Connect with us

Palentir - Communication via quantum entanglement, sans electromangeticwaves?

Discussion in 'Electronic Design' started by Scott Stephens, Jul 15, 2004.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. In quantum entanglement, particles that have had their quantum states
    cohered are "entangled", dependent on each other, even when
    separated. It takes energy to "cool" or remove uncertainty, to
    cohere quantum states.

    So would it be possible, by cohering, say, a plasma crystals, a
    Bose-Einstein condensate matrix, to create a television that could
    transmit pictures to a remote locations, with out the use of any radio
    waves, via Einstein's "spooky action at a distance" phenomena of
    entanglement?

    Theories of Cellular Automata and TEW would seem to permit
    this? It wouldn't be FTL, but would transmit information through the
    substrate of the quantum vacuum. It couldn't be shielded, only modified
    by another entangled entity. A kind of spread-spectrum coding, at the
    quantum level.

    It would also find great application in space communications. Distance
    and power would no longer be related in such a device, nor would
    interfering objects! No big antenna. Perhaps the entanglement sensor
    could be sub-microscopic for a data link? Anti-jam, anti-intercept.

    Scary. Spooky. Someone could get damn rich and powerful =)

    http://www.spacedaily.com/news/chip-tech-03f.html
    http://www.spacedaily.com/cgi-bin/search/search.pl

    Scott
    --
    Scott

    **********************************

    DIY Piezo-Gyro, PCB Drill Bot & More Soon!

    http://home.comcast.net/~scottxs/

    **********************************
     
  2. John Larkin

    John Larkin Guest


    As I understand it, quantum entanglement can't be used for
    communications, and, if it could, it would be instantaneous, which
    isn't allowed either.

    Qe can, in theory, be used for encryption of communications.

    John
     
  3. Dave

    Dave Guest

    care to explain just how you transfer information from one location to
    another by quantum entanglement??
    if you know how it works, why aren't you rich and powerful?
     
  4. Seems it is a topic of discussion elsewhere:
    http://tinyurl.com/634vk

    According to my notions of QM, it is possible, and wouldn't be
    instantaneous.

    Unfortunately, I doubt anyone capable of doing the experiment will be
    chatting about it, unless it is a government dis-information subterfuge
    do discourage such applications as undetectable eavesdropping,
    un-jammable missiles, micropower radio systems for satellites,
    microscopic radio systems for neural implants for Manchurian Candidates, et.

    --
    Scott

    **********************************

    DIY Piezo-Gyro, PCB Drill Bot & More Soon!

    http://home.comcast.net/~scottxs/

    **********************************
     
  5. Spooky action at a distance, as Einstein would say.
    Because I don't have the means to do it, duh.

    And the feds that have the means aren't very nice. They think you aught
    to be a hard-working, stupid, grateful peasant.

    --
    Scott

    **********************************

    DIY Piezo-Gyro, PCB Drill Bot & More Soon!

    http://home.comcast.net/~scottxs/

    **********************************
     
  6. Cecil Moore

    Cecil Moore Guest

    The problem, as I understand it, is: The characteristics of the entanglement
    result in random events. If you do something to one particle, it stills appears
    as a different random event at the other end. Only after the two measurements
    are compared, using speed of light communications, can it be determined that
    the random sequence did indeed change because of modulation. Thus, one must
    wait for speed of light communications in order to demodulate the entanglement
    information.
     
  7. On second thought, it wouldn't work, since it would require violating
    causality. It's looking at hidden, correlated dice that have already
    been rolled, as it were. You may know what the remote dice is, you can
    even change your dice, but it isn't going to change the remote,
    correlated dice.

    Just as well, perhaps.

    --
    Scott

    **********************************

    DIY Piezo-Gyro, PCB Drill Bot & More Soon!

    http://home.comcast.net/~scottxs/

    **********************************
     
  8. John Larkin

    John Larkin Guest


    The real irony is that if, say, you and Joe are a light-year apart,
    and have both just received one of a pair of entangled photons via
    FedEx or whatever, you can measure the spin of your photon, and you
    can then instantly know the spin of Joe's photon; Joe can measure the
    spin of his (it will be the opposite of yours), you can know what an
    up or down spin *means*, but Joe can't know what it means unless you
    send him an email.

    Nature sure has a cruel sense of humor.

    John
     
  9. No, on third thought...

    Consider a matter of perspective. Say calcium atom C emits entangled
    photon A and photon B. Is there some explanation that goes: C emits a
    certain polarization of A because, at some time future, an detector will
    detect that polarization state! (advanced wave, IIRC)?

    So I catch a photon A from atom C in a bottle of slow-light plasma. I
    catch a lot of entangled photons in a storage loop, and take them with
    me to Saturn so I can communicate with the B photons I keep in a storage
    loop on Earth, so when the Sun is in the way, I don't need a big
    high-gain antenna and radio transmitter.

    The atom C knew I would prefer detecting data-dependent polarization
    states in the future, which allowed it to emit data-polarized A photons
    for me.

    So at the appropriate time, after the A photons at Saturn have been
    imparted a data-correlated state, the B photons are examined on Earth,
    and found to have the same data-dependent polarization state as the A
    photons at Saturn!

    The spooky part is (if you accept the theory of advance-waves) when I
    get C to emit two bottles of entangled photons, I can't open my present
    of B-photons before Christmas (before the causal light-cone, the quantum
    vacuum stabilizes between Saturn and Earth) or I won't get the
    transmitted data! The state the B-photons are detected in will impose
    that state on the A-photons!

    The chain of causality is C can emit data-polarized photon A because a
    detector exists to detect it in that state. Since B will be detected
    after A, it must be in the same state, otherwise atom C could not emit it!

    --
    Scott

    **********************************

    DIY Piezo-Gyro, PCB Drill Bot & More Soon!

    http://home.comcast.net/~scottxs/

    **********************************
     
  10. All the sacred cows of physics are being slaughtered John. This is
    just another one that's already dead. Particles created together can
    instantaneously change their spin, no matter how far apart they may
    have drifted apart. The mechanism by which this interaction is
    mediated is not yet understood, however. So much for C being the
    ultimate speed in the universe.
     
  11. John Larkin

    John Larkin Guest

    Einstein predicted qe something like 70 years ago; it's nothing new,
    except that it's now possible to do it experimentally. Einstein said
    that it would be impossible to use qe to send information faster than
    c, and he's still right.

    They don't instantaneously change their spin; they had opposite spins
    at birth, and they still do when they are measured. Once you get over
    the weirdnesss that one particle has quantized spin, the idea that an
    n-particle system has coupled spins isn't so bad.

    John
     
  12. Cecil Moore

    Cecil Moore Guest

    So the question is: Once the mechanism is understood, can it be
    used for FTL communications or does Mother Nature get the last
    laugh after all?
     
  13. John Larkin

    John Larkin Guest

    Why should C care about the future fate of its photons? Besides, A
    doesn't have any polarization when it is emitted. Its polarization is
    only determined when it's measured.
    No, it had no interest in you.
    As the observer at B measures his photon spin states, he knows that
    every corresponding photon at A has precisely the opposite state. But
    he know *nothing* about what that means, and no information can be
    derived from B's measurements except a random string of 1s and 0s that
    have no meaning without additional communication from A.

    Nothing is imposed, only meaasured.
    Opposite states. They had opposite spins when they were created and
    will have opposite spins if measured. No communications is required to
    keep their spins opposite, and none is derivable.

    John
     
  14. Ken Smith

    Ken Smith Guest

    No, this is just another case where the cat is both fed and unfed[1] until
    you check on it. The only way you can know if the communication happened
    faster than C is to check it involving communication at or below C. It
    has to be a two way system before the speed of light is really broken.



    [1] Cleaned up for cat lovers.
     
  15. Wheeler-Feynman Absorber Theory:
    http://www.npl.washington.edu/npl/int_rep/dtime/node2.html

    My brief, amateur take on quantum physics phenomena is that "events" are
    time direction independent. Atom C will probably not emit a photon
    unless their is an absorber for it. If an absorber exists in some
    arbitrary polarized state (I'm going to Manchester encode data on
    polarized light) in the future, C can emit a polarized photon in that
    state. Atom C does care what happens in the future!

    We live in a world we perceive according to the thermodynamic arrow of
    time. We can't apply our time perspective to quantum events.

    Besides, A
    I was thinking photon a would necessarily be measured in a forced state,
    such as with another Ca (quantum mixer) atom that was being stimulated
    with a data-polarized photon. The palantir receiver is a simple
    polarization detector. The palantir transmitter is a 3-body entanglement
    mixer. The palantir propellant generator is also a 3-body entanglement
    mixer.
    C can only emit entangled photons in the state I permit it to, because
    of the data I apply to the A photon absorber in the future.
    They would not be a random string of 1 & 0's, they would be Manchester
    encoded data!

    --
    Scott

    **********************************

    DIY Piezo-Gyro, PCB Drill Bot & More Soon!

    http://home.comcast.net/~scottxs/

    **********************************
     
  16. I would bet it may be possible to communicate FTL, but not circumvent
    the 2nd law of thermodynamics and conservation of energy.

    So you can't built an FTL quantum computer to build a "Maxwell Demon"
    thermodynamic robot to separate hot and cold particles to reap free energy.

    --
    Scott

    **********************************

    DIY Piezo-Gyro, PCB Drill Bot & More Soon!

    http://home.comcast.net/~scottxs/

    **********************************
     
  17. Ho hum. No it aint.

    http://www.anasoft.co.uk/quantummechanics/index.html

    "Shrodingers Cat was introduced to prove that the standard Copenhagen
    Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics was false. It achieved this, yet
    many simply failed to notice."


    Kevin Aylward

    http://www.anasoft.co.uk
    SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
    Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
    Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
     
  18. Nope paul.
    Ho hummm...
    Why does someone who has *no* qualifications in any science matter
    whatsoever, feel qualified to regurgitate the popular bantam book fodder
    used to impress journalists that know no more than Shakespeare.

    Look Paul, your clueless about all this, so go away. Its getting
    tiresome.

    Kevin Aylward

    http://www.anasoft.co.uk
    SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
    Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
    Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
     
  19. Why does someone with the grammar and spelling of a 14 year old get to
    post to an English-speaking newsgroup at all??
    Stick to the maths, Kev! ;->
     
  20. Ken Smith

    Ken Smith Guest

    [.. I wrote ..]
    Followed by a comment where I explain that two way communication is needed
    before you have proven FTL communications.
    Your web site states:
    The Ensemble Interpretation does not attempt any explanation as to why
    Quantum Mechanics is the way it is. It simply states the most rational way
    of interpreting and calculating the results without introducing the
    blatant contradictions that are indeed in the Copenhagen interpretation,
    in addition to removing all excess metaphysical baggage.

    So it isn't really talking about what the true state of affairs for
    Shrodinger's cat is. It is talking about what the observer can see or
    prove in an experiment. If the communication is only in one direction,
    the experimenter can't see the faster than light communication
    happen. The best he can do is see something that could be explained by
    FTL. This doesn't prove that some other effect is really responcible.
     
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day

-