Live data from Hacker News

Mathematicians confirm the possibility of data transfer via gravitational waves

phys.org

21–30 of 42 posts

Re: Mathematicians confirm the possibility of data transfer via gravitational waves

#21

Not to sound condescending, but… You can transmit data by modulating in on top of something that propagates through space? Well, big deal, who'd thought? /s In all seriousness, the big problem is, how to create gravitational waves in a controlled manner in the first place. Because the fact remains, that gravity is, by several orders of magnitude, the weakest force in our universe and it takes stooopid amounts of ener…

What does "close to DC" mean?

And "end facets of the optical filter"? What is being thrown around?

Re: Mathematicians confirm the possibility of data transfer via gravitational waves

#22
post #4

"The discovery could lead to a new means of data transfer in space, e.g., between space stations." Sure, we'll be building space stations with gravitational wave transmitters as soon as we can figure out how to wiggle stars and planets in a controlled fashion to produce them. That should happen Real Soon Now.

You capture a quantum black hole, slap a charge on it, and wiggle that: The Hole Man https://wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hole_Man

Wouldn't that evaporate rather quickly? (Sure, Niven didn't know that _then_... but science has a habit of catching up to some stories.)

Re: Mathematicians confirm the possibility of data transfer via gravitational waves

#25
post #4

"The discovery could lead to a new means of data transfer in space, e.g., between space stations." Sure, we'll be building space stations with gravitational wave transmitters as soon as we can figure out how to wiggle stars and planets in a controlled fashion to produce them. That should happen Real Soon Now.

That's not strictly necessary, is it? All matter should be able to effect gravity. It's a matter of having sensitive enough detectors for whatever is causing the disturbance, not necessarily having something which can produce enough of a disturbance to detect.

Re: Mathematicians confirm the possibility of data transfer via gravitational waves

#27
post #25
post #4

"The discovery could lead to a new means of data transfer in space, e.g., between space stations." Sure, we'll be building space stations with gravitational wave transmitters as soon as we can figure out how to wiggle stars and planets in a controlled fashion to produce them. That should happen Real Soon Now.

That's not strictly necessary, is it? All matter should be able to effect gravity. It's a matter of having sensitive enough detectors for whatever is causing the disturbance, not necessarily having something which can produce enough of a disturbance to detect.

I did some high school level math on the equivalence of the signals detected by LIGO vs the gravitational wave induced by the mass energy conversion of 1kg of plutonium from the other side of the earth.

If memory serves the signal of the latter should have been ~3 orders of magnitude higher.

Using nukes to communicate is a bit intense, but a tuned receiver should be able to pick up lower energy levels.

Re: Mathematicians confirm the possibility of data transfer via gravitational waves

#28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You capture a quantum black hole, slap a charge on it, and wiggle that: The Hole Man https://wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hole_Man

Wouldn't that evaporate rather quickly? (Sure, Niven didn't know that _then_... but science has a habit of catching up to some stories.)

According to this... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation#A_crude_anal...

"[F]or instance, a 1-second-life black hole has a mass of 2.28×10^5 kg", and the time taken seems proportional to the cube of the mass. So a 2.28×10^6 kg black hole would take 1000 seconds, and so on.

How massive was the black hole in the story?

Re: Mathematicians confirm the possibility of data transfer via gravitational waves

#29
post #27
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not strictly necessary, is it? All matter should be able to effect gravity. It's a matter of having sensitive enough detectors for whatever is causing the disturbance, not necessarily having something which can produce enough of a disturbance to detect.

I did some high school level math on the equivalence of the signals detected by LIGO vs the gravitational wave induced by the mass energy conversion of 1kg of plutonium from the other side of the earth. If memory serves the signal of the latter should have been ~3 orders of magnitude higher. Using nukes to communicate is a bit intense, but a tuned receiver should be able to pick up lower energy levels.

> the gravitational wave induced by the mass energy conversion of 1kg of plutonium from the other side of the earth.

Did you take into account that in a process like this, virtually none of the energy released can be put into gravitational waves? The efficiency of such transmission is extremely low for processes involving ordinary matter--many orders of magnitude less efficient than for electromagnetic waves. You need huge quantities of matter to overcome this problem--or, alternatively, you need very dense matter, like neutronium, or strong spacetime curvature like that of a black hole (but not too large a hole, since curvature at the horizon goes like the inverse square of the hole's mass).

Re: Mathematicians confirm the possibility of data transfer via gravitational waves

#30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't that evaporate rather quickly? (Sure, Niven didn't know that _then_... but science has a habit of catching up to some stories.)

According to this... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation#A_crude_anal... "[F]or instance, a 1-second-life black hole has a mass of 2.28×10^5 kg", and the time taken seems proportional to the cube of the mass. So a 2.28×10^6 kg black hole would take 1000 seconds, and so on. How massive was the black hole in the story?

The story mentions "ten-to-the-seventeenth grams in mass and ten-to-the-minus-eleven centimeters across", but I'm not sure if that's the black hole in question, or a hypothetical one.

They definitely mention it being smaller than an atom, though.

Post reply on HN