Re: [Starlink] The "reasons" that bufferbloat isn't a problem

[Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>]

Le 05/06/2024 à 16:46, David Fernández via Starlink a écrit :
> "quantum entanglement may be a path to beat the speed of light"
>
> It seems that is not going anywhere. Maybe better warp drives.
>
> Faster than light comms as a target for 7G mentioned here:
> https://imageio.forbes.com/specials-images/imageserve/653fee7b042dc92df0919930/MnM-Trends-Wheel/960x0.jpg?format=jpg&width=1440 
> <https://imageio.forbes.com/specials-images/imageserve/653fee7b042dc92df0919930/MnM-Trends-Wheel/960x0.jpg?format=jpg&width=1440>

That is a physics limitations - faster than light comms.

But it does not mean that because some people claim breaking physics 
barriers that the same effects can not be achieved differently.

It is possible to achieve ever lower latencies and higher bandwidths 
with talking about faster-than-light.

>
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarwantsingh/2023/10/30/the-mega-trends-that-will-shape-our-future-world

Thanks for the paper.

It claims that in year 2040 people use 6G, but I doubt so.  6G will be 
nearing to disappear (as 3G is today), 7G largely deployed and research 
happening on 8G and 9G.

6G will be deployed before year 2030 for all.

A G has a typical lifetime of less than 10 years, from research to 
deployment.  The initial Gs had a longer lifetime and recent Gs have a 
shorter lifetime.

Alex

>
> So, maybe that means that 6G will be the last G, after all, as faster 
> than light comms seem to be impossible, because paradoxes could be 
> created.
>
> The end of comms engineering could be in the horizon of our lifetime.
>
>
> Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 07:16:16 -0700 (PDT)
> From: David Lang <david@lang.hm>
> To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
> Cc: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>, starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
> Subject: Re: [Starlink] The "reasons" that bufferbloat isn't a problem
> Message-ID: <1r928s39-s5o3-q44n-804n-11ro432210s8@ynat.uz>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
>
> Alexandre Petrescu wrote:
>
> > Le 05/06/2024 à 15:40, Gert Doering a écrit :
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 03:28:45PM +0200, Alexandre Petrescu via 
> Starlink
> > wrote:
> >>> well, ok.  One day the satcom latency will be so low that we will 
> not have
> >>> enough requirements for its use :-)
> >> Your disbelief in physics keeps amazing me :-)
> >
> > sorry :-)  Rather than simply 'satcom' I should have said
> > satcom-haps-planes-drones.  I dont have a name for that.
>
> you would be better off with plans that don't require beating the 
> speed of
> light. Yes, quantum entanglement may be a path to beat the speed of 
> light, but
> you still need the electronics to handle it, and have the speed of 
> sound at
> temperatures and pressures that humans can live at as a restriction.
>
> by comparison to your 1ms latency goals, extensive AT&T phone testing 
> decades
> ago showed that 100ms was the threshold where people could start to 
> detect a
> delay.
>
> David Lang
>
> _______________________________________________
> Starlink mailing list
> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink