• 1 Post
  • 38 Comments
Joined 10 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 29th, 2025

help-circle



  • Mostly yes, but it wasn’t flawless. Those trackpads are quite loud (compared to the Deck), the ABXY buttons are a bit too small and awkwardly placed, and there are just many times that I want a second thumbstick. Also it lacks touch-to-engage for the gyro but that’s a newer invention.

    I think the most impressive innovation came from pairing it with Steam Input. That system is still wildly underappreciated; it’s what lets you turn the trackpads into things like custom radial menus.


  • [We’re not still playing OP’s game here, right? I’m keeping that to top-level comments only, so the rest is serious]

    So if the particles are entangled, then separated by a kilometer then the state of one particle is altered, the second particle is instantaneously altered

    That’s not how entanglement works. A pair of entangled particles (as a system) are in a superposition of states. When you measure the state of the near particle, the superposition collapses and you instantly know the far one has the opposite state.

    But you don’t get to “alter” or choose the state of either particle; the outcome of the collapse is random and you just have to measure it. If you tried to impose a particular state onto the system you would sever the delicate entanglement.

    Because of this, you have to encode information onto the system locally when the particles are first entangled, i.e. before you separate them. Note, the information couldn’t be stored directly in the quantum states, but rather in how you arrange a set of entangled particles (a simple data structure like an array would suffice).

    After separation by some distance, you observe the particle set on your side and read out the pattern of their states. As expected, that instantly tells you the remote pattern as well. However, by doing this you don’t actually learn anything new that you didn’t already know when the entangled particles were together locally in the first place!

    Logically you cannot do all the encoding/arranging work later when the particles are already far apart, because you would lack the information to create the same arrangement on both ends of the communication (necessary to read any message, like ordered letters in a word). As you say, you would need a secondary slower-than-light communication method to share that info, and that defeats the whole point.

    If it did work like you suggest where you can arbitrarily write data to your local particle set and have the entanglement transmit it remotely, then you wouldn’t need a secondary verification method at all. You would know your message was received because your faraway partner would reply via the same tech in a way that only makes sense if they read it (plus maybe a few parity bits for error correction).

    Unfortunately the entangled system is inherently too fragile for that scenario. Any meaningful perturbation (including measurement) collapses the necessary superposition at the heart of it. Yes that collapse can potentially reveal information, however it’s limited to info that was already known in a shared local past.






  • Also, entanglement isn’t slowed by a physical medium like wires or optical cables

    I mean, it’s still going to be slower than light because the only ways we know how particles can become entangled in the first place requires them to be in the same location (spacetime frame of reference). And then moving them apart is limited of course.

    I mean, I guess you could encode whatever information you want onto an arrangement of entangled particles and then somehow expand the empty space between the paired sets faster than light… But we don’t know how to do that yet. And besides, you could in principle do the same thing with a pair of matching mechanical hard drives or pieces of paper, so there’s nothing special about entanglement here in terms of data carriage.