Lets start.
Quantum entanglement.
I see where you're going, but quantum entanglement is not technology, it's a concept used to describe an observed phenomenon.
A quantum computer would be the relevant technology, and that technology is in its infancy right now. If the most prevalent model for quantum entanglement still has to explain away what appears to be faster-than-light information transfer, that doesn't mean applying the concept is like magic. It means there is a knowledge gap regarding the theories that underlie the technology. The technology itself, in this case quantum computers, will not be considered magic.
It's within these knowledge gaps that we can speculate on science, which is what we were talking about in the first place. Maybe that's what
Ranarama meant.
Which reminds me, here is a disclaimer: My academic background is in computer science and I'm not a physicist, so keep in mind my view on this subject is limited and biased. I know how qubits work and I know we might be on the verge of a cryptography crisis because of what quantum computers can theoretically do in terms of making the Rijndael block ciphers we currently use obsolete. I've been told getting a quantum computer to work is just an engineering problem at this point, but I couldn't tell you if that is true or not. The theory seems sound, but I'm not qualified to poke any holes in it if it weren't and I try not to talk out of my ass too much.
As for the other discussion going on in this thread: It's a
minefield.
If six years of working in academia taught me anything, it's that politics sometimes get prioritized over research. STEM is resilient in that regard, but it is not immune. Academia is full of people sucking up to other people, quietly waiting for them to retire or die so they can get their chair. Not toeing the line can get you kicked off the precious tenure track. Irrelevant personal attributes also factor into it. Sometimes explicitly so. I'll quote from the
Dutch NWO selection committee page: "NWO actively seeks to appoint more women to selection committees and juries". The outcome of that may be good, it may be bad, but on principle it doesn't sit right with me. The most bizarre thing is that under Dutch law, a statement like that is discriminatory and borderline illegal. Yet it is there. In plain sight. I wish it were based on merit alone, but it's not. Anyway, an equality of outcome debate belongs in GD, so I'll leave it at that.
Back to work so we can add one to the list.
On topic: Apparently the PnP I mentioned earlier already exists.
The Expanse RPG.