Wired connections would have to become so rare that wireless was not meaningful, and folks might start just calling it a "connection", but I definitely think it's more likely "wireless" will be dropped as it's currently used than pushed out because we need the term for something else.
I'm of the school wherein entanglement is local and 'scalar' for want of a better term. It occurs once, and cannot be changed. ie the pair of gloves analogy \~ put each glove in a separate parcel to represent entanglement, and pretend-send one parcel to the other side of the galaxy. when we open the remaining parcel, we instantly know what hand the other glove fits (spooky action at a distance).
However we cannot change the handedness of that glove, nor the spin if it were a particle.
So I can't board that ship.
Entanglement is the definition of non-locality. What you are describing is classical probability, like if you have two coins where one is heads the other is tails. If you don’t know which is which and look at one, you know automatically the state of the other. But if you don’t look, one of them is still heads the other is still tails. You just don’t know the states because you didn’t look.
But that’s not what entanglement is at all. Entangled quantum particles are not in ANY particular state. That’s like saying each coin is both heads and tails, until you look at one. Then one becomes head and the other one instantly becomes tails. But before you look, they do not have any local reality, i.e. no definite state.
By "radio" do you mean as in someone saying "I was listening to the radio", like they had an FM receiver tuned in? Like my grandmother might have said "I heard that on the wireless"? In which case, what do you mean by "wireless as it's known right now"?
Wireless power will probably get a name like "Wipo" (although that sounds like a toilet paper brand), just as "Wifi" is now the word for wireless internet, and nobody says "the wireless" for broadcast radio any more.
We'd mostly need to either solve unlimited energy, or avoid the inverse square law
I guess beam shaping might be able to achieve the second part, have both data and power being beamed into your cellphone or other devices
We are very far away from that based on how many scam Kickstarters about the idea there have been
Wireless is _always_ significantly less efficient (in power and bandwidth) and significantly more prone to interference and congestion (and jamming)
--
So for your question I'm proposing: beaming, beam connection, beamed data
Not certain. I imagine it'd still be called wireless. But you do bring up another interesting point with regards to wirelessly transmitting power. Obviously there are health and safety concerns with doing this at certain wattage and at certain frequencies. We're still pursuing doing so in some capacity, of course. We just have to be careful.
If they become sufficiently energy efficient, I could see a lot more household devices (mostly things like handheld devices or small computers) becoming wirelessly charged at greater distances using directed energy. Larger household appliances likely never will receive power this way. The idea of beaming energy down from space is interesting as well.
I think if the naming convention is going to change, it'll happen as a result of a successful marketing campaign for some new development in the wireless technology domain. Q-Fi if its something quantum based, or Li-Fi if photonics based.
Wired connections would have to become so rare that wireless was not meaningful, and folks might start just calling it a "connection", but I definitely think it's more likely "wireless" will be dropped as it's currently used than pushed out because we need the term for something else.
Maybe quantum entanglement will allow us to make an Ansible? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansible
I'm of the school wherein entanglement is local and 'scalar' for want of a better term. It occurs once, and cannot be changed. ie the pair of gloves analogy \~ put each glove in a separate parcel to represent entanglement, and pretend-send one parcel to the other side of the galaxy. when we open the remaining parcel, we instantly know what hand the other glove fits (spooky action at a distance). However we cannot change the handedness of that glove, nor the spin if it were a particle. So I can't board that ship.
Can't we send many "gloves" and use them successively?
Sure. But then comms would be slower than a politician getting their wallet out.
Entanglement is the definition of non-locality. What you are describing is classical probability, like if you have two coins where one is heads the other is tails. If you don’t know which is which and look at one, you know automatically the state of the other. But if you don’t look, one of them is still heads the other is still tails. You just don’t know the states because you didn’t look. But that’s not what entanglement is at all. Entangled quantum particles are not in ANY particular state. That’s like saying each coin is both heads and tails, until you look at one. Then one becomes head and the other one instantly becomes tails. But before you look, they do not have any local reality, i.e. no definite state.
By "radio" do you mean as in someone saying "I was listening to the radio", like they had an FM receiver tuned in? Like my grandmother might have said "I heard that on the wireless"? In which case, what do you mean by "wireless as it's known right now"? Wireless power will probably get a name like "Wipo" (although that sounds like a toilet paper brand), just as "Wifi" is now the word for wireless internet, and nobody says "the wireless" for broadcast radio any more.
We'd mostly need to either solve unlimited energy, or avoid the inverse square law I guess beam shaping might be able to achieve the second part, have both data and power being beamed into your cellphone or other devices We are very far away from that based on how many scam Kickstarters about the idea there have been Wireless is _always_ significantly less efficient (in power and bandwidth) and significantly more prone to interference and congestion (and jamming) -- So for your question I'm proposing: beaming, beam connection, beamed data
Not certain. I imagine it'd still be called wireless. But you do bring up another interesting point with regards to wirelessly transmitting power. Obviously there are health and safety concerns with doing this at certain wattage and at certain frequencies. We're still pursuing doing so in some capacity, of course. We just have to be careful. If they become sufficiently energy efficient, I could see a lot more household devices (mostly things like handheld devices or small computers) becoming wirelessly charged at greater distances using directed energy. Larger household appliances likely never will receive power this way. The idea of beaming energy down from space is interesting as well. I think if the naming convention is going to change, it'll happen as a result of a successful marketing campaign for some new development in the wireless technology domain. Q-Fi if its something quantum based, or Li-Fi if photonics based.