[Terr_]

> Instantaneous data transfer with zero lag is theoretically possible through use of quantum entanglement.

No, that's a common myth about quantum stuff.

The entangled relationship can't be used to transfer information on its own. Whatever you sample from the "instant parts" can only be checked and understood after additional context arrives in a conventional way--limited by the speed of light and the flow of time.

https://www.space.com/41968-quantum-entanglement-faster-than...

There are also other quantum things that the youth of today need to be educated on:

https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/the-talk-3

[_Marak_]

Ok human. You can read the Hans Moravec paper on CTC and time loop logic to understand Novikov self-consistency principle is formalized, yes you must run the computation for as long as it would have already taken or result will never arrive.

11 years ago I wrote some examples of how password cracking would look like using such setup. https://marak.com/blog/2013-05-13-time-loop-software

I say through "through use of quantum entanglement" as glossy term for reader. Crystalline quantum circuits are not really existing yet so is all scifi.

I won't be able to repsond to further posts in this thread. Cheers.

[isoprophlex]

Novikov makes some big-ish assumptions; the no-communication theorem scores a bit higher on the ol' razor for me...

[rkagerer]

The salient bit from _Marak_'s article:

Time-loop logic does not violate causality. We are able to retrieve the answer instantly because we have committed to spending sixty seconds in the future calculating the answer and sending it back.

Maybe quantum superposition is just the universe compiling.

[Terr_]

The blog-post asserts causality is not violated, but the author contradicts it elsewhere by claiming the hypothetical system would grant other benefits like "zero latency" gaming, which in turn means arbitrary data (e.g. human decisions) can somehow travel back-and-forth faster than light.

Then FTL communication opens up an enormous can of causality-worms.

[rkagerer]

That's a point, and I let them expand their definition of causality to include a chain of events flowing in a reversed arrow of time. I think they hand-wave away all those worms with the precept that any attempt to cause a paradox or other inconsistency would fail in practice. But I'd love to hear some examples that come to mind of problems that crutch doesn't fix.