[joering2]

"Instead of traveling 10,000 miles or more via cable, it’s only 8,000 miles in a direct line through the center of the Earth."

8k vs 10k -- is it such a big difference? I see it more as cost efficient -- "powering up" 10k miles long cable may be more expensive than shooting a "beam" through the Earth.

[dalke]

People are building the Atlantic Fibre Optic Cable connecting Europe to the US, in part to reduce latency. The obvious question is, is someone willing to pay a LOT of money for a low-latency, low-bandwidth connection from Sydney to NYC? The Great Circle minimum time of light in fiber is 74.6ms, while neutrinos (which travel at almost the speed of light) going through the Earth's diameter take 42ms.

Thus, you could cut the time in half if you could use neutrinos.

[marvin]

Yeah, location arbitrage. There is no way to trade equities faster and on better information than if you're faster than everyone else. Having this 30ms advantage will give whomever has it a huge advantage.

[joering2]

+1. Thanks. Didnt see it this way.

[mrsebastian]

Well, the 10,000 miles is also through multiple routers -- and I think it's probably a lot more than 10k, once you factor in obstacles and landing points and stuff.

But yeah, it could also be more power efficient (assuming, of course, we find a way that doesn't require a few-mile particle accelerator to fire the neutrinos :)

[powertower]

Don't forget about all the repeaters/boosters, hardware, and networks that signal is going to propagate through (that’s going to slow it down at every point).

With a neutrino network, you just set it up to point to the receiver, and let the fabric of space-time do the rest.