Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Chinese Physicists Teleport Photons Over 100 Kilometers
Popular Science ^ | May 11, 2012 | Dan Nosowitz

Posted on 05/12/2012 7:52:50 PM PDT by Innovative

Teleportation, sci-fi-y as it sounds, is actually not fictional or even new; two years ago, Chinese physicists broke the then-current record for quantum teleportation by teleporting photons over 10 miles. But a new effort from that same team demolishes that record, beaming the photons over 97 kilometers.

The physicists, working from the University of Science and Technology of China in Shanghai, have again taken advantage of quantum entanglement for the purposes of moving an object from one place to another without ever moving in the space between. According to Technology Review, "The idea is not that the physical object is teleported but the information that describes it. This can then be applied to a similar object in a new location which effectively takes on the new identity."

The task uses a 1.3-watt laser "and some fancy optics" to beam those photons and retrieve them at the final location. The trick seems to be maintaining the photons' information, since the beam widens over space, but eventually teleportation of this sort could be used to beam information incredibly quickly up to satellites.

(Excerpt) Read more at popsci.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: physics; science; scifi; stringtheory; teleportation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last
For those interested in such things...

More in Technolgy REview: Chinese Physicists Smash Distance Record For Teleportation

1 posted on 05/12/2012 7:52:59 PM PDT by Innovative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DUMBGRUNT

ping


2 posted on 05/12/2012 8:06:31 PM PDT by mountn man (Happiness is not a destination, its a way of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

“The idea is not that the physical object is teleported but the information that describes it. This can then be applied to a similar object in a new location which effectively takes on the new identity.”

I’m an economist not a physicist but this doesn’t sound like teleportation to me. Rather it is the transmission of information not the transmission of an object.

Will someone more enlightened inform an ignorant economist what I’m missing?


3 posted on 05/12/2012 8:21:40 PM PDT by Black_Shark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Black_Shark

I take it as an advanced copy of something.


4 posted on 05/12/2012 8:26:37 PM PDT by classified
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Black_Shark
Will someone more enlightened inform an ignorant economist what I’m missing?

I could inform you, but I would have to charge you...

5 posted on 05/12/2012 8:33:55 PM PDT by FDNYRHEROES (It's 3 AM. Let me sleep on it. I'll get back to you in 16 hours.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Black_Shark

I believe you’re correct. Quantum entanglement allows 2 entangled particles to have the same “information” regardless of how far apart the objects are. I have no clue how or why it works, and am not sure anyone else does either - but it’s not teleportation in the Star Trek sense.


6 posted on 05/12/2012 8:34:58 PM PDT by TheZMan (Obama is without a doubt the worst President ever elected to these United States)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Black_Shark

go to the Technology Review link I posted in my post 1, they have more explanation.

But basically something is in one place, then the same/or at least identical something appears at a different location, without it having actually having moved there by moving through the space between the two location.

Hi, I am here at point A.

Next I am calling for you from point B, without actually being observed on route from A to B.


7 posted on 05/12/2012 8:44:21 PM PDT by Innovative (None are so blind that will not see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Innovative
"The idea is not that the physical object is teleported but the information that describes it. This can then be applied to a similar object in a new location which effectively takes on the new identity."

There is no spoon...

8 posted on 05/12/2012 8:45:20 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

Don’t many photons look alike?


9 posted on 05/12/2012 8:49:12 PM PDT by Hillarys Gate Cult (Liberals make unrealistic demands on reality and reality doesn't oblige them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Black_Shark
Will someone more enlightened inform an ignorant economist what I’m missing?

Famously referred to as "spooky action at a distance."

10 posted on 05/12/2012 8:53:46 PM PDT by LoneRangerMassachusetts (The meek shall not inherit the Earth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Black_Shark
Rather it is the transmission of information not the transmission of an object.

Just think of it like Internet Porn.

11 posted on 05/12/2012 9:26:03 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Lame and ill-informed post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

This is not good. Not good at all. This might give the ChiComms unbreakable communications encryption. Hopefully NSA is already past this point and working on ways to disrupt this kind of communications encryption. The ChiComms are known for selling their MILTech to rogue nations, terrorists and Narco-smugglers, so this could be a game-changer on many fronts if they figure out how to field this.


12 posted on 05/12/2012 9:36:34 PM PDT by anymouse (God didn't write this sitcom we call life, he's just the critic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hillarys Gate Cult
Don’t many photons look alike?

What... are you racist?

(: o )

Maybe photons are neither particle nor wave, but the pattern produced by the intersection of waves.


13 posted on 05/12/2012 9:40:21 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Lame and ill-informed post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Innovative
Next I am calling for you from point B, without actually being observed on route from A to B.

I'm not sure but doesn't that imply the transit time from 'A' is 'B' zero? That would be very hard to measure since our instruments are bound by light speed, in any event it would allow the transfer of information at intergalactic distance faster then light speed, yes?

SETI calling on line 2...

Regards,
GtG

14 posted on 05/12/2012 9:41:01 PM PDT by Gandalf_The_Gray (I live in my own little world, I like it 'cuz they know me here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

Are you Speedy Gonzales? Andelay! Andelay!

Roadrunner?

My stomach when I got dysentary in the jungles of Guatemala?


15 posted on 05/12/2012 10:03:01 PM PDT by MadMax, the Grinning Reaper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: mountn man

Oh, well, of course “photons”. Wake me up when they start teleporting neutrons! (or Volkswagon Beetles)


16 posted on 05/12/2012 11:05:44 PM PDT by The Duke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Black_Shark
The statement is completely wrong. No information in the sense understood by laymen is transmitted at superluminal velocity by quantum teleportation; if that were possible causality could be violated.

There is a sleight of hand involved here. What is done is that the state vector (colloquially, and less correctly, called a "wave function" by some) of a photon at distance is entangled with the state vector of a nearby photon. By manipulating the state of the near photon, a change in the state of the remote photon occurs. Because photons (actually all quantum particles) are indistinguishable, the state change reflected in the remote photon is identical to the appearance of a "new" photon with the same state.

However, since an observer at distance cannot know the state of our "nearby" photon (which is remote from his point of view) without exchanging state descriptions with us, there is actually no information being transmitted until an ordinary radio transmission (or pony express rider, or some other conventional information process) actually verifies the content. Roughly, the particles "know" they have been changed ("spooky action at a distance," in Einstein's words) but this knowledge cannot do anyone any good until ordinary messages can be exchanged.

This is the position of orthodox physics. It is not controversial, although there are a few (actually respected) dissenters who claim information can be exchanged in this way. But they have never constructed an experiment that shows how.

This article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_teleportation does not completely suck, even though it is from Wikipedia. If you are very interested, also have a look at the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox which is the original paper that got people thinking about the question of quantum entanglement. Both of these articles are accessible to an intelligent layman. The article on the EPR paradox is the better of the two. Interestingly, Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen believed their "paradox" would overthrow Quantum Mechanics.

They were mistaken; it is not a paradox. It is the way the universe actually behaves.

If you want to follow this rabbit quite far down the hole, the issue was resolved (to the current state of our knowledge) by Bell's Theorem. Have a look there if you are an economist with a decent mathematical background and some time.

17 posted on 05/12/2012 11:26:16 PM PDT by FredZarguna (2.9979 times ten to the eight meters per second: not just a good idea, it's The Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Black_Shark
I'm just an old ex-cotton chopper/picker with an eitght grade educakion.

But I have often thought the simplest way (ha, that's an oxymoron) to do such was gather all the information down to the subatomic structure of an object, transmit it and reconstruct a clone of the object elsewhere. IE: a clone

18 posted on 05/12/2012 11:33:53 PM PDT by Sea Parrot (I'll be a nice to you as you'll let me be, or as mean as you make me be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TheZMan
I believe you’re correct. Quantum entanglement allows 2 entangled particles to have the same “information” regardless of how far apart the objects are. I have no clue how or why it works, and am not sure anyone else does either - but it’s not teleportation in the Star Trek sense.

They do not have the same information. They have complementary information.

It is well understood, and has been since 1937. No physics graduate student can pass a doctoral candidacy or comprehensive exam without being able to explain it.

It is teleportation in the Star Trek sense, as explained by James Blish in the novel Spock Must Die in 1970. [Blish wrote a number of Star Trek episodes and adapted the teleplays into anthologies in at least two books.] His very nice description of how the teleporter works, and how it involves the material destruction of an individual in the transporter room accompanied by his material reconstruction at distance is both quantum mechanically correct (at the level explained) and metaphysically interesting.

19 posted on 05/12/2012 11:36:04 PM PDT by FredZarguna (2.9979 times ten to the eight meters per second: not just a good idea, it's The Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Innovative
"The Propaganda Department of the Central Committee ..."

I believe NOTHING that comes out of China.

20 posted on 05/12/2012 11:36:04 PM PDT by HeartlandOfAmerica ("We have prepared for the unbeliever, whips and chains and blazing fires!" Koran Sura 76:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

Now if they can transport a futon that would be news.


21 posted on 05/12/2012 11:36:32 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Duke
In principle, all that is required is that the particles be quantum mechanical particles. Neutrons are not proscribed.

Unfortunately, though they appear similar (despite the fact that no two have a heater that works -- or fails to work -- in quite the same way) Volkswagons are not indistinguihable particles, so a single state vector cannot describe a system composed of two VW's. This makes them ineligible for QT.

22 posted on 05/12/2012 11:41:41 PM PDT by FredZarguna (2.9979 times ten to the eight meters per second: not just a good idea, it's The Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Sea Parrot
I'm just an old ex-cotton chopper/picker with an eitght grade educakion.

A transparent attempt at deception, since true cotton-pickers use the word "edumacashun."

But I have often thought the simplest way (ha, that's an oxymoron) to do such was gather all the information down to the subatomic structure of an object, transmit it and reconstruct a clone of the object elsewhere. IE: a clone

Again, betraying your false pretense at ignorance by correctly describing exactly what is done.

The key thing to understand is that in a very deep sense every quantum particle in the universe is indistinguishable from every other. Quite profoundly, two photons (for example) are identical in a way that two identical ball-bearings, or two identical twins are not. Thus when a photon is cloned on the other side of the universe, it is -- for all material purposes -- exactly the same as moving the original photon there.

Now "just" repeat that process for every electron, neutron, and proton in a person's body, and you have moved him across the universe.

23 posted on 05/12/2012 11:54:08 PM PDT by FredZarguna (2.9979 times ten to the eight meters per second: not just a good idea, it's The Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Innovative; LoneRangerMassachusetts; TheZMan; All

Hello — OK, so maybe it shouldn’t include the syllable “port”? To me, “porting” means moving something, with or without “tele”.

If you have the same program open twice on a PC, it is considered Multiple Instances. That sounds like what this is.

An instance is an occurrence of an object, regardless of how many times the object occurs, with identicality being implied/assumed thanks to Spooky Action.

The quick verb could be “Spooky”, meaning make another instance of something (wherever).

If I have item X in New York, and want it to also be in London, I could “Spooky” it to London. And, by Spooky Action (no transporting involved), it is there. And, in London, it is equally as X as it is in New York.

I do not pick up from the article that the original in New York would disappear. In fact, it is not relevant unless the Effect of Spooky Action continues past creation, which is not, as I can tell, herein implied.

If the Effect of Spooky Action were continued past creation, the items could be considered “Haunted”.

I believe the items actually are Haunted in Theoretical Quantum Mechanics, but we haven’t done that in the laboratory.

Also, in cases where there is Haunting, which Instance inherits change (via Spooky Action) from which, if they are Identical? Would change occur in either direction? Sounds like conflicts would occur. And what if one Instance is destroyed?

Also #2: There doesn’t seem to be a limit on the number of instances. If New York & London, why not Paris & Munich?


24 posted on 05/12/2012 11:54:24 PM PDT by Museum Twenty (To see myself as others see me? Sounds like a terrible fate! I take great comfort in self-delusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
Now if they can transport a futon that would be news.

That actually made me laugh out loud!!

25 posted on 05/13/2012 12:04:03 AM PDT by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun
From an old MAD magazine bit about Captain Kirk and futon torpedoes.
26 posted on 05/13/2012 2:55:42 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna
That is a succinct, crisp presentation of the Current Standard Model. Nicely done. Bravo!

I, for one, welcome our new Entangled Overlords /.

27 posted on 05/13/2012 3:19:28 AM PDT by Mycroft Holmes (<= Mash name for HTML Xampp PHP C JavaScript primer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna

Does this mean we now have two dead cats?


28 posted on 05/13/2012 4:31:11 AM PDT by Gadsden1st
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Gadsden1st
Does this mean we now have two dead cats?

No, one live and one dead cat. They are complementary.

29 posted on 05/13/2012 4:33:59 AM PDT by Mycroft Holmes (<= Mash name for HTML Xampp PHP C JavaScript primer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

“Teleporting photons”?...

When I was in boy scouts, i teleported photons all the way to the surface of the moon, with my green BSA flashlight.

This is Chicoms, bragging about being Chicoms.

Commie nonsense.


30 posted on 05/13/2012 4:36:51 AM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network (Vote for the straight guy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mycroft Holmes

Then if we did this to Obama, we could vote for him.


31 posted on 05/13/2012 4:39:06 AM PDT by Gadsden1st
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Gadsden1st
Then if we did this to Obama, we could vote for him. (re: Clone dead/alive cat.)

Isn't that how we got Romney?

32 posted on 05/13/2012 4:49:36 AM PDT by Mycroft Holmes (<= Mash name for HTML Xampp PHP C JavaScript primer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Innovative
Teleportation is a cool idea, I mean, what could go wrong?


33 posted on 05/13/2012 5:04:28 AM PDT by Hot Tabasco (My 6 pack abs are now a full keg......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anymouse

You’re talking about quantum encryption. Yes, we’ve been working on that for many years now.


34 posted on 05/13/2012 5:20:51 AM PDT by Future Snake Eater (CrossFit.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Black_Shark

Maybe the original is destroyed as it is codified and the new code “creates” the “teleported” version. Can’t think of how why ecept for the fact that nothing is truly destroyed/created (other than wht God accomplished), but all springs from other forms and changes to other forms.


35 posted on 05/13/2012 5:41:11 AM PDT by trebb ("If a man will not work, he should not eat" From 2 Thes 3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna

I will have to look for a copy.


36 posted on 05/13/2012 5:51:23 AM PDT by wally_bert (It's sheer elegance in its simplicity! - The Middleman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna

Umm.... I think I understand why I went into Econ and not Physics ;)

That pretty much went right over my head.

“However, since an observer at distance cannot know the state of our “nearby” photon (which is remote from his point of view) without exchanging state descriptions with us, there is actually no information being transmitted until an ordinary radio transmission (or pony express rider, or some other conventional information process) actually verifies the content. Roughly, the particles “know” they have been changed (”spooky action at a distance,” in Einstein’s words) but this knowledge cannot do anyone any good until ordinary messages can be exchanged. “

How do particles “know” if they are not sentient?


37 posted on 05/13/2012 9:29:28 AM PDT by Black_Shark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Museum Twenty

But it *is* teleported. A “cloned” quantum particle with the same wavefunction is not different in any material sense; your analysis is mistaken because you are thinking as if these photons are classical particles. They are not. Because they are entangled there is really no way to know which one is “here” and which one is “there.” Both particles are actually in both places and neither particle is in either place. There is only a state vector which describes both of them until we do an experiment that subsequently untangles them.


38 posted on 05/13/2012 9:41:19 AM PDT by FredZarguna (2.9979 times ten to the eight meters per second: not just a good idea, it's The Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Black_Shark

It’s just an analogy. They are not self-aware. It’s just a shorthand for saying that the the wave function of the entangled system is changed. This has effects within the system which cannot be observed until a subsequent experiment is done.


39 posted on 05/13/2012 9:59:55 AM PDT by FredZarguna (2.9979 times ten to the eight meters per second: not just a good idea, it's The Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Gadsden1st
That you have (or have not) two dead cats was never the point. The point was that you ostensibly have a cat (or two cats, or N-cats) that are in a state of neither "aliveness" or "deadness." Contrary to what is printed in the popular literature, a number of physicists have had a lot of problems with Schroedinger's Cat over the years, including the question of whether the state of being alive or being dead even corresponds to an "Observable," in the quantum mechanical sense. Or if the cat's own self-awareness (cats are not particles, after all) fundamentally changes the experiment and so on.

Einstein had a much better analogy for mixed eignestates, and his version had no cat and did not involve potentially problematic metaphysical questions about whether there is a bounded Hermitean operator corresponding to "Life" or "Death." In his paradox, there is a keg of gunpowder in Schroedinger's Box. The question then becomes, when a quantum of radiation is introduced, is the gunpowder in an (un)exploded state or a mixed state of the two?

He argued that not even the most strident defender of quantum mechanics would remain in the room, secure in the belief that the gunpowder was in a mixed combination of eigenstates until the box was actually open.

Probably true.

That paradox is stripped of the silly aspects of the Schroedinger's Cat paradox, but for the same reason did not catch on in the imaginations of popular science writers who don't really understand science very well.

Assuming something that I don't believe -- that there's a quantum mechanical operator corresponding to "Life" -- for the purposes of advancing a hypothetical, if you could find a complementary physical property for a two-cat state, flipping that state in the near cat could kill the remote cat and bring the local cat back to life. Flipping that eigenstate again would bring the remote dead cat back to life, and kill the local one.

This is instructive in the instant case because no one believes physics can bring a dead entity back to life once truly dead. A perfectly good alternative explanation -- precisely because the two cats are indistinguishable -- is that you have merely teleported the dead cat to the live cat's former location, while teleporting the live cat back at the same time.

40 posted on 05/13/2012 10:23:44 AM PDT by FredZarguna (2.9979 times ten to the eight meters per second: not just a good idea, it's The Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna
I hadn't heard the Einstein analogy, replacing the cat with gunpowder. It really does work much better to illustrate the actual realities of the situation. Of course, the observer in this case is the gunpowder (and the cat).

What convinced me that the state vectors really don't collapse until observed is the experiment with a laser pointer and three polarized sun-glass lenses.

Point a laser at a piece of polarized stuff oriented up. This will cut the intensity of the beam significantly by filtering out everything that isn't polarized up.

Downstream of that put another polarized piece oriented sideways (90 degrees) from the first piece. Given a sufficiently good quality of polarization this will pretty much totally stop the beam. This is all in accord with everyone's experience.

Now, what happens to the downstream beam (currently totally blocked) if we insert another polarized piece oriented at 45 degrees between the existing two? If the polarized pieces were just acting as filters the intuitive result would be exactly nothing.

This is not what happens. What does happen is that where there was darkness downstream there is now a pretty good beam. What happens at each polarization stage isn't a simple filtering, it is an honest to God observation, and it really does alter the polarization of the incoming photon.

I, for one, welcome our new Observing Overlords /.

41 posted on 05/13/2012 10:56:08 AM PDT by Mycroft Holmes (<= Mash name for HTML Xampp PHP C JavaScript primer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Mycroft Holmes

This is pretty cool stuff!


42 posted on 05/13/2012 10:59:52 AM PDT by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: The Duke
Oh, well, of course “photons”. Wake me up when they start teleporting neutrons! (or Volkswagon Beetles)

Forget neutrons. I want them transporting Morons.

43 posted on 05/13/2012 11:02:05 AM PDT by mountn man (Happiness is not a destination, its a way of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna; TheZMan
It is teleportation in the Star Trek sense, as explained by James Blish in the novel Spock Must Die in 1970. [Blish wrote a number of Star Trek episodes and adapted the teleplays into anthologies in at least two books.] His very nice description of how the teleporter works, and how it involves the material destruction of an individual in the transporter room accompanied by his material reconstruction at distance is both quantum mechanically correct (at the level explained) and metaphysically interesting

Thanks i was wondering if anyone else was going to chime in with this bit of Star Trek knowledge.

In addition I believe that the there was at least one episode of Star Trek the Next Generation that dealt with this concept..might have been the one with Scotty as the guest star.

44 posted on 05/13/2012 11:04:53 AM PDT by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco
Teleportation is a cool idea, I mean, what could go wrong?


Exactly.
45 posted on 05/13/2012 11:17:07 AM PDT by RandallFlagg (Look for the union label, then buy elsewhere.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

They teleported photons by using photons?


46 posted on 05/13/2012 11:21:33 AM PDT by AFreeBird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DouglasKC; FredZarguna
Dan Simmons also used this type teleportation in his novels Ilium and Olympos.

No one seemed as excited about this mode of "transportation" once they learned that they were actually destroyed at the transmitting end.

47 posted on 05/13/2012 11:31:38 AM PDT by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna

“I’m just an old ex-cotton chopper/picker with an eitght grade educakion.”

T’was in jest, but in fact true. My formal education ended at the 8th grade.

But, being an autodidact, I happily escaped the bureaucratization of intellect.


48 posted on 05/13/2012 11:38:39 AM PDT by Sea Parrot (I'll be a nice to you as you'll let me be, or as mean as you make me be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Museum Twenty
I do not pick up from the article that the original in New York would disappear. In fact, it is not relevant unless the Effect of Spooky Action continues past creation, which is not, as I can tell, herein implied.

I think your reading too much into this. We can manipulate objects at a distance with magnetism. We can manipulate charged particls in an electric field. We can predict orbits in a gravitational field. Now scientists are manipulating particle states at a distance. All this stuff is "action at a distance." For all the clever calculations and speculations scientists make, they still can't tell us the underlying mechanics of how forces act at a distance. It's spooky, erie, otherworldly for the time being.

49 posted on 05/13/2012 3:42:40 PM PDT by LoneRangerMassachusetts (The meek shall not inherit the Earth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Museum Twenty
I do not pick up from the article that the original in New York would disappear. In fact, it is not relevant unless the Effect of Spooky Action continues past creation, which is not, as I can tell, herein implied.

I think your reading too much into this. We can manipulate objects at a distance with magnetism. We can manipulate charged particls in an electric field. We can predict orbits in a gravitational field. Now scientists are manipulating particle states at a distance. All this stuff is "action at a distance." For all the clever calculations and speculations scientists make, they still can't tell us the underlying mechanics of how forces act at a distance. It's spooky, erie, otherworldly for the time being.

50 posted on 05/13/2012 3:43:09 PM PDT by LoneRangerMassachusetts (The meek shall not inherit the Earth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson