Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

gaardsund t1_iu66j8o wrote

It is quite facinating when you think about it!
Also that you can connect two side of the globe faster sending a signal via space (starlink for example) than fiber optics underground even though the distance is greater.

79

SpaceWanderer22 t1_iu68i4d wrote

Simply because of light traveling slower in fiber optics than a vacuum?

If you cut straight through the earth, that would. Change the equation.

21

PandaCL t1_iu6ht27 wrote

That would be hella expensive

17

SpaceWanderer22 t1_iu6j5eo wrote

I wonder at what point in the future it will be even possible? Probanly quite a long time. Right now, even if the entire GDP of earth was funneled into it, I'm sure they wouldn't be able to do it.

10

rumbake t1_iu6jlkm wrote

It'd never be done, pretty sure you'd possibly screw up the magnetic fields around earth in some way. Also we never know if the magma sharks have lasers, considering the undersea cable was attacked by sharks we can't take this risk.

23

madsci t1_iu75nlw wrote

Short answer, no.

A quick Google search tells me that the lithostatic pressure in the lower mantle is something like 24 gigapascals, and the strongest high-performance concrete in the world can handle 1% of that.

And that's not even considering the temperature, which starts at around 1000 C.

4

SpaceWanderer22 t1_iu76a4f wrote

Plus the inner core is a 1500 mile diameter sphere of a solid iron alloy.

At some point it'll probably be possible, but I'd imagine that's pretty far future territory.

4

madsci t1_iu76wbb wrote

If we ever get to that point, I suspect we'll already be building planet-scale megastructures and won't have any need to be boring holes through the Earth.

4

SpaceWanderer22 t1_iu77hqx wrote

Agreed, why drill a difficult hole when you could build a Dyson sphere? My main point was just considering what level of technology it would require to actually accomplish the feat.

It is possible though that some unexpected mechanism would make it more feasible than expected, and communication straight through the planet would have some serious benefits. Especially if it was a straight hole, and light was sent directly through it, without even using a fiber optic cable.

1

madsci t1_iu75ti3 wrote

Because of the speed of light. In fiber optics it moves at something like 70% of the speed it does in a vacuum.

Maybe someday we can use neutrinos for communication and not worry about having the Earth in the way.

3

SpaceWanderer22 t1_iu775i7 wrote

Interesting discussion of neutrino communication: https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/199606/is-neutrino-based-communication-possible

2

madsci t1_iu7ak1z wrote

Interesting, thanks! That's really impressive. If they could get it to a reasonable size, 0.1 bits/second still has real value for a use case like nuclear submarines when you just need to say "fire ze missiles" or "surface and establish a high-bandwidth connection".

3

gaardsund t1_iu6nl8w wrote

Yes excatly, apparently quite a lot faster in vaccum!

1

rpsls t1_iu8a6rv wrote

Also because on the ground you need more switches to route around everything, while in space you can theoretically do it in fewer satellite-to-satellite hops.

1

DM_Me_For_Dog_Pics t1_iu6k6sm wrote

So does a tape recorder placed inside of a Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor.

20

Gr8fulFox t1_iu6u0x5 wrote

That's always been true with radio; if you listen to a live concert broadcast, you're hearing the sound from your radio before many people in the venue have had a chance for the sound to even reach them.

20

needlenozened t1_iu81byr wrote

I have no idea what this means.

A mobile you that you hang from the ceiling different dangly things on it? What does it have to do with sound?

4

SweetNeo85 t1_iu9dg0u wrote

OP must not be American. I know English, probably Australians and otherss as well, call their cell phones "mobiles", with a long I sound. Like mobe-isle. I was confused at first as well.

1

ItsFrit t1_iu6sces wrote

Technically it’s the digital signal that travels the vast majority of the distance, but that’s just being pedantic

2

VoUHcW t1_iu89thz wrote

I had the same thought when I bought eDrums. The sound you get in headphones reaches your ears quicker then actual sound coming from the hit itself.

2

katycake t1_iu8lymr wrote

That's not true. You're sitting right next to it.

1

VoUHcW t1_iu8n1ge wrote

With my arm extended the distance from farther cymbal is 1.5 m, which gives 1.5 / 345 = 4ms. Roland eDrums have about 2.5 ms latency.

3

katycake t1_iu8nr5v wrote

Oh, in milliseconds perhaps. I was thinking of more an actual perceivable by ear difference.

1

Showerthoughts_Mod t1_iu5ml6t wrote

This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.

Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"

(For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, please read this page.)

Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.

1