I have always wanted to give this a try. I have this daft idea of implenting a system logically as an n-dimensional cube and physically on two facing surfaces (even and odd parity processor addresses) with laser connections between the processors. Perhaps it'll be one of my crazy project ideas that I can do in my retirement
IP over Lasers
51–60 of 83 posts
Re: IP over Lasers
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's right, the beam pointing problem is far harder when everything is moving.
Deterministic space dynamics vs chaotic fluid dynamics (or worse, as the sibling comment by eqvinox illustrates). Space is hard by many aspects, but on that part it's much easier than on earth.
Space dynamics are not that much deterministic. Gravity itself is kinda noisy (Earth isn't an ideal sphere with uniform density), there's the Moon, orbital decay (caused by drag from particles in low orbit, which is variable), solar radiation pressure (also variable), etc. Calculation of the dynamics will only give an approximate result, a prediction. They need constant measurement of the trajectories and frequent correction maneuvers (by ion engines). But yeah, I think that once the satellites accurately know each others trajectory, their movement shouldn't be a big issue for the lasers, as in the timespan of one laser connection it should be predictable with the required precision. And if both satellites would be on the same orbit, their relative movement should be ~0, so the laser beam ideally wouldn't move at all from the satellite's perspective, the angle would be constant.
Re: IP over Lasers
#53We know neolithic internet used free air lasers because we haven't found either optical fibre connectors or copper Ethernet in the trenches we dig at neolithic settlements.
Is this a jab at the people who believe Egyptians must have used electric lights because we can't figure out how they lit and ventilated their tombs at the same time during construction?
Re: IP over Lasers
#54We know neolithic internet used free air lasers because we haven't found either optical fibre connectors or copper Ethernet in the trenches we dig at neolithic settlements.
Is this a jab at the people who believe Egyptians must have used electric lights because we can't figure out how they lit and ventilated their tombs at the same time during construction?
It's a version of an englishman/irishman/Russian archeologist joke, one finds shards of glass (proves invented optics) one finds copper wire (ethernet) and one finds nothing (wifi, punchline)
Re: IP over Lasers
#55I don't know why, but I would have expected higher speeds. Maybe my mind just assumes "lasers = fast". It would be interesting to know which factors make this setup unreliable at higher speeds.
Most likely one of:
1. Noise in the detection (the room is bright etc.)
2. The laser being a form that's not susceptible to direct modulation (if it takes a millisecond to start/stop lasing, obviously you cannot turn it on/off very fast)
Re: IP over Lasers
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not quite the same thing as doing it in an atmosphere.
That's right, the beam pointing problem is far harder when everything is moving.
Bizarre take.
Atmospheric scintillation is the barrier for free space laser communications on terra-firma; this is one reason we enclose the laser light in optical fibre to avoid this problem.
In space where nobody can hear you scream, scintillation isn't a problem.
Re: IP over Lasers
#57I want to see the actual laser beams while transmitting those packets.
Re: IP over Lasers
#58Isn't fiber broadband exactly this? It's shooting a laser through a fiber optic cable.
[deleted]
Re: IP over Lasers
#59None of this is remotely new or interesting. I was doing IP-over-laser-light at Ethernet speeds over kilometer distances using free-space optics thirty years ago, and even then it wasn't a new technology.
Re: IP over Lasers
#60Why is the ping worse than connecting to a remote shack in Mongolia?