Message boards :
Science (non-SETI) :
Quantum Entanglement possible instant communication over very long distances
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Bob DeWoody Send message Joined: 9 May 10 Posts: 3387 Credit: 4,182,900 RAC: 10 |
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. |
cov_route Send message Joined: 13 Sep 12 Posts: 342 Credit: 10,270,618 RAC: 0 |
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. |
Darth Beaver Send message Joined: 20 Aug 99 Posts: 6728 Credit: 21,443,075 RAC: 3 |
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 . |
William Rothamel Send message Joined: 25 Oct 06 Posts: 3756 Credit: 1,999,735 RAC: 4 |
Let's await a working model. Perhaps in a laboratory or at my local electronics store. Where can I buy such a device? |
Bob DeWoody Send message Joined: 9 May 10 Posts: 3387 Credit: 4,182,900 RAC: 10 |
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. |
Darth Beaver Send message Joined: 20 Aug 99 Posts: 6728 Credit: 21,443,075 RAC: 3 |
Yes BOb your right it is a good show and still very confusing Quantum Physics the world of the wired , impossible , strange |
IT-Green Send message Joined: 13 Dec 07 Posts: 4 Credit: 862,151 RAC: 0 |
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. |
Darth Beaver Send message Joined: 20 Aug 99 Posts: 6728 Credit: 21,443,075 RAC: 3 |
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 |
Bob DeWoody Send message Joined: 9 May 10 Posts: 3387 Credit: 4,182,900 RAC: 10 |
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. |
William Rothamel Send message Joined: 25 Oct 06 Posts: 3756 Credit: 1,999,735 RAC: 4 |
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. |
Darth Beaver Send message Joined: 20 Aug 99 Posts: 6728 Credit: 21,443,075 RAC: 3 |
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 |
Bob DeWoody Send message Joined: 9 May 10 Posts: 3387 Credit: 4,182,900 RAC: 10 |
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 ?? 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 Send message Joined: 2 Feb 14 Posts: 7105 Credit: 1,577,368 RAC: 75 |
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... |
Darth Beaver Send message Joined: 20 Aug 99 Posts: 6728 Credit: 21,443,075 RAC: 3 |
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 .... |
anniet Send message Joined: 2 Feb 14 Posts: 7105 Credit: 1,577,368 RAC: 75 |
I LOVE quantum physics when I'm not looking at it! :) |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
Just when you thought quantum physics couldn’t get any weirder, it violates the pigeonhole principle. Oh what fun! lol! Reality Internet Personality |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
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. 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 Reality Internet Personality |
W-K 666 Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19012 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67 |
Just when you thought quantum physics couldn’t get any weirder, it violates the pigeonhole principle. 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." |
anniet Send message Joined: 2 Feb 14 Posts: 7105 Credit: 1,577,368 RAC: 75 |
Just when you thought quantum physics couldn’t get any weirder, it violates the pigeonhole principle. :) Ish ferry *HIC* undershtandable now - fanksh WK ;} jus wonderin why I haff four feet...? |
Darth Beaver Send message Joined: 20 Aug 99 Posts: 6728 Credit: 21,443,075 RAC: 3 |
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. Chris that's even a bigger can of worms "Time" and it's relashanship to the Quantum world ........Peta seconds or smaller ................. |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.