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

Skip to comments.

The Spooky Factor And Teleportation
Toogood Reports ^ | October 23, 2001 | Beth Goodtree

Posted on 10/23/2001 5:15:41 PM PDT by Starmaker

A few weeks ago we just got one big step closer to having quantum computers and teleportation. This is because atoms have an almost ‘psychic´ ability that Einstein once termed spooky. It seems that distant atoms are almost ‘telepathically´ linked to each other in what scientists call entanglement. Plainly put, it means that a group of atoms ‘over here´ knows what a group of atoms ‘over there´ are doing. This is one of the properties of atoms described by of a branch of science called Quantum Theory.

The word ‘quantum´ means a discrete or separate unit of energy, and Quantum Theory tries to explain the properties of these basic units of nature. When people think of atoms, they usually envision solid, separate balls of matter like a group of billiard balls. However, according to Quantum Theory, atoms are much less tangible, with properties that can only be described (right now) as spooky.

One of the first weird things we learned about quantum particles was that we could know where a particle was, or when a particle was, but we could never know both at the same time. Because it reminds me of the socks I always lose in the wash, I call it "Beth´s Principle of Lost Socks and Quantum Particles." (I would know when I had a full pair of socks, or where that full pair had been, but do the laundry and the full pair would be gone.) In fancy terms, we´d say we knew a particle´s location or it´s velocity, but not both. This discovery is called the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, and understanding it is critical to understanding the possibilities inherent in Quantum Theory.

Quantum particles such as atoms or photons can exist in distinct states, like the head or tail of a coin. But these same particles can also exist in both states at once (known formally as superposition). This is comparable to a coin spinning in the air before it lands.

Now let´s suppose we toss two coins at once. Whichever way one coin lands has no bearing on how the other coin lands. Because of this, we say their outcomes are independent -- if one coin lands heads up, it will not effect the way the other coin lands. However, two entangled quantum particles are not like coins. The fate of one effects the fate of the other. For instance, if one entangled quantum particle is in a 'heads' state, the other must be in a 'tails' state. We say that they are interdependent. And this interdependence is the whole key to teleportation.

For any practical applications, entanglement has to embrace thousands, or even millions, of particles, and maintaining total entanglement is very difficult. However, the scientists have found a way around this problem.

They do without complete entanglement, where the state of each particle depends on the state of every other particle. Instead, they generate two loosely entangled clouds of cesium gas, one with slightly more atoms in a 'heads' state and the other with slightly more in a 'tails' state. (These two states are actually defined by the directions of the atoms' magnetic fields.) By doing it this way, many more atoms can be entangled, and stay that way for a longer period of time.

So how does this translate into teleportation? Well, it does and it doesn´t. But the final effect is the same as teleportation. One set of quantum particles can be instantaneously reproduced somewhere else. So unlike Star Trek, objects are not broken down and their particles ‘beamed´ somewhere. Instead, they are reproduced somewhere. In this way a message encoded in photons of light could be transmitted from one place to another without sending the photons across the intervening space, effectively bypassing the speed-of-light barrier.

Up until now, the maximum amount of particles that scientists could entangle were a measly four atoms. This most recent experiment entangled about a million atoms, bringing us much closer to the realization of teleportation, quantum computers, and a new form of instant communication over vast distances.


TOPICS: Editorial; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last
To: All those who are willing to question....

Humans who live currently cannot possibly comprehend what humans who will live a mere 100 years from now will know and understand about the universe and existence...

They will possess power we have not yet dreamed of...

The secrets of the extremely large will come from learning the secrets of the very small...

Consciousness on planet earth is about to be forced to deal with it's own power...

It is now time for the conscious human being to learn not to fear the power that he possesses...

But instead learn to control it...

41 posted on 10/23/2001 10:09:02 PM PDT by Ferris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Feisty1
I see your point - I was just trying and failing to say the article has a sort of spin to it - it mentions caesium, then talks almost exclusively about entanglement, almost giving the impression that it is some new thing (the clue being the mention of Einstein) - it then says at the end:

Up until now, the maximum amount of particles that scientists could entangle were a measly four atoms.

Unfortunately (especially since this article is for readers who may never have heard of entanglement) there are two ways to read that, and one way is 'the only particles they can entangle are atoms, and the max total is 4 of these' This is reinforced by the second line ("This is because atoms have..."). This is not true - light and electrons are the usual mediums for these experiments - usually they produce continuous beams of entangled particles.

Then again, quantum theory and all, light/electrons - is it fair to refer to them as a PARTICLE OR a WAVE??? - ARRRRRRGH!

42 posted on 10/23/2001 10:15:33 PM PDT by New Zealander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Starmaker
A clever young fellow named Bright
Could travel much faster than light.
He departed one day,
In a relative way,
And arrived on the previous night.
43 posted on 10/23/2001 10:16:05 PM PDT by Octar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: In veno, veritas
I don't believe that is correct. The issue is that fiber-optics are really mirrors wrapped into a tube. The photons do not travel in a straight line but instead constantly bounce off of the 'walls' and therefore the distance that they travel is really 1/3rd longer than the distance that an electron would travel. It's been awhile, but I used to work in telecom where this stuff matters. From what I recall, latency on a fiber line is higher than a copper line for these reasons.
44 posted on 10/23/2001 10:19:35 PM PDT by wireplay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

Comment #45 Removed by Moderator

To: Starmaker
Good grief! I read the whole article and couldn't repeat more than one sentence of it - I should send it to my son,a chemist. Too many "egg-heads" here. Did you see the report where they put 'fat' cells on one side of a membrane, and 'nerve' cells on the other side, and the fat cells send signals to the nerve cells to tell the body to eat??
46 posted on 10/23/2001 10:37:40 PM PDT by potlatch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

Comment #47 Removed by Moderator

To: Ferris
It won't be humans that will possess all that power. It will either be some form of AI robots or some seriously mangled-up form of genetic mutants.

Or maybe the future will be owned by bunches of electrons or photons circulating through networks. Or maybe super intelligent nanobots that humans (the few that are left around) won't even be able to see.

Oh well. We had a nice 1,000,000 year ride while it lasted!

48 posted on 10/24/2001 7:55:16 AM PDT by who_would_fardels_bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: nunya bidness
Here's one I found at auction on Amazon:

PHILIP K. DICK ~ LIES, INC. ~ FIRST EDITION ~ NEW IN DUST JACKET ~

Another good place to look for old books is at Powell's (although they don't have this one at the moment).

Looks like the Amazon auction ends in less than 3 hours, BTW...

49 posted on 10/24/2001 11:37:36 AM PDT by MadameAxe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: nunya bidness
Oops, make that less than 4 hours. It's also known as The Unteleported Man, which is also out of print. I have it under that name in a reprint edition...
50 posted on 10/24/2001 11:41:26 AM PDT by MadameAxe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: wireplay
With such a short distance involved, that much wouldn't matter a great deal. From what I have been taught, it is like a tube filled with golf balls. You push one in and at the same exact time, one comes out.
51 posted on 10/25/2001 7:42:22 PM PDT by In veno, veritas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Starmaker
One of the first weird things we learned about quantum particles was that we could know where a particle was, or when a particle was, but we could never know both at the same time.

It would be helpful if the author actually understood what he was writing about.

The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle states (in lay terms) that we can't similataneously determine a quantum particle's position (location) AND momentum to an arbitrary degree of accuracy. As momentum is the product of the particles' mass times its velocity, the implication is that we can know the location of the particle, or its velocity, or we can know both to a limited degree of accuracy, but not BOTH to an arbitrary degree of accuracy at the same time.

52 posted on 10/25/2001 8:03:24 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Physicist; Gordian Blade; RadioAstronomer; ThinkPlease; PatrickHenry; VadeRetro; Godel
QM entanglement bump
53 posted on 10/25/2001 8:06:05 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Skibane
A LOT of "Science Fiction" written about the "Theoretics" of this process--(see "Piers Anthony's 'Tarot' Novels")!

Quantum Physics & its "strange by-products" have produced fertile "ground" for LOTS of fun speculation!

We have SO MUCH to learn--if the psychotic followers of "Osama's Islam" can , once again, be rendered "Irrelevant!"

Doc

54 posted on 10/25/2001 8:38:48 PM PDT by Doc On The Bay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Starmaker
Can I assume since you're NOT moving the object, you only need one perfect original to make an unlimited number of copies? Kiss the factories good-bye ... kiss pollution off, bye-bye poverty. Time for an economy based on experience not things. We would be strangers in a strange land.
55 posted on 10/25/2001 8:53:23 PM PDT by GOPJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPJ
Man, I wish they'd hurry up! I got lots more 'sperience than I do things. See, I met the guy (ok gal) with experience when I had some things. Now she's got the things and I got the 'sperience.
56 posted on 10/25/2001 10:11:10 PM PDT by Anthem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
Thanks for the bump. Threads on QM often seem no more comprehensible than threads on the Bermuda Triangle. Of course, sometimes that's true of QM itself.
57 posted on 10/26/2001 4:12:12 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Starmaker
In this way a message encoded in photons of light could be transmitted from one place to another without sending the photons across the intervening space, effectively bypassing the speed-of-light barrier.

Tha's completely wrong. Quantum entanglement cannot be used to transmit a signal faster than the speed of light. If I have time later, I'll write up a layman's explanation of why. This is a good question for the future FR physics FAQ.

58 posted on 10/26/2001 6:55:04 AM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts
Until someone is able to prove that entanglement is constant from one end of the universe to the other, it is still just a theory.

Everyone knows the furthest point away from an object is right next to it! LOL

59 posted on 10/26/2001 7:09:46 AM PDT by antidisestablishment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Starmaker
I have a hairache.
60 posted on 10/26/2001 7:14:57 AM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 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