You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

James_Miller comments on OPERA Confirms: Neutrinos Travel Faster Than Light - Less Wrong Discussion

10 Post author: XiXiDu 18 November 2011 09:58AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (63)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: James_Miller 18 November 2011 03:05:14PM 1 point [-]

Should we hope that the result is correct? (Please ignore the rationality problems caused by hoping for the universe to be structured in some preferred way.) Obviously, finding faster than light neutrinos makes the world more interesting but would it also mean that the laws of physics are more friendly to "beneficial technology" than we had previously believed? If you, and you alone, somehow knew that the result was correct and within a year the world would recognize this what if any stocks would you buy based on your private information?

Comment author: JoshuaZ 18 November 2011 03:12:14PM *  6 points [-]

If you, and you alone, somehow knew that the result was correct and within a year the world would recognize this what if any stocks would you buy based on your private information?

Unfortunately, this research is so preliminary that there's no obvious applications that are remotely plausible even under this assumption. Detecting neutrinos is really tough. This means that one a) is going to have a lot of trouble using this to send information faster than the speed of light with any substantial bandwith (and even then you would be getting only a small fractional improvement) b) in order to violate causality to solve computational problems you generally need to be able to send back in time a number of bits that is roughly linear with the length of your problem. It is remotely plausible that similar tricks can be done with fewer bits but if so, very little has been worked out that does that sort of thing in any useful fashion and the math looks tricky. And even if that does work, the infrastructure may be so large that it might not be worth it compared to just building large computers.

So the stocks that would make the most sense are simply companies that have anything to do with pure neutrino research because that is more likely to get more funding. So I'd look at what companies made the equipment for Gran Sasso, Kamiokande and IceCube and maybe buy stock in them. However, I strongly suspect that any company which is publicly traded and involved in these detectors is probably large enough that building components for neutrino research is very likely only a small segment of what they do. So even this would not be that helpful.

Comment author: gwern 18 November 2011 05:11:52PM 1 point [-]

Maybe it would just make more sense to invest in tech stocks in general. While one is not getting much of a speed up on each roundtrip, multiple roundtrips, doing a little calculation on each trip, sounds like a major engineering task and not a fundamental task. And if that works, then we get the usual speedup - NP to P or whatever the precise complexity class conversion is, which sounds very economically valuable and whomever maintained the FTL computer would be able to extract much of the surplus.

Comment author: FiftyTwo 18 November 2011 07:16:51PM 5 points [-]

If one is willing to be purely mercenary one would invest in the sort of publishers who will soon be selling books about 'Neutrino Astrology' in the same way they currently sell ones about 'quantum healing.'

Comment author: amcknight 18 November 2011 10:39:22PM 1 point [-]

If neutrinos are going back in time (which is only one possible explanation) then you might be able to create some pretty fancy things like Paradox Buttons that cannot be pressed and so won't be and so you can make "wishes" that the universe must satisfy... or the universe can stop you from making the button in the first place. There's a Yudkowsky video about this which he calls the Grandma Extraction Problem. Starts at the 19th minute.

Please ignore the rationality problems caused by hoping for the universe to be structured in some preferred way.

What wrong with hoping for the structure of the universe to be one way rather than another? I do it all the time.

Comment author: James_Miller 19 November 2011 04:34:09PM *  0 points [-]

What wrong with hoping for the structure of the universe to be one way rather than another? I do it all the time.

See the Litany of Tarski.