Quantum Entanglement possible instant communication over very long distances


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Quantum Entanglement possible instant communication over very long distances

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · Next
Author Message
Profile Bob DeWoody
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 May 10
Posts: 1753
Credit: 583,045
RAC: 35
United States
Message 1539848 - Posted: 11 Jul 2014, 16:17:21 UTC

So I watched some programming the other night that included reports about experiments with quantum entanglement, ie teleportation of data instantaneously, even over large distances. But, I assume to get two particles entangled they have to start out in close proximity, then one particle can be transported to a remote location without losing it's entanglement. Then when the first quantum particle changes state it's partner does the same instantaneously (no speed of light barrier. So, it seems to me that if a network of quantum entangled particles are located, say around the solar system, a means of communication can be developed allowing instant transmission. So we may be closer to "subspace communication" than we are to FTL human transportation.

But some questions weren't answered. Can two entangled particles remain that way indefinitely no matter how far apart they are? And how much energy must be expended to keep them that way. And is there an upper limit on how many particles can be entangled at one location limiting how much data can be transmitted?

And finally is this a way that ET could be trying to communicate with us across the vast distances of the galaxy. Maybe they left a quantum receiver here on earth millions of years ago and we just have to find it and start listening.
____________
Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32636
Credit: 14,523,897
RAC: 14,126
United Kingdom
Message 1539941 - Posted: 11 Jul 2014, 20:12:08 UTC

Perhaps we are living on it. It maybe earth itself.

Profile cov_routeProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 13 Sep 12
Posts: 311
Credit: 7,621,058
RAC: 1,085
Canada
Message 1540070 - Posted: 11 Jul 2014, 23:24:18 UTC

If I'm traveling "fast" with respect to my friend who is "far" away and we have an instantaneous communication device, if I send him a message and he sends it back to me right away I will receive it in my past. Causation trouble.

So far quantum communication requires that the receiver get some information through a conventional back channel in order to interpret the quantum collapse information she receives. So it doesn't work given the theory we have to date.

It's like we're in a diabolical speed-of-light jail.

Glenn savill
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Aug 99
Posts: 2912
Credit: 4,329,742
RAC: 5,846
Australia
Message 1540106 - Posted: 12 Jul 2014, 0:40:00 UTC

hello Daniel I think we still got a way to go before we get Qantum Entanglement to work for communication but maybe this is why we haven't found anything yet as it would make cents to use a communication system that is instant anywhere in the COSMOS and can't be herd by your enemy or potential enemy's

Darn I noticed you got a new rig dam and there I was thinking I mite be able to catch you on the leader board even if your 5 mill in front but not gona happen now you got that i7 dam dam
spose best I can do is I place behind you at 22nd in a few months that is .
____________



Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2645
Credit: 1,181,299
RAC: 90
United States
Message 1540216 - Posted: 12 Jul 2014, 8:22:49 UTC - in response to Message 1540106.
Last modified: 12 Jul 2014, 8:23:09 UTC

Let's await a working model. Perhaps in a laboratory or at my local electronics store. Where can I buy such a device?

Profile Bob DeWoody
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 May 10
Posts: 1753
Credit: 583,045
RAC: 35
United States
Message 1540288 - Posted: 12 Jul 2014, 12:02:18 UTC

So far it appears they have spent millions just to transmit simple messages just between two of the Canary Islands. But they didn't mention anything about how they maintained the entangled state of the particles or how long it lasted. Even at that short distance they were able to verify the instantaneous nature of the data transmission. There is just so much about quantum physics and it's weirdness that I din't understand even after Morgan Freeman has over simplified it for dummies like me.
____________
Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

Glenn savill
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Aug 99
Posts: 2912
Credit: 4,329,742
RAC: 5,846
Australia
Message 1540610 - Posted: 13 Jul 2014, 0:46:16 UTC
Last modified: 13 Jul 2014, 0:46:55 UTC

Yes BOb your right it is a good show and still very confusing

Quantum Physics the world of the wired , impossible , strange
____________



Profile IT-Green
Send message
Joined: 13 Dec 07
Posts: 4
Credit: 822,046
RAC: 177
United Kingdom
Message 1543192 - Posted: 17 Jul 2014, 16:18:32 UTC - in response to Message 1540070.

I'm not sure that's right. The particles that have been entangled and are travelling near the speed of light woud aso suffer from the effect of time dilation.

Glenn savill
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Aug 99
Posts: 2912
Credit: 4,329,742
RAC: 5,846
Australia
Message 1543231 - Posted: 17 Jul 2014, 16:45:56 UTC - in response to Message 1543192.
Last modified: 17 Jul 2014, 16:49:59 UTC

umm no it would not IT-Green Einstein called it spooky and is instantaneous and distance has no bearing on it also speed of light has no bearing they would not need to travel at that speed in fact they don't have to move at all
____________



Profile Bob DeWoody
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 May 10
Posts: 1753
Credit: 583,045
RAC: 35
United States
Message 1543294 - Posted: 17 Jul 2014, 17:41:27 UTC

That's the whole reason they are experimenting with quantum entanglement. The reactions are instantaneous no matter what the distance. The speed of light is not a factor. Nothing actually travels. Flip one entangled photon and it's counterpart instantly flips the other way.
____________
Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2645
Credit: 1,181,299
RAC: 90
United States
Message 1543311 - Posted: 17 Jul 2014, 17:55:42 UTC - in response to Message 1543294.
Last modified: 17 Jul 2014, 17:56:54 UTC

Where do they keep the photons and how do they tell them apart and how long does it take to "type" in the messages to one set of photons ??

I will still believe that information cannot travel faster than the speed of light until i get some understandable answers to these questions.

Glenn savill
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Aug 99
Posts: 2912
Credit: 4,329,742
RAC: 5,846
Australia
Message 1543317 - Posted: 17 Jul 2014, 18:06:40 UTC - in response to Message 1543311.

I will still believe that information cannot travel faster than the speed of light until i get some understandable answers to these questions


First you have to understand this is the Quantum world we are talking about and the rules change the smaller you go

words to describe the Quantum world

weird
impossible is possible
two places at the same time
disappearing and reappearing somewhere else
going through solid objects
diverting from a straight line for no reason
____________


Profile Bob DeWoody
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 May 10
Posts: 1753
Credit: 583,045
RAC: 35
United States
Message 1543342 - Posted: 17 Jul 2014, 19:03:40 UTC - in response to Message 1543311.

Where do they keep the photons and how do they tell them apart and how long does it take to "type" in the messages to one set of photons ??

I will still believe that information cannot travel faster than the speed of light until i get some understandable answers to these questions.

Those are the details I am curious about too. So far they claim to have used QE to transmit data but they are not revealing much about how it was done, not that I could understand the explanation.
____________
Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

anniet
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 2 Feb 14
Posts: 5049
Credit: 230,071
RAC: 392
United Kingdom
Message 1545114 - Posted: 21 Jul 2014, 2:00:34 UTC

Just when you thought quantum physics couldn’t get any weirder, it violates the pigeonhole principle.


Am popping this in here although I'm not sure it belongs...
It DOES mention quantum entanglement though... just not a lot :)

You shouldn’t try to pigeonhole quantum physics

You can follow a link... that leads to a link... to a pdf file all about it! :) But I haven't done that yet :/ Will do so once I've got my head round the last main paragraph of the original link. It might require reconstructing my brain... there were some ominous clunking noises you see...

Glenn savill
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Aug 99
Posts: 2912
Credit: 4,329,742
RAC: 5,846
Australia
Message 1545124 - Posted: 21 Jul 2014, 3:02:46 UTC

Aniet welcome to the wounderful world of Quantum Physics where your brain goes clunk , tilt , reboot , clunk , tilt , reboot a few dozen times before you mite understand stand it . But as i have herd ppl say anyone that thinks they understand the Quantum world doesn't hell even the scincetist's doing it bang there head on the table every now and then just to make shore there not seeing things ...lol
Yes that last part is confusing particle 2 is in box with particle 1 and particle 3 is in box with particle 1 but particle 2 - 3 are not in the same box so i'll confuse things a bit more and say they mite be until you look at them ....
____________



Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32636
Credit: 14,523,897
RAC: 14,126
United Kingdom
Message 1545263 - Posted: 21 Jul 2014, 12:27:04 UTC

Depending on how you conduct your measurements, in some situations, you will find that particles 1 and 2 are both in the same box. But in other circumstances, your measurements will find that they aren’t. And applying those conditions gives the same result no matter which two particles you choose to measure. So you can have a situation where you have more particles than boxes, but no more than one particle in either box.

“In other words,” the physicists write, “we have three particles in two boxes, yet no two particles can be found in the same box — our quantum pigeonhole principle.”

Seems straightforward to me. The particles are moving in and out of the boxes all the time. Sometimes there are none in either box, at other times there are more than one in each box. It all depends at which point in time you make the observation. This business about being in two places at once is explained by the particles moving millions of times faster than we can measure them. So that in effect you see particle A in box 1, and also at the same time see it in box 2. It has moved so fast that you haven't seen it leave box A yet.

anniet
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 2 Feb 14
Posts: 5049
Credit: 230,071
RAC: 392
United Kingdom
Message 1545273 - Posted: 21 Jul 2014, 13:08:40 UTC
Last modified: 21 Jul 2014, 13:08:51 UTC

I LOVE quantum physics when I'm not looking at it! :)

Profile Es99Project donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 9201
Credit: 261,419
RAC: 115
Canada
Message 1545497 - Posted: 21 Jul 2014, 21:24:51 UTC - in response to Message 1545114.

Just when you thought quantum physics couldn’t get any weirder, it violates the pigeonhole principle.


Am popping this in here although I'm not sure it belongs...
It DOES mention quantum entanglement though... just not a lot :)

You shouldn’t try to pigeonhole quantum physics

You can follow a link... that leads to a link... to a pdf file all about it! :) But I haven't done that yet :/ Will do so once I've got my head round the last main paragraph of the original link. It might require reconstructing my brain... there were some ominous clunking noises you see...

Oh what fun! lol!
____________
"The truth which makes men free is for the most part the truth which men prefer not to hear." - Herbert Agar

Profile Es99Project donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 9201
Credit: 261,419
RAC: 115
Canada
Message 1545500 - Posted: 21 Jul 2014, 21:27:43 UTC - in response to Message 1545263.

Depending on how you conduct your measurements, in some situations, you will find that particles 1 and 2 are both in the same box. But in other circumstances, your measurements will find that they aren’t. And applying those conditions gives the same result no matter which two particles you choose to measure. So you can have a situation where you have more particles than boxes, but no more than one particle in either box.

“In other words,” the physicists write, “we have three particles in two boxes, yet no two particles can be found in the same box — our quantum pigeonhole principle.”

Seems straightforward to me. The particles are moving in and out of the boxes all the time. Sometimes there are none in either box, at other times there are more than one in each box. It all depends at which point in time you make the observation. This business about being in two places at once is explained by the particles moving millions of times faster than we can measure them. So that in effect you see particle A in box 1, and also at the same time see it in box 2. It has moved so fast that you haven't seen it leave box A yet.

Not quite.

The particles have a probability of being anywhere, until you measure it, then you know where it is. They don't move as such, they just have a probability of being somewhere other than where you are looking. So technically you could measure one box and see they aren't there, and measure another box and see they aren't there either. All that is telling you is the result of that particular measurement.

I hope that makes everything clear! :D
____________
"The truth which makes men free is for the most part the truth which men prefer not to hear." - Herbert Agar

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8780
Credit: 25,943,896
RAC: 17,275
United Kingdom
Message 1545507 - Posted: 21 Jul 2014, 21:55:12 UTC - in response to Message 1545114.

Just when you thought quantum physics couldn’t get any weirder, it violates the pigeonhole principle.


Am popping this in here although I'm not sure it belongs...
It DOES mention quantum entanglement though... just not a lot :)

You shouldn’t try to pigeonhole quantum physics

You can follow a link... that leads to a link... to a pdf file all about it! :) But I haven't done that yet :/ Will do so once I've got my head round the last main paragraph of the original link. It might require reconstructing my brain... there were some ominous clunking noises you see...

Don't worry about it, go lie down in a darken room with a glass of wine and put your feet up. Richard Feynman is attributed with making the quote "If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics."

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · Next
Post to thread

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Quantum Entanglement possible instant communication over very long distances

Copyright © 2014 University of California