[ttol]

This is super interesting. Right now we are limited by communication due to latency from speed of light. With quantum entanglement, does that mean no latency over great distances? Or is there a latency involved, even in quantum entanglement?

[Florin_Andrei]

To perform any communication via entanglement, you're required to also have a regular, (sub-)luminal side-channel, otherwise it doesn't work.

So, no, instantaneous communication is not possible according to current science.

[zem]

no, there's a theorem that states you cannot use quantum entanglement for communication: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-communication_theorem

[Filligree]

With one exception, you could use them for a synchronised random number generator.

It's not as useful as you'd hope, since a cryptographic PRNG theoretically does the same thing (and you need to individually transport the bits ahead-of-time), but you can at least be sure the numbers are random and no-one is spying. Whether or not that counts as communication is up to you.

[ucho]

Having quantum entangled particles stored in some crystal sounds better than requiring direct optical cable connection between peers for some kinds of quantum computer resistant communication.

[vinceguidry]

You still need direct connection and you still need to do key exchange. Whether you're exchanging keys or quantum particles for the purpose of generating keys is immaterial for the purposes of security.

[Keyframe]

You mean you would want to entangle two particles, move them apart over great distance and then use them to signal information, more or less instanteniously? That would not work.