Teleportation

[XboxJosh]

Stargate, anyone?

I think teleportation would be a good tech, if balanced correctly. I'd think it'd have to be deep in T3, though.. After all the research upgrades, perhaps...

[Zarel]

It was confirmed scientifically in 1993 & has been demonstrated through independent experiments a number of times since. The underlying scientific principle was first articulated the 1930s and is known as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) entanglement and part of the 1993 effort was also making a robustly logical end run around Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.

Entanglement isn't teleportation. Entanglement doesn't even violate the c-limit on information transfer (the law of physics I'm thinking of), since it's impossible to transfer information using entanglement, much less matter.

[DTSX]

You know, even though all of you are claiming that "it doesn't fit" with the rest of the game's technology, let's look at what you have:

1. A giant laser satellite
2. Cyborgs
3. Said Cyborgs with functioning, mobile rail guns
4. Laser Cannons
5. Plasma Artillery
6. Mass Fabricator

- With all of that, I don't think you should say "it doesn't fit" cause really? If you can make a laser satellite and a rail gun that doesn't need to be plugged in, then you should have teleportation.

[Zarel]

1. A giant laser satellite

Lasers exist. Go ask a physicist.

2. Cyborgs

Humans in a high-tech bodysuit. Popularized in the book Starship Troopers, which is the inspiration for armor now used by the US military.

3. Said Cyborgs with functioning, mobile rail guns

Rail guns exist. Go ask a physicist. Making them "portable'" isn't that difficult, you just need a mobile energy source or energy storage. Heck, you might even be able to get away with wireless energy transfer.

4. Laser Cannons

Do not exist in Warzone.

5. Plasma Artillery

Plasma exists. Go ask a physicist.

Artillery exists. Go ask... anyone with a passing familiarity with weapons.

6. Mass Fabricator

Does not exist in Warzone.

Unless you're talking about trucks, in which case that's more nanotech than mass fabrication. Things to keep in mind:
- It's still actually possible.
- It's an acceptable break from reality since no one wants to spend a month building a factory for a game.

With all of that, I don't think you should say "it doesn't fit" cause really? If you can make a laser satellite and a rail gun that doesn't need to be plugged in, then you should have teleportation.

The difference is, those things are possible by the laws of physics, and at least vaguely plausible in the next hundred years. Teleportation is neither. It doesn't even make the game any more fun (you could do nearly the same thing with dropships).

[Rman Virgil]

It was confirmed scientifically in 1993 & has been demonstrated through independent experiments a number of times since. The underlying scientific principle was first articulated the 1930s and is known as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) entanglement and part of the 1993 effort was also making a robustly logical end run around Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.

Entanglement isn't teleportation. Entanglement doesn't even violate the c-limit on information transfer (the law of physics I'm thinking of), since it's impossible to transfer information using entanglement, much less matter.

You think I made this all up off the top of my head ?

The least you could have done if you disputed my statements was ask for the Primary Source Physics experiment peer-reviewed publications it was based upon. That is partly how RL Science is practiced, btw.

How thoroughly frackin arrogant of you, all the way around, to just assume I was full of chit. Not that it's any more consequential than a pesky gnat flitting on my forearm. Still, on principle alone.

Would a world class quantum physicist be hangin out here ? Maybe. Are you such ? And if so where are your experiments, data & peer reviewed papers disputing the C.H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Crepeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, and W. Wootters findings?

The 1993 paper from the Physics Review is called "Teleporting an Unknown Quantum State via Dual Classical and Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Channels" & there are subsequent independent experiments since '93 confirming these initial findings. Look 'em all up - Physics Review, Nature, Science News, Scientific American, etc... I didn't fabricate anything I posted to puff myself up. I merely stated some verifiable facts that were of interest & germane to the topic. That's it.

*Rman says a prayer* - "Oh Lord, if ever my self-worth devolves into being contingent on WZ BB postings, please strike me dead with a lightening bolt and end that pitiful existence... Amen."

- RV
.

[Zarel]

You think I made this all up off the top of my head ?

No, I don't dispute anything you say, so I have no need to ask for sources.

This whole thing stems from a misunderstanding of what entanglement is. Refer to Wikipedia:

"Quantum teleportation, or entanglement-assisted teleportation, is a technique used to transfer quantum information from one quantum system to another. It does not transport the system itself, nor does it allow communication of information at superluminal (faster than light) speed. Neither does it concern rearranging the particles of a macroscopic object to copy the form of another object."

Would a world class quantum physicist be hangin out here ? Maybe. Are you such ? And if so where are your experiments, data & peer reviewed papers disputing the C.H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Crepeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, and W. Wootters findings?

See, I don't dispute their findings at all. I'm clarifying that their findings in no way contradict the basic law that information and matter cannot be teleported.

It's true that I'm no world-class quantum physicist. I am, however, a math major who's taken courses in relativity and quantum mechanics, and so I believe I am at least qualified to explain common misconceptions of their work.

Quantum entanglement, like most of quantum mechanics, may be best explained with an analogy:

Say, you have two envelopes, one with a dollar in it, one with nothing in it. You give one envelope to Person A, and one envelope to Person B, mixing them up so you don't know which is which.

One day, Person A opens his envelope, and discovers that there's nothing inside it. He instantly knows that Person B's envelope contains a dollar bill, faster than Person B can tell him. However, no information is actually being transfered from Person B to Person A, and this scheme cannot be used to transfer either information nor matter superluminally.

Now, quantum mechanics is pretty much the exact same thing, except there's a lot more happening "behind the scenes" and wave functions collapsing. The results, though, are effectively the same: The fact that Person A instantly knows what's in Person B's envelope can't actually be used to transfer actual information from one person to another.

[Rman Virgil]

.

Here let me quote the abstract of the paper:

Quantum Teleportation

Teleportation is the name given by science fiction writers to the feat of making an object or person disintegrate in one place while a perfect replica appears somewhere else. How this is accomplished is usually not explained in detail, but the general idea seems to be that the original object is scanned in such a way as to extract all the information from it, then this information is transmitted to the receiving location and used to construct the replica, not necessarily from the actual material of the original, but perhaps from atoms of the same kinds, arranged in exactly the same pattern as the original.

A teleportation machine would be like a fax machine, except that it would work on 3-dimensional objects as well as documents, it would produce an exact copy rather than an approximate facsimile, and it would destroy the original in the process of scanning it. A few science fiction writers consider teleporters that preserve the original, and the plot gets complicated when the original and teleported versions of the same person meet; but the more common kind of teleporter destroys the original, functioning as a super transportation device, not as a perfect replicator of souls and bodies.

In 1993 an international group of six scientists, including IBM Fellow Charles H. Bennett, confirmed the intuitions of the majority of science fiction writers by showing that perfect teleportation is indeed possible in principle, but only if the original is destroyed. In subsequent years, other scientists have demonstrated teleportation experimentally in a variety of systems, including single photons, coherent light fields, nuclear spins, and trapped ions.

Teleportation promises to be quite useful as an information processing primitive, facilitating long range quantum communication (perhaps unltimately leading to a "quantum internet"), and making it much easier to build a working quantum computer. But science fiction fans will be disappointed to learn that no one expects to be able to teleport people or other macroscopic objects in the foreseeable future, for a variety of engineering reasons, even though it would not violate any fundamental law to do so.

In the past, the idea of teleportation was not taken very seriously by scientists, because it was thought to violate the uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics, which forbids any measuring or scanning process from extracting all the information in an atom or other object. According to the uncertainty principle, the more accurately an object is scanned, the more it is disturbed by the scanning process, until one reaches a point where the object's original state has been completely disrupted, still without having extracted enough information to make a perfect replica. This sounds like a solid argument against teleportation: if one cannot extract enough information from an object to make a perfect copy, it would seem that a perfect copy cannot be made. But the six scientists found a way to make an end run around this logic, using a celebrated and paradoxical feature of quantum mechanics known as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen effect.

In brief, they found a way to scan out part of the information from an object A, which one wishes to teleport, while causing the remaining, unscanned, part of the information to pass, via the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen effect, into another object C which has never been in contact with A. Later, by applying to C a treatment depending on the scanned-out information, it is possible to maneuver C into exactly the same state as A was in before it was scanned. A itself is no longer in that state, having been thoroughly disrupted by the scanning, so what has been achieved is teleportation, not replication.

As the figure to the left suggests, the unscanned part of the information is conveyed from A to C by an intermediary object B, which interacts first with C and then with A. What? Can it really be correct to say "first with C and then with A"? Surely, in order to convey something from A to C, the delivery vehicle must visit A before C, not the other way around. But there is a subtle, unscannable kind of information that, unlike any material cargo, and even unlike ordinary information, can indeed be delivered in such a backward fashion. This subtle kind of information, also called "Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) correlation" or "entanglement", has been at least partly understood since the 1930s when it was discussed in a famous paper by Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen.

In the 1960s John Bell showed that a pair of entangled particles, which were once in contact but later move too far apart to interact directly, can exhibit individually random behavior that is too strongly correlated to be explained by classical statistics. Experiments on photons and other particles have repeatedly confirmed these correlations, thereby providing strong evidence for the validity of quantum mechanics, which neatly explains them. Another well-known fact about EPR correlations is that they cannot by themselves deliver a meaningful and controllable message. It was thought that their only usefulness was in proving the validity of quantum mechanics. But now it is known that, through the phenomenon of quantum teleportation, they can deliver exactly that part of the information in an object which is too delicate to be scanned out and delivered by conventional methods.

This figure compares conventional facsimile transmission with quantum teleportation (see above). In conventional facsimile transmission the original is scanned, extracting partial information about it, but remains more or less intact after the scanning process. The scanned information is sent to the receiving station, where it is imprinted on some raw material (eg paper) to produce an approximate copy of the original. By contrast, in quantum teleportation, two objects B and C are first brought into contact and then separated. Object B is taken to the sending station, while object C is taken to the receiving station. At the sending station object B is scanned together with the original object A which one wishes to teleport, yielding some information and totally disrupting the state of A and B. The scanned information is sent to the receiving station, where it is used to select one of several treatments to be applied to object C, thereby putting C into an exact replica of the former state of A.

.

[Zarel]

Here let me quote the abstract of the paper:

That's not the abstract. This is the abstract:

• An unknown quantum state ‖φ〉 can be disassembled into, then later reconstructed from, purely classical information and purely nonclassical Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) correlations. To do so the sender, ‘‘Alice,’’ and the receiver, ‘‘Bob,’’ must prearrange the sharing of an EPR-correlated pair of particles. Alice makes a joint measurement on her EPR particle and the unknown quantum system, and sends Bob the classical result of this measurement. Knowing this, Bob can convert the state of his EPR particle into an exact replica of the unknown state ‖φ〉 which Alice destroyed.

What you've quoted is some sort of "layman's terms" article talking about the paper.

Both that article and the abstract say the same thing, though. What the Bennett paper describes as "teleportation" isn't superluminal teleportation. It's just a way to move a qbit from one place to another. A more sophisticated method of recording matter into information, sending the information, and reconstructing it into matter somewhere else.

It's not so much like teleporting a hammer as writing down "This is a hammer", sending that text somewhere else, and then at the destination reading it and saying "I need a hammer", and then getting a hammer from somewhere else.

[DTSX]

1st: Lasers exist, yes, but the pure militarization of a laser satellite? No. The size of the laser would have to be that of an entire building. With that logic, the laser cannon itself would need to be one that is capable of a few things: a continuously functioning booster system since the geosynchronous orbit would need to be hindered for the moment that it fires as well as moving to fly over the location. Because of that, in order to have such a booster system without any supplies means that it would use solar power to propel itself via solar wind sail. All of that is higher tech than we can currently produce.

2nd+3rd: Rail Guns require a decent amount of power, but seeing as the power suits themselves require a large amount of power, then you would need something capable of producing enough power for both systems, as well as being extremely compact. Also the term Cyborg doesn't imply power suits, as told via the game, they're synaptic link technology, meaning that the cyborg suit is directly connected with the thoughts of the person.

5th: Sure, plasma exists, but hurling flaming balls of plasma over long distances? It would need to be contained in a system that recreates the magnetic rope structure as well as having the capacity to release it at an exact moment. That system is something we clearly don't have.

[WarTux]

Interesting discussion going on here!

My take: teleportation still seems a bit high-tech for Warzone, and I agree with the reasons Zarel listed above. I'd much rather see vehicle transports.

[lav_coyote25]

Interesting discussion going on here!

My take: teleportation still seems a bit high-tech for Warzone, and I agree with the reasons Zarel listed above. I'd much rather see vehicle transports.

YES!!!!!!! now that would put the frosting on the ol cake fur shure. gotta luv transports.

[Rman Virgil]

Here let me quote the abstract of the paper:

That's not the abstract. This is the abstract:

• An unknown quantum state ‖φ〉 can be disassembled into, then later reconstructed from, purely classical information and purely nonclassical Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) correlations. To do so the sender, ‘‘Alice,’’ and the receiver, ‘‘Bob,’’ must prearrange the sharing of an EPR-correlated pair of particles. Alice makes a joint measurement on her EPR particle and the unknown quantum system, and sends Bob the classical result of this measurement. Knowing this, Bob can convert the state of his EPR particle into an exact replica of the unknown state ‖φ〉 which Alice destroyed.

What you've quoted is some sort of "layman's terms" article talking about the paper.

Both that article and the abstract say the same thing, though. What the Bennett paper describes as "teleportation" isn't superluminal teleportation. It's just a way to move a qbit from one place to another. A more sophisticated method of recording matter into information, sending the information, and reconstructing it into matter somewhere else.

It's not so much like teleporting a hammer as writing down "This is a hammer", sending that text somewhere else, and then at the destination reading it and saying "I need a hammer", and then getting a hammer from somewhere else.

Yes. I understand all that. And I should have called it a "Layman's Abstract"- I posted it instead of the briefer formal abstract for the fuller benefit of those with OUT a strong physics back-ground... woo-hoo.... you have thus invalidated the thrust of all I've posted.

I never mentioned "superluminal" in my original post because we were not talking "Star Gates" between galaxies - you brought it up - but I did make clear the difference between Micro & Macro Teleportation right here on Earth, the information distinction and the necessary destruction of the original.

I also have a grasp of Information Theory moving forward from Bell Lab's Claude Shannon's seminal paper in 1948 to its present state & the various branches of Quantum Information Theory as well the intersection of information, entropy, language and life - the connection to Epigenetics & Neo Darwinism as well (& so what, really). I'm not here for lessons on any of this though I do make a point of remaining open to learning anywhere, anytime, but I am also particular sensitive to claims of absolute knowledge in an ontological or epistemological sense. Any one familiar with Whitehead / Russell's "Principia Mathematica" and Kurt Godel's "Incompleteness Theorems" ?

I am not advocating the "official" embrace of Teleportation. I played Speedy's WZ 2100 with Teleportation many years ago & enjoyed it, I know how it works and how to make it into a mod for me and mine to enjoy if i so choose - don't need your sanction or anyone elses for any of this really.

Same with "Transport" drop-ships which I have specifically advocated for "Official" embrace the last 2 years but also do not need your sanction to make real for me and mine to enjoy playing with. The diff being that these have to be done with a changed binary and not simply through modding against your current binary. But I'm sure no one wants to revisit notions of forking

Ando9bviously BOTH these mechanics exist in the WZ 2100 Campaign; Drop Ships AND Teleportation of the Macro sort - it's called "Spawning".

And Trucks explained as utilizing Nano Bots still does not explain the Truck bed's endless source "Matter" of raw material or it's possible use of the surrounding "dirt" and its conversion into manufactured materials or it's possible use of energy-matter conversion. Trucks are probably the most far-fetched Sci Fi aspect of WZ. But so what. It's just a game for fun and the use of the artistic narrative trope device called "Applied Phlebotinum" has been an accepted & powerfully effective technique not just in vid-comp game creation but Sci Fi artistry in print, broadcast and cinematic creations for generations.

- RV

.

[Zarel]

Yes. I understand all that. And I should have called it a "Layman's Abstract"- I posted it instead of the briefer formal abstract for the fuller benefit of those with OUT a strong physics back-ground... woo-hoo.... you have thus invalidated the thrust of all I've posted.

I'm unsure if "abstract" is the right term for that.

I never mentioned "superluminal" in my original post because we were not talking "Star Gates" between galaxies - you brought it up - but I did make clear the difference between Micro & Macro Teleportation right here on Earth, the information distinction and the necessary destruction of the original.

I think I made it clear that I defined teleportation to be superluminal transportation. 'Cause, otherwise, I do a lot of teleporting; I call it walking.

Anyway, in the context of this discussion, my entire point was that the sort of teleportation depicted in StarCraft isn't possible under the laws of physics as currently depicted, and while I guess that's not entirely true and there are ways to explain teleportation, StarCraft also depicts things like psychic powers, which are unambiguously impossible.

Which brings us to a more core point, that teleportation is significantly less plausible than most of the things in Warzone, except maybe trucks, which we as consensus have decided is an acceptable break from reality.

Which brings us to the most important point, that teleportation would feel out-of-place in Warzone.

I am not advocating the "official" embrace of Teleportation. I played Speedy's WZ 2100 with Teleportation many years ago & enjoyed it, I know how it works and how to make it into a mod for me and mine to enjoy if i so choose - don't need your sanction or anyone elses for any of this really.

Whoa, you sound a bit irritated. :/

Same with "Transport" drop-ships which I have specifically advocated for "Official" embrace the last 2 years but also do not need your sanction to make real for me and mine to enjoy playing with. The diff being that these have to be done with a changed binary and not simply through modding against your current binary. But I'm sure no one wants to revisit notions of forkin.

And I've advocated that, too. I see no reason to fork. If you feel like writing a patch, I can commit it.

[JDW]

I am not advocating the "official" embrace of Teleportation. I played Speedy's WZ 2100 with Teleportation many years ago & enjoyed it, I know how it works and how to make it into a mod for me and mine to enjoy if i so choose - don't need your sanction or anyone elses for any of this really.

Whoa, you sound a bit irritated. :/

Nah, I think RV is just trying to make a valid point for everybody's consideration. He is right though. IMHO, he's trying to encourage more gamers to implement their ideas/feature requests themselves and submit them as patches if they think it's worth having in the base game. After all, that's how open source works.

Some wise words by Dave Thomas on Open Source (For those who are not aware: Warzone2100 is open source since a long time now),

Scratching your own itch

The Open Source world embraced this mantra a long time ago — they call it "scratching your own itch." For the open source developers, it means they get the tools they want, delivered the way they want them. But the benefit goes much deeper.

As the designer or developer of a new application, you're faced with hundreds of micro-decisions each and every day: blue or green? One table or two? Static or dynamic? Abort or recover? How do we make these decisions? If it's something we recognize as being important, we might ask. The rest, we guess. And all that guessing builds up a kind of debt in our applications — an interconnected web of assumptions.

As a developer, I hate this. The knowledge of all these small-scale timebombs in the applications I write adds to my stress. Open Source developers, scratching their own itches, don't suffer this. Because they are their own users, they know the correct answers to 90% of the decisions they have to make. I think this is one of the reasons folks come home after a hard day of coding and then work on open source: It's relaxing.

—Dave Thomas, The Pragmatic Programmers

http://gettingreal.37signals.com/ch02_W ... roblem.php

[Rman Virgil]

Yes. I understand all that. And I should have called it a "Layman's Abstract"- I posted it instead of the briefer formal abstract for the fuller benefit of those with OUT a strong physics back-ground... woo-hoo.... you have thus invalidated the thrust of all I've posted.

I'm unsure if "abstract" is the right term for that.

An abstract is a brief summary of a research article - the original is 8 pages, what I posted considerable less and sans formula for the layman

I never mentioned "superluminal" in my original post because we were not talking "Star Gates" between galaxies - you brought it up - but I did make clear the difference between Micro & Macro Teleportation right here on Earth, the information distinction and the necessary destruction of the original.

I think I made it clear that I defined teleportation to be superluminal transportation. 'Cause, otherwise, I do a lot of teleporting; I call it walking.

"Faster-than-light (also superluminal or FTL) communications and travel refer to the propagation of information or matter faster than the speed of light."

Sub-light covers a broad spectrum of transport on the planet Earth besides walking.

Anyway, in the context of this discussion, my entire point was that the sort of teleportation depicted in StarCraft isn't possible under the laws of physics as currently depicted, and while I guess that's not entirely true and there are ways to explain teleportation, StarCraft also depicts things like psychic powers, which are unambiguously impossible.

You need to brush up on the latest scientific research into psychic powers.

Which brings us to a more core point, that teleportation is significantly less plausible than most of the things in Warzone, except maybe trucks, which we as consensus have decided is an acceptable break from reality.

Artistry has trumped plausibility since the dawn of consciousness.

Which brings us to the most important point, that teleportation would feel out-of-place in Warzone.

Perhaps for some.

I am not advocating the "official" embrace of Teleportation. I played Speedy's WZ 2100 with Teleportation many years ago & enjoyed it, I know how it works and how to make it into a mod for me and mine to enjoy if i so choose - don't need your sanction or anyone elses for any of this really.

Whoa, you sound a bit irritated. :/

Hmmm. Yes and no. No on this matter - yes on others.

Same with "Transport" drop-ships which I have specifically advocated for "Official" embrace the last 2 years but also do not need your sanction to make real for me and mine to enjoy playing with. The diff being that these have to be done with a changed binary and not simply through modding against your current binary. But I'm sure no one wants to revisit notions of forkin.

And I've advocated that, too. I see no reason to fork. If you feel like writing a patch, I can commit it.

I can only offer what is strictly my work alone. This is not and those I play & collab with outside of this community do not want any of their work submitted to this project. Though we have the game itself in common there is a vast cultural-values chasm that is likely to never be bridged in much the same way that the Klan would never convince Mahatma Gandhi to lend a hand in a lynching.

I am not advocating the "official" embrace of Teleportation. I played Speedy's WZ 2100 with Teleportation many years ago & enjoyed it, I know how it works and how to make it into a mod for me and mine to enjoy if i so choose - don't need your sanction or anyone elses for any of this really.

Whoa, you sound a bit irritated. :/

Nah, I think RV is just trying to make a valid point for everybody's consideration. He is right though. IMHO, he's trying to encourage more gamers to implement their ideas/feature requests themselves and submit them as patches if they think it's worth having in the base game. After all, that's how open source works.

Some wise words by Dave Thomas on Open Source (For those who are not aware: Warzone2100 is open source since a long time now),

Scratching your own itch

The Open Source world embraced this mantra a long time ago — they call it "scratching your own itch." For the open source developers, it means they get the tools they want, delivered the way they want them. But the benefit goes much deeper.

As the designer or developer of a new application, you're faced with hundreds of micro-decisions each and every day: blue or green? One table or two? Static or dynamic? Abort or recover? How do we make these decisions? If it's something we recognize as being important, we might ask. The rest, we guess. And all that guessing builds up a kind of debt in our applications — an interconnected web of assumptions.

As a developer, I hate this. The knowledge of all these small-scale timebombs in the applications I write adds to my stress. Open Source developers, scratching their own itches, don't suffer this. Because they are their own users, they know the correct answers to 90% of the decisions they have to make. I think this is one of the reasons folks come home after a hard day of coding and then work on open source: It's relaxing.

—Dave Thomas, The Pragmatic Programmers

http://gettingreal.37signals.com/ch02_W ... roblem.php

Yes. This is an accurate read of an aspect of my disposition.

The culture of sloth and entitlement does irritate me to no end.

- RV

.