Real-time faster-than-light communications question

[noamineo]

Not technically a homework question, but I thought this would be as good a place as any to ask. I'm a science fiction writer working on a new novel that centers around a near-future manned mission to mars. I've been attempting to make it as realistic as possible, but I've hit a bit of a snag. As you know, current technology does not allow for real-time communications with a ship in orbit around Mars, according to my research at best you'd get about a 3 to 8 minute time delay.

 

While I could work around this if I had to, I'd actually really like to have real-time communications. Now as I said, this is near-future, so I am allowed some technological leeway, but for my purposes I need something that is at least plausible and scientifically sound.

 

So, is there anything in the world of science today that could possibly lead to faster-than-light communications in say the next ten or twenty years? At least some concept that doesn't just spit in the face of our current understanding of physics?

[Spyman]

Current understanding of physics is ruled by the theory of relativity which states that nothing can pass through space faster than light, AFAIK there is no new understanding or possible concept that could change this in the next twenty or even fifty years.

 

However I think most common people wrongly believes that faster than light communication using quantum entanglement could work, so unless you have decided that everything must be scientific accurate, you could use some kind of syncronized quantum devices.

 

Quantum entanglement is a physical phenomenon that occurs when pairs or groups of particles are generated or interact in ways such that the quantum state of each particle cannot be described independently - instead, a quantum state may be given for the system as a whole.

/snip/

According to the formalism of quantum theory, the effect of measurement happens instantly. It is not possible, however, to use this effect to transmit classical information at faster-than-light speeds (see Faster-than-light → Quantum mechanics).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement

 

Certain phenomena in quantum mechanics, such as quantum entanglement, might give the superficial impression of allowing communication information faster than light. According to the no-communication theorem these phenomena do not allow true communication; they only let two observers in different locations see the same system simultaneously, without any way of controlling what either sees.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light#Quantum_mechanics

Edited April 17, 2014 by Spyman

[swansont]

IOW, if you try to use entanglement you might bamboozle some readers but anyone with physics chops will deride it as a clumsy (and misguided) effort.

 

There is no method by which you can get FTL communication without contradicting known physics, i.e. you cannot set the story in our present universe.

[imatfaal]

proto-wormhole technology? - further to the above that present knowledge shows that you just cannot have ftl communication technology. wormholes are on the verge of hypothetical physics; you could explain that research into wormholes was on the point of being abandoned as the energy cost of a wormhole that a single atom could pass through was equivalent to the usage of a large continent but hen some bright spark realised that the operational noise made at one end of the device was replicated at the other. The information was travelling the length of the wormhole in under ftl speeds - but in real space the distance between the ends of the wormhole was orders of magnitude greater than the length

[noamineo]

I don't want to try to get into wormholes, just a bit too far out there to fit into my "our technology, but maybe a few steps ahead" setting.

 

Same goes for quantum entanglement. Some of the technology I'm using might not work well in practice but it at least works on paper. That's more or less the bar we're trying to cross, here. If its the sort of thing that doesn't actually work then I don't want to use it.

 

Thanks for the replies! I will work around the time-delay for the sake of realism.

[Sensei]

according to my research at best you'd get about a 3 to 8 minute time delay.

 

I don't think so it's correct value.

 

Earth can be at aphelium 152.1 mln km from Sun, and Mars can be at it's own aphelium 249.3 mln km but on reverse side of Sun.

(152.1+249.3)/0.299792458 = ~1338.7 seconds = 22 minutes 18 seconds.

(signal can't pass through Sun, so it's just theoretical. We would have to take into account also orbital inclination)

 

Of course it's theoretical the worst est situation, when distance is the furthest.

[noamineo]

Of course it's theoretical the worst est situation, when distance is the furthest.

 

That 3 to 8 minutes was based on the closest distance, I believe(if I am remembering my research correctly) under the best of all possible conditions it can be as little as 3-4 minutes, and at worst closer to your 22-23. My statement of 3-8 was based on a very rough ballpark assuming they arrive when conditions are best and staye for around 3 months.

 

From a narrative standpoint, 1 minute is the same as 20 or 30. Basically, if real-time contact is not possible, it doesn't really matter what the exact duration of the delay is, I still have to write around "Some time passed while they waited for a response." While it would certainly be fun to get all of the fine details textbook-accurate, I don't think enough readers will appreciate it. Just getting a rough approximation of the time-delay should be good.

[vampares]

If light was communicating with light it would cut time in half. I am drawing this theory from the concept that if the two points of communication were moving towards each other technically it is fast than than it would have been otherwise. It may be trivial but given 3-8 minutes you could move several hundred, maybe a few thousand, miles.