i didn't realise that the particles would become untangled.

i was under the impression that when you measure S_y (perhaps resulting in S_y is up - and i forget how to right that mathematically) Then particle 2 (S') will be in the opposite sate S'_y is down, and that when you then go to measure S'_z you will destroy this state information and determine particle 1's S_z state.

untangling would make most attempts to turn this into a FTL communication system even harder.

@Orathatic,

I'm pretty sure, but I'll double check later by tracking down a source.

@Abge, law was always the plan going into undergrad. Then I just decided I missed math too much.

Bump for Krellin

I can't believe no one's said this yet.
"in the ~19030s Einstien proposed a requirement which showed that quantum mechanics must either be non-local or have hidden variables... " Orathaic, how do you know that a new scientist named Einstein will be alive in the future 19030s. That seems like we have a time-traveler in this thread. And if that's the case, then I assume we already have FTL comm/transportation or have proved it impossible.

Obligatory GREAT SCOTT!

@Warden

LOL

Yeah, and if I'm not mistaken Bell's Inequality proved there were no hidden variables.

see if it does disentangle then that explains basvanopheusden's gednaken; i've just never seen that explicitly stated. (it doesn't even matter which measurement comes first, or which frame of reference you are in, you just get two disentangled particles after the second measurement - or at the point in time when the simultaneous measurements are made in my version where both measurements are made at the same time...)

I assumed that a conserved quantity (angular momentum in this case) still had to be conserved even after multiple measurements.

and yes, i'm afraid that i am infact a time traveler, and that the future will be more awesome than you can comprehend.

But now that you've figured it out i have to go back in time and have already killed you... hmm.

What's the matter, Krellin, Schrödinger's Cat got your tongue? : )

@Abge -- regarding my comments that you find offensive.....uh....whatever. Don't care. And, by your explanatory comments, you prove why I insulted you and/or you colleagues and professors.

You state, basically, that QEv does not imply "classical" communication.

Sigh....

That's find, because Quantum Mechanics doesn't imply classical Newtonian Physics....and the next wave of Phsyics will likewise be beyond "classic" QE theory.


THAT BEING SAID.....I don't give a fuck what was created or destroyed in a QE expirement. What the hell is so hard to understand that: A and B are entangled....thus equivalent for all practical pursposes.

A and B are separated.

A is changed while B is measured.

A is destroyed, but ***INSTANTANEOUSLy*** B is changed, and this change is measured.

This represents a change from a state of...let's say..."0" (unchanged state)....to a "1" (changed state).

I don't give a crap what your professors say, but if you tell me, over a distance and instananeouslt, that a state has changed from "0" to "1"....then you have transmitted information. And....incidently....done it "spookily over a distance" and at FTL speeds.

As I said....it is not an MP3 file. It is not "claissical" information....but....for God's sake, man, open up your fucking college-narrowed brain enough to understand that the transference of ***one bit*** of data IS IN FACT communication.

It is not 2-way communication.
It is not continuous communcation.

But it IS FTL communication. Either that....or you just don't understand the basic definition of communication.


You know....when an Indian lit a smokey fire to put black clouds in the sky, the message changed from "0" (no smoke) to "1" (SMOKE! White Man coming with guns....) It was communication....

....and QE / photonic "teleportation" is communication. There really is no debate on the subject....unless you are using different definitions for words with long-held definitions.

Maybe you should ask Ms. Psychology chick that observes, real time, your defenses of the pervert known at Conservative Man, and ask her is a change in state over distance represents communication of a bit of data.

Abge -- Schrödinger's Cat is dead, by the way....but no...I didn't answer you before now because **I HAVE A LIFE** AND HAVEN'T LOGGED ON IN A WHILE.

Kind of pathetic of you to get so fucking snotty, abgeass...p[particularly when you are so fucking closed minded as to not grasp **very basic** definitions of what represents communication.

You....as is typical....represent the way-too-smart-but-doesn't-know-shit-college student.

Krellin, your post completely ignores my careful refutation of your claims.

Also, you should note: most uses of the word "communication" include the implication that the "sender" can choose WHAT to communicate. Even if it is only one bit, he can choose whether to communicate a 0 or a 1. That is what is missing here, and why most will not use the word communication. It is mere correlation.

Krellin

How do I chose if I want to send a 1 or a 0?

Can you answer that?

If not you aren't communicating anything.

"Maybe you should ask Ms. Psychology chick that observes, real time, your defenses of the pervert known at Conservative Man, and ask her is a change in state over distance represents communication of a bit of data."

LOL Why? She knows nothing about QM.

Abge -- You CLAIM to have knowledge of QM / QE....but, apparently you don't. If you ENTANGLE to photons, for example....then you know the state of the entangled photon....i.e. the one that you will just watch.

THUS....I can't believe I have to actually explain this shit to you, since you PRETEND to know about QE....when you CHANGE the state of the original, then you will OBSERVE the change in the entangled partcle.

(((sigh....good god....are you this stupid, really???)))

Let me be blunt....scientists KNOW and have REPEATED the expiriment in which they entangle photons. The have affected one...and observed the FTL change in the other.

In other words....

Here...let's put it in Willy Wonka terms for you, OK? Maybe that will penetrate your (apparently) small brain.

Suzy and Betsy are Quantumly Entangled. Betsy is taken to a different part of the candy factory.

Suzy runs into the blueberry room and eats an expiremental blueberry candy...

Suddenl, Suzy turns Blue and inflates with blueberry juice...

In the other room, the scientists have a passive detector on betsy that detects what color whe is emitting, and at the SAME INSTANT the Suzy turns blue, Betsy turns blue, and the passive Juice Detector notes that she is full of juice.

WALLA! We have communcation! Betsy has ***CHANGED STATES*** without any external input....i.e. gone from a "0" (stable state) to a "1" (changed state) in an instant, without being affected externally, other than that she was quantumly entangled with the other chick.

THIS IS THE QUANTUM PHOTON TELEPORTATION EXPIREMENT IN A NUTSHELL. IT IS FTL COMMUNCATION OF A STATE. IT IS FTL COMMUNICATION. IT IS COMMUNCIATION.

YES/NO.....1/0......WHITE KID/BLUE KID.....THIS SPIN/THAT SPIN.....is ALL an example of communication.

Again, abge, if you are in some science course and you don't grasp this ***very*** basic concept of what constitutes communication....than I pity your parents for all the money they have wasted on your education.

Why shold you ask Ms. Psychology about QM? Because YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT QM EITHER!!!

SEMCK83

Show me a paper in which someone is able to make an electron either spin-up or spin-down. It can't be done.

Semk83 -- Sigh....again....fuck you narrow-minded view of what constitues "communciation". If you are monitoring a signal that is a "0"....and you are told "IF it changes to a 1, then x...." then you have been communicated to.

OK....since you guys are so fucking narrow minded and unimaginative....

Fort Knox sets up a system with QE photons. One is set up on the door to the vault of Fort Know. If the door opens, the photon will be affected such that it's state changes.

At a missile silo, there is the paired QE photon. If IT changes state, it knows that the door to Fort Know has opened and it will launch a missile.

You break in to Fort Know and get nuked.

The communication worked.

Fuck you morons for being so fucking narrow-minded. I won't continue this discussion, because you fools do NOT disagree that QE particles change state instantaneously over a distance....i.e. you do not refute QE FTL communciation...you are just being fucking morons and disagreeing the the particular definition of "communcation" while missing the larger point that Event B is triggered by Event A *over distance* *with no time passing* (i.e. instantaneously)...and therefore Event A triggers Event B at FTL communcation speeds.

That you idiots argue the *wrong* point demonstrates how infantile you are in the subject matter at hand.

abge....FIRST google item to search "quantum teleportation of a single-photon"....fine...I was wrong...they teleported "we could transfer a quantum property (in our case the polarization state) from one photon to another. " Whatever...it is a measurable quality, transmitted instantly over distant. It is FTL.

Good fucking god, man, learn how to use google....

Perhaps this is just an issue of miscommunication (heh)

When I say communication, I mean communicate actual information. Knowing if an electron is spin up or spin down is *not* actual information, because you've learned nothing of substance. See Shannon/Information Theory for more info. This is what is meant *in the field* by communication.

Yes, I agree that entangled particles *will* change instantly when measured (FTL), but this has no affect on relativity (unlike if the neutrino results are true) and is *not* communication.

http://www.quantum.at/research/quantum-teleportation-communication-entanglement/first-quantum-teleportation.html

Krellin

1) This is not a narrow minded definition of communication. It is the technical, widely accept definition.

2) No, your fort knox example won't work BECAUSE WE CAN'T MEASURE THE SECOND PARTICLE WITHOUT CHANGING IT. Show me a paper that disagrees.

krellin

This is the same link from the other day. What of it? I've already explained how it doesn't relate to FTL communication.

ABGE -- Please site your source for what the "technical, widely accepted definition" of communication is. Because....I want to suggest you throw that book away. Again....Indians....smoke signal...."0" (no smoke) to "1" (smoke" ****IS**** communcation. If you can't grasp that, then you are lost.

The NEXT STEP of scientific progress will involve learning to communicate a single bit. That is how it ALWAYS starts. And then someone will learn how to entangle an array of quantum bits.....and then someone will learn how to renew that array....

That you are too narrow-minded to grasp that communicating a bit of data is communcation is a terrible black mark against your education.

If I were interviewing you for an engineering position, I would never hire you because you are too narrow-minded and ridiculous to open your mind. I think it is rather pathetic.


Grasp....Tell me....how do we know that we have teleported quantum states without mearuring? How come I can goolge article after article about this topic and find peer-reviewed articles about the *success* of photnic teleportation? The ONLY way to know if the expirement was a success is to monitor the entangled photon for change.

Again....what a severe discredit to your education this is.....

http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20100208334 Knock yourself out. SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ENTANGLED PHOTONS GENERATION AND MEASUREMENT

Uh....CREATE....and *****MEASURE***** entangled photons. GASP!!!!! How can that be....

Yes, sending a 0 or 1 *is* communication, but *not* if you can't chose which it is.

I've already told you--Shannon/Information Theory. Shannon word is *the* word on communication.

Look at that paper. They say they teleport *without* knowing the state. How is that communication?

Cross Post

I'll look at this paper

Abge....basic, basic, basic, basic, basic question: How do you know you hve teleported anything unless you can verify that the QE photon changed states after it was entangled and separated?

I mean....I assume you don't disagree with the published statements that photonic teleportation has taken place, right? You DO agree with the multiple published papers on QE?


And if you DO agree that photonic teleportation has been proven, then you must ALSO agree that, in order to prove it, they needed to see a change in state, write?

Because if they isolated a photon, took it somewhere else, and then couldn't verify that it changed states, then they can't prove teleporation, right?

So either you disagree with all the papers that claim photonic teleportation....or you disagree with the definition of communcation. Because the only way to verify teleportation is the verify a change in state of the entangled photon....and, thus, transmit information...

I truly don't grasp why this is so difficult to grasp.

krellin

That is a good question. But, then why do all these papers (excep the last, which i'm reading now) say that they transport without observing the state?

And....on a side not, Abge...if you *ARE* a major of science, then you should EMBRACE the idea that someone has opened the door to a new field of study (FTL communcation, photonic teleportation, etc.) You should EMBRACE the idea that there is more to learn, more to study, more to explore.

The idea that you think what has been demonstrated could not happen because you hold on to an archaic definition or some such thin lke an ancient monk tells me that your professors are doing nothing to encourage your desire to explore, but instead are encouraging your desire to grasp on to, and hold tight to, the status quo. In other words, they are not teaching you to be a scientist....but instead, they are teaching you to be a priest of current science.

I once worked for GM...and was separated off the Delphi Automotive Systems.

The Government put forh a mandate regarding emissions. GM told the government (being the old-school technology company) that the technology the Feds requested COULD NOT be done. We had the communications from GM that stated it was imnpossible to do.

Delphi....in fact, the guy in the cube next to me....beat the "known science" and met the government standard for this particular emmission requirement.

Don't be so quick to accept that whatever the over-paid brainiac in front of you....and giving you your grade...says is correct. It may just be that he doesn't know the latest and greatest theory, or for some strange reason is a skeptic.

regardles...YOUR job, as a youth in learning, is to be open to AL ideas, and rigorously DISPROVE things. Make sure EXACTLY why you do not believe something, just the same as you need to know exactly why you believe something.