Posted: 7/12/2017 12:10:32 AM EDT
|
For anyone who might understand this stuff, the current news about china "teleporting" something is total bs right? ( IF they did what they claim) China has further shown that entanglement is possible.
The definition of teleportation appears to be used incorrectly in the story. Most accepted definitions of teleporting involve traversing space instantly. Ie: particle 1 goes from points A to B instantly. Whereas in the story they beam ( entangled ) photons to a satellite, which are traveling at the speed of light. I understand the data rate allowed by entangled photons is "instant", but the story claims to have teleported a photon. What do you think? Eta, forum titles does not support the inequal sign. ? <-- That one! |
| If talking about the article I read on Fox News they transported a neutron to space. Yet the mass of it is nothing compared to a human so doesn't mean shit at this point in time. They teleprted the same thing 20ish miles a few years ago. Yet it's mass is really nothing so it could just be a bad reading on the sensor. |
|
Quoted:
Lol yup I love it when normies try to smart I'm calling out MIT people them being wrong about teleportation, and I'm right. So logically I'm not super dumb. ( Very dumb with women, I admit ) |
|
Quoted:
If talking about the article I read on Fox News they transported a neutron to space. Yet the mass of it is nothing compared to a human so doesn't mean shit at this point in time. They teleprted the same thing 20ish miles a few years ago. Yet it's mass is really nothing so it could just be a bad reading on the sensor. |
|
I have a pair of shoes. I give you one in a box.
You go to space, say the moon. You open the box. You see a L shoe. You now know I have a R shoe. Ooooh! Magic teleportation of information instantly!!! The theoretical physicist dweebs will swear this is not like what's happening. Yet they can never really come up with any use for it beyond tamper proofing a signal. And i'd guess in a few years it will be shown you actually can tamper. |
|
I'm not so jazzed up about the teleportation part...i could care less. The most interesting part is verifying the entaglement stuff at distance. Supposedly, you can perturb one particle and get instantaneous reaction in the other. That could be manipulated for faster than light communication. Uninteruptable communication, at that.
The latter is probably the reason the Chinese are experimenting with it. |
|
Quoted:
If talking about the article I read on Fox News they transported a neutron to space. Yet the mass of it is nothing compared to a human so doesn't mean shit at this point in time. They teleprted the same thing 20ish miles a few years ago. Yet it's mass is really nothing so it could just be a bad reading on the sensor. |
|
Quoted:
I'm not so jazzed up about the teleportation part...i could care less. The most interesting part is verifying the entaglement stuff at distance. Supposedly, you can perturb one particle and get instantaneous reaction in the other. That could be manipulated for faster than light communication. Uninteruptable communication, at that. The latter is probably the reason the Chinese are experimenting with it. They did not teleport a photon! |
|
Quoted:
I have a pair of shoes. I give you one in a box. You go to space, say the moon. You open the box. You see a L shoe. You now know I have a R shoe. Ooooh! Magic teleportation of information instantly!!! The theoretical physicist dweebs will swear this is not like what's happening. Yet they can never really come up with any use for it beyond tamper proofing a signal. And i'd guess in a few years it will be shown you actually can tamper. 
this is an extremely simple easy to uderstand analogy. yet amazingly accurate. nice work. |
|
Quoted:
I have a pair of shoes. I give you one in a box. You go to space, say the moon. You open the box. You see a L shoe. You now know I have a R shoe. Ooooh! Magic teleportation of information instantly!!! The theoretical physicist dweebs will swear this is not like what's happening. Yet they can never really come up with any use for it beyond tamper proofing a signal. And i'd guess in a few years it will be shown you actually can tamper. The state of the shoe going to the moon isn't preset, it will change instantly to match the state of the shoe on Earth whenever the state of the shoe on Earth changes. |
|
Quoted:
I'm not so jazzed up about the teleportation part...i could care less. The most interesting part is verifying the entaglement stuff at distance. Supposedly, you can perturb one particle and get instantaneous reaction in the other. That could be manipulated for faster than light communication. Uninteruptable communication, at that. The latter is probably the reason the Chinese are experimenting with it. 
|
|
Quoted:
I'm not so jazzed up about the teleportation part...i could care less. The most interesting part is verifying the entaglement stuff at distance. Supposedly, you can perturb one particle and get instantaneous reaction in the other. That could be manipulated for faster than light communication. Uninteruptable communication, at that. The latter is probably the reason the Chinese are experimenting with it. |
|
Quoted:
The information (i.e. the state of the particle) is what is 'transported' instantly. ETA... I did a paper on quantum entanglement in grad school... specifically bells theorem and I still don't understand shit about it) We're on the same page here. |
|
Quoted:
It will get interesting when they start QE with 8 particles at a time. |
|
TL/DR version... "Quantum teleportation".
1. Entangle some photons so their state depends on each other. Say one is polarized left, the other right. But... you don't know which photon is which. 2. Send one photon far away and test it. Testing it or "looking" at it makes it pick a state. Say it turns out to be the one that's polarized right. The photon that you kept at home when you test it will immediately test as being polarized to the left. Nothing actually "telepoprts". What "teleports" is that quantum information it instantly jumps to be the matching or the opposite, whatever it's supposed to be no matter how far apart the two particles are. It does not actually move anything anywhere. Not even a single atom. It does not allow you to communicate faster than the speed of light, because you have to send the particle there at light speed or less still. And no, you can't keep one particle in a jar or something and take it to Alpha Centauri and then once it gets there wiggle the particle you kept on Earth in a lab and use it to send FTL Morse Code either. What it does do is makes secure encryption possible, because if anyone eavesdrops or does a "man in the middle" kind of attack, the quantum state flips, you know someone looked. And to cheat the system you'd have to be able to break the laws of the Universe. |
|
Quoted:
TL/DR version... "Quantum teleportation". 1. Entangle some photons so their state depends on each other. Say one is polarized left, the other right. But... you don't know which photon is which. 2. Send one photon far away and test it. Testing it or "looking" at it makes it pick a state. Say it turns out to be the one that's polarized right. The photon that you kept at home when you test it will immediately test as being polarized to the left. Nothing actually "telepoprts". What "teleports" is that quantum information it instantly jumps to be the matching or the opposite, whatever it's supposed to be no matter how far apart the two particles are. It does not actually move anything anywhere. Not even a single atom. It does not allow you to communicate faster than the speed of light, because you have to send the particle there at light speed or less still. And no, you can't keep one particle in a jar or something and take it to Alpha Centauri and then once it gets there wiggle the particle you kept on Earth in a lab and use it to send FTL Morse Code either. What it does do is makes secure encryption possible, because if anyone eavesdrops or does a "man in the middle" kind of attack, the quantum state flips, you know someone looked. And to cheat the system you'd have to be able to break the laws of the Universe. |
|
To Continue with the Shoe metaphor which was lacking is this.
Quantum entanglement supposes that the spin or other characteristics of on particle and it's mate are in sync. So, if the left shoe on Earth was rotating clockwise and the right shoe on the moon was also in sync and rotating counter clockwise, anything affecting the left shoe and imparting a different flavor or spin would have the same effect on the shoe on the moon. This would lead to a spin state of zero. So, if the Earth shoe was viewed and that caused the shoe to impart a differing spin, the same, but opposite effect would happen to the shoe on the moon, keeping the zero spin state. Conservation of Angular Movement. The "entanglement" comes from the presence of both particles sharing the same or opposing states. Most likely from a particle decaying from a "Master" particle. The master particle with spin-zero could decay into two sub particles each with spin-1/2. One would be spin-up and the other would be spin-down. if, by viewing, we reverse the spin-up particle, the spin-down particle will also reverse, regardless of the distance between the two. |
|
Quoted:
!= is "not equal to" =/= is "equal divided by equal" 
The != comes from a programming language. |
|
Quoted:
so determinism? In the awful creepy way of Quantum Mechanics, the states actually switch to be the right ones instantly. They're not already set, and we just happened to look. The actual act of "looking*" causes them to flip. *in the context of Quantum Mechanics "looking" does not mean a scientist turning his head to point his eyes at it, but how to "see" anything on the tiny quantum or atomic scales you have to smash light, electrons, some other atoms into the thing which forces them to interact. Or the particle you're testing has to smash into some kind of matter or energy to test it. You can't take a picture of an electron whizzing by like some teeny microscopic baseball being thrown through the air. Nor can you see photons etc. The only way to see the electron is for it to hit something or for something to hit it. And the act of hitting it to "look" at it inevitably changes it. Doing quantum stuff and atomic stuff is like having a pool table full of balls, and you're blind, and you can only tell what's going on by shooting your own cue ball through the table to tell where stuff is, and where it's bouncing. |
|
Quoted:
If I tie a knot on the shoe laces on Earth, the laces on the moon shoe will be tied as well. The state of the shoe going to the moon isn't preset, it will change instantly to match the state of the shoe on Earth whenever the state of the shoe on Earth changes. Quoted:
Quoted:
I have a pair of shoes. I give you one in a box. You go to space, say the moon. You open the box. You see a L shoe. You now know I have a R shoe. Ooooh! Magic teleportation of information instantly!!! The theoretical physicist dweebs will swear this is not like what's happening. Yet they can never really come up with any use for it beyond tamper proofing a signal. And i'd guess in a few years it will be shown you actually can tamper. The state of the shoe going to the moon isn't preset, it will change instantly to match the state of the shoe on Earth whenever the state of the shoe on Earth changes. |
|
Quoted:
It's all very fun and facinating, however I find the observer effect super fascinating, in that ( the debated theory), our conscience mind could affect the outcome in "quantum reality," thus changing a particle between having mass and a wave. To measure something you must change it. It's not consciousness it's photons, or magnetic fields, or gravity, etc.. that affects the outcome. And the whole idea that something only manifests when measured is unprovable and hence philosophy not science. Quantum teleportation is fake news/science. |
|
Quoted:
No. In the awful creepy way of Quantum Mechanics, the states actually switch to be the right ones instantly. They're not already set, and we just happened to look. The actual act of "looking*" causes them to flip. *in the context of Quantum Mechanics "looking" does not mean a scientist turning his head to point his eyes at it, but how to "see" anything on the tiny quantum or atomic scales you have to smash light, electrons, some other atoms into the thing which forces them to interact. Or the particle you're testing has to smash into some kind of matter or energy to test it. You can't take a picture of an electron whizzing by like some teeny microscopic baseball being thrown through the air. Nor can you see photons etc. The only way to see the electron is for it to hit something or for something to hit it. And the act of hitting it to "look" at it inevitably changes it. Doing quantum stuff and atomic stuff is like having a pool table full of balls, and you're blind, and you can only tell what's going on by shooting your own cue ball through the table to tell where stuff is, and where it's bouncing. |
|
Quoted:
It's all very fun and facinating, however I find the observer effect super fascinating, in that ( the debated theory), our conscience mind could affect the outcome in "quantum reality," thus changing a particle between having mass and a wave. Quoted:
It's all very fun and facinating, however I find the observer effect super fascinating, in that ( the debated theory), our conscience mind could affect the outcome in "quantum reality," thus changing a particle between having mass and a wave. To "Look" at light and particles etc. and see a quantum effect, those particles have to hit some other atoms or particles, or go through a magnetic field... something. And that something is what counts as "looking" so it's more like you're a blind man with a pool table full of balls, and to tell what's going on you have to shoot your own cue ball into the table to see what it bounces off of. And obviously any of the balls you detected are now changed, either moving or stopping or changing directions by how you "looked" at them. You can't see particles flying around "from the side" as they pass on by like a baseball being thrown by a pitcher. You can only see the baseball by how it hits other baseballs you throw up in it's path, or a pile of baseballs that start moving when the thrown one hits them. You really can't think of this as how we see and perceive things on the macro scale. Quoted:
there's no instantaneous xfer of information if the information was alread there...ergo determinism. https://arstechnica.com/science/2014/02/is-entanglement-is-real-or-is-there-a-super-deterministic-cosmic-conspiracy/ Three main possibilities. 1. Quantum entanglement is upheld. Spooky and fucky, but there it is. 2. Special attributes that somehow create deterministic outcomes can cross billions of light years to pre-program photons quantum outcomes when tested. Just as spooky and fucky as "plain" quantum entanglement is. 3. Every particle in the Universe at the time of the Big Bang was encoded with all it's possible deterministic outcomes if they were ever tested. Even more spooky and fucky.
|
|
Quantum entanglement is mind boggling, but it really doesn't allow you to transfer anything meaningful. You can't manipulate anything without breaking the entanglement, which means that there is still no way to decide that I want to create a signal at such and such a place that is (for instance) an arbitrary binary stream. I can look at it, and determine what it will be, but I can't set it to anything, nor can I pass on the information to tell the party at the other end that it was actually entangled, so while an effect is there, nothing intelligible can be extracted from the far end. If you are looking at a polarization filter, you are going to get 50% passing at random - although that random pattern is set by what was measured by another party, it is still random and no information can be extracted from it.
Mike ETA - what WOULD be amazing and have implications would be if you could determine the properties of a photon and THEN entangle it to another entangled pair, because that WOULD allow you to pass specific information faster than light, since you could choose to pair arbitrary data. That would allow you to actually CONTROL the information received at the far end, rather than just know what it will be. |
|
Quoted:
That's a bit over-played. The particles don't "know" that the scientist or whoever uncovered his eyes or turned around. The particles and quantum effects react because observing them always necessitates touching, pinging, banging them off of other particles, fields, or energy. To "Look" at light and particles etc. and see a quantum effect, those particles have to hit some other atoms or particles, or go through a magnetic field... something. And that something is what counts as "looking" so it's more like you're a blind man with a pool table full of balls, and to tell what's going on you have to shoot your own cue ball into the table to see what it bounces off of. And obviously any of the balls you detected are now changed, either moving or stopping or changing directions by how you "looked" at them. You can't see particles flying around "from the side" as they pass on by like a baseball being thrown by a pitcher. You can only see the baseball by how it hits other baseballs you throw up in it's path, or a pile of baseballs that start moving when the thrown one hits them. You really can't think of this as how we see and perceive things on the macro scale. I totally understand what your saying, but it's not what experimental proof suggests so far, however, you're not alone. There are proposals to do quantum entanglement testing using light from separate and distant quasar galaxies 12 billion light years away, so we're using 100% "virgin light" that got sent off into space before the Earth even formed. https://arstechnica.com/science/2014/02/is-entanglement-is-real-or-is-there-a-super-deterministic-cosmic-conspiracy/ Three main possibilities. 1. Quantum entanglement is upheld. Spooky and fucky, but there it is. 2. Special attributes that somehow create deterministic outcomes can cross billions of light years to pre-program photons quantum outcomes when tested. Just as spooky and fucky as "plain" quantum entanglement is. 3. Every particle in the Universe at the time of the Big Bang was encoded with all it's possible deterministic outcomes if they were ever tested. Even more spooky and fucky. 
|
