efficiency neutrino detectors I'd say more like underwater city and moon colony. Also everything near or outside the atmosphere would have to deal with a hell of a lot noise...
      Still, underground comms. Why not? It sure can become much more efficient than the idiotic cables that build the Internet today. Also judging from technology's progress it should be only about a couple of decades before you can walk around with a pocketable, battery powered neutrino I/O device. then were talking.

      --
      -- no sig today
    3. Re:Will Neutrinos collide with other Neutrinos? by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, at least this will be new tool to get messages through the thick skulls of certain managerial PHB's.

      And right out the other side, just like normal.

    4. Re:Will Neutrinos collide with other Neutrinos? by necro81 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It sure can become much more efficient than the idiotic cables that build the Internet today

      Compared to reconstructing the our communications network using ephemeral particles that can barely be detected, that require billion-dollar particle accelerators to create, and are easily drowned out by the deluge of neutrinos ejected by the Sun, yes, cables are stupid, as in stupidly easy.

    5. Re:Will Neutrinos collide with other Neutrinos? by subreality · · Score: 4, Insightful

      more like underwater city and moon colony

      ... or mid-size financial institution, trying to achieve slightly more efficient arbitrage by communicating market data from one side of the earth to the other a few milliseconds faster by going through instead of around.

      Just suggest it to them and they'll have it in mass production next month and be working on compact, cost-reduced versions in a year.

  12. Re:Receiver works how? by WaffleMonster · · Score: 4, Informative

    If neutrinos can pass through thousands of miles of solid rock without apparently being affected by it, how are you going to make a receiving antenna of any practical size?

    Well we know from the FTL neutrino saga that it can be done. The idea I believe is that if the beam can be focused enough you make up for it by sending a massive quantity of neutrinos and hoping that just one of them hits... A bit like a telescope taking a picture with exposure times on order of minutes to hours.

    For the neutrino sources on earth I forget exactly how it works but the signature you get in the detector registers a double hit that allows you to separate it from noise of other sources so these things don't need to be burried under thousands of feet of rock either as they are normally.

  13. Some crucial details left out by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative

    Some crucial details were left out.

    The "transmitter" uses the Fermilab accelerator ring to generate neutrinos. 6km of particle accelerator.

    The "receiver" is a neutrino detector the size of a large house.

    The data rate is so low that it took 20 minutes to transmit one word.

    Neutrinos still interact with other particles very infrequently. These researchers have no way around that. They just used a very powerful beam and a huge detector to pick up the very rare events. It's a stunt, not an advance.

  14. You're thinking of.. by shiftless · · Score: 3, Funny

    No, that was Transatlantic Trip IV: Laying the Cable

  15. Another problem by shiftless · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well it's a great thing that technology never improves then. We'll almost certainly never develop better neutrino detection technology.....especially considering we just plain don't have time, what, in between skinning bears, chopping up bones with primitive stone axes, and stacking up big rocks to form a crude fire pit at our latest migratory camp.

    Gotta run now, tribe needs a hand. A hunter found a field of skunky smelling trees with big flowery arms, totally covered in some weird looking crystals. Looks like great kindling for the bonfire. Ugh is stacking em up and getting ready to light. Back later...