Talk:Ansible

The Fortress at the End of Time
This book, by Joe M. McDermott, uses the term ansible frequently. One example: "A new tech was ordered from the network ansibles; a new recruit from Earth would be called to this miserable station." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Infimprob (talk • contribs) 00:04, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

absolutely not "a category of fictional device"
Now that entanglement is an accepted component of quantum mechanics {https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement} and it has been done in a controlled environment {https://arxiv.org/pdf/1609.07459.pdf} the development of Ansible communication is only a mater of coherence time, id like the page to be in line with this reality and not have it called "a category of fictional device" But I see the page has been updated within the last three days so in case someone else want the honers. If the above comment is any indication this change has been needing to happen sense 2008 so your over a decade late anyway. I would be very disappointed if there is some agenda being pushed here. Wikipedia is used in schools you know... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.113.179.182 (talk) 03:18, 10 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I do not know enough about it myself to explain why, but the consensus of mainstream physicists is that faster-than-light communication cannot be accomplished via quantum entanglement, even though entanglement does involve "nonlocal" correlations that seem like they cannot be explained in any other way. See the no-communication theorem article. Elwoz (talk) 20:19, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

References for "theoretical" non-fictional ansibles
Having contacted the author of ref 1 he maintains {publicly, see his twitter} the description as outlined in ref 1 is accurate to the work of Le Guin, being most clearly illustrated in the Dispossessed
 * ref 1

Clearly holds information can be communicated between entangled particles
 * ref 3

Is deep, It not only shows how you can have entangled networks, it should be enough that most students could create their own entanglement based communication.
 * ref 4

ref 1 the form the tech must take to be called Ansible by Le Guins standards. Ref 3 we can communicate as described. ref 4 you can see for yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.113.179.182 (talk) 20:54, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * refs don't mean that!


 * Notwithstanding the cited references, the content (now reverted) that was added to the lead constitutes original research and synthesis. When a Wikipedia editor personally contacts the author of a reference, and relies on that contact, that clearly violates Wikipedia's policy on WP:OR. The rest of the statements above do not establish compliance with Wikipedia policy; they are an individual editor's own analysis of the sources, which is personal opinion. A statement that "most students could create their own entanglement based communication" doesn't help establish credibility. Lwarrenwiki (talk) 22:42, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

I never specified on the wiki side that the Dispossessed was the main source of the description and the article stands on its own to make clear that ansible as imagined by Le Guin is entanglement based communication. The supplementary information was acquired separately, without mention of my use for it and for myself so calm your tits and learn to read.

There is a lot in that reference to establish credibility as i said "its deep" and honestly if any student of quantum computing could do it themselves what more proof do you need that it can be done?

If your policy is so shitty that you can't fix whats clearly wrong your the problem... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.113.168.165 (talk) 12:20, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Is this really how you want your sources?

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/china-shatters-ldquo-spooky-action-at-a-distance-rdquo-record-preps-for-quantum-internet/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.113.168.165 (talk) 12:29, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Like this? https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/quantum-spookiness-passes-toughest-test-yet/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.113.168.165 (talk) 12:32, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Also let me hold that any "synthesis" is of a mathematical nature and ask you get someone else in here who can go into the provided engine or another to see for themselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.113.168.165 (talk) 13:09, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

shits been around for years and people have tried to point it out. sorry you think this is a game. https://www.nature.com/news/quantum-spookiness-passes-toughest-test-yet-1.18255?WT.mc_id=TWT_NatureNews — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.113.168.165 (talk) 13:12, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

seriously https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318207645_Ground-to-satellite_quantum_teleportation — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.113.168.165 (talk) 13:25, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Other writers
The introductory sentence to "Other writers" does not make clear whether the writers cited all use the word "ansible" to refer to their FTL comm technologies. They should be checked to make sure they use the word itself, only those that do should be listed, and the introductory sentence should be revised to make that clear. Elizabeth Moon, for example, uses the word in her Vatta's War series, but I don't know (yet) whether she does in Winning Colors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hieronymus Illinensis (talk • contribs) 17:04, 27 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Not only does she use it in Winning Colors, she uses it all through the series taking place in the Familias Regnant universe. JDZeff (talk) 22:56, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Philip Pullman, in the 2000 novel The Amber Spyglass...,
 * I can't seem to recall where in that novel anyone uses an FTL comm device. It would've helped if the person who included the reference had cited which character(s) and in what place the device had allegedly been used.
 * Nuttyskin (talk) 10:30, 18 May 2024 (UTC)