Comment Re:NOT 140 years late (Score 3, Informative) 183
It won't take but a second for you to stop guessing that it's about polarization once you see their clear explanation that it's different.
It won't take but a second for you to stop guessing that it's about polarization once you see their clear explanation that it's different.
They're using physics that wasn't even discovered until 1992.
This is about modulating the orbital angular momentum of photons, a property that wasn't even discovered until 1992.
Each photon can have an integer quantity of orbital angular momentum (0, 1, 2, 3...) without obvious limit (or in the opposite direction, -1, -2, -3...). In principle, and increasingly in experiment, it is possible to encode information by modulating the orbital angular momentum carried. This provides and entirely separate channel with its own bandwidth in addition to traditionally understood modulation. They're right to be excited about it; it has the potential of being just as big in scope as was the invention of radio.
Am I missing something? These guys are proposing polarizing wireless transmissions.
Yes, you are, and no, they aren't.
This is about modulating the orbital angular momentum of photons, a property that wasn't even discovered until 1992.
Each photon can have an integer quantity of orbital angular momentum (0, 1, 2, 3...) without obvious limit (or in the opposite direction, -1, -2, -3...). In principle, and increasingly in experiment, it is possible to encode information by modulating the orbital angular momentum carried. This provides and entirely separate channel with its own bandwidth in addition to traditionally understood modulation. They're right to be excited about it; it has the potential of being just as big in scope as was the invention of radio.
To write good code is a worthy challenge, and a source of civilized delight. -- stolen and paraphrased from William Safire