It's basically an ansible! Plus the professor that is working on it is named Anton, as if this whole thing were directly from the OSC universe.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
This is not new research -- it's about two years old. (Although I believe this experiment involved considerably larger distances than earlier ones.)
As of yet, while the media has been touting it, there are no practical applications.
Check back in 40 years or so.
IOW, yes, it's neat. But it's NOT an ansible, or even necessarily likely to lead to one. Oh, and it's not a transporter either (the other thing the media keep linking to this research).
Posted by Ronin (Member # 1749) on :
How can you say that there are no practical applications? The one they site here are for sending secure messages. If there is only one receiver capable of even being in tune with the sender there is no room for insecurity. No one can ease drop on the message. In addition, the ability to be able to extend the distance between transmitter and receiver opens up the idea of using it on satellites, and maybe eventually on other planets.
Instantaneous transfer means 0 latency connections. I don't see how anyone can't be excited about that.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Hey, they offered to name my soul mate. I'm excited!
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ronin: How can you say that there are no practical applications? The one they site here are for sending secure messages.
And when they actually manage to send information on a scale larger than a single bit, get back to me.
Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by Ronin: How can you say that there are no practical applications? The one they site here are for sending secure messages.
And when they actually manage to send information on a scale larger than a single bit, get back to me.
I was under the impression that it wasn't supposed to be possible to send any information. Can anyone here provide a non media hype translation for us, I am curious as to what is actually happening here.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
They can currently trigger a single change. That essentially IS information -- just a very, very small amount. One bit's worth.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
If someone is travelling near light speed, the bits we send them will seem like a lot by the time they get them. Or is it the other way around? This is actually interesting stuff for my time contraction universe, if the communication can only go one way.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Currently we can only send one bit. It's not one-bit-every-long-period-of-time; it's one bit. Period.
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
I love quantum entanglement SO MUCH. Our knowledge will improve; soon Jane will be inside my ear.
Also, SPOOKY PHOTONS.
Oh, god, I love science so very, very much. I'm naming my next show dog Spooky Photon.
Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Currently we can only send one bit. It's not one-bit-every-long-period-of-time; it's one bit. Period.
Well, it's one bit more than I thought they could. I suppose that's a start.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
quote:Currently we can only send one bit. It's not one-bit-every-long-period-of-time; it's one bit. Period.
I guess I'm not smart enough to understand where it says this. Why does the article talk about encrypted messages?
Posted by Ronin (Member # 1749) on :
I read the article twice and I didn't see where they said how much information they sent. They say an encrypted message but that could mean a lot of things.
Posted by Reg (Member # 9350) on :
I don't normally post or even view here, just read OSC's columns , but I would like to correct the news media and many others on the possibilities of quantum entanglement. Quantum entanglement does not facilitate instantaneous communication. Period. While one aspect of quantum entanglement; the reading of the entangled state, in photons in this case, is instantaneous, the overall communication speed is still less then the speed of light. This is because the entangled photon must be sent to the source by normal means, i.e. a laser. When the entangled photon arrives at the source you can "read" the entanglement and know what was sent, but each entangled photon only represents one bit, no more. It is completely analog to sending a letter to someone on a distant planet. When they open the letter and read the contents, presto faster then light communication. Quantum entanglement is no different in theory, just a much more complicated encoding method. Although quantum entanglement is very useful as an encryption method, as mentioned in the article, because the message can only be read once, then like in mission impossible it is destroyed.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
, but I would like to correct the news media and many others on the possibilities of quantum entanglement. Quantum entanglement does not facilitate instantaneous communication. Period. While one aspect of quantum entanglement; the reading of the entangled state, in photons in this case, is instantaneous, the overall communication speed is still less then the speed of light. This is because the entangled photon must be sent to the source by normal means, i.e. a laser. When the entangled photon arrives at the source you can "read" the entanglement and know what was sent, but each entangled photon only represents one bit, no more. It is completely analog to sending a letter to someone on a distant planet. When they open the letter and read the contents, presto faster then light communication. Quantum entanglement is no different in theory, just a much more complicated encoding method. Although quantum entanglement is very useful as an encryption method, as mentioned in the article, because the message can only be read once, then like in mission impossible it is destroyed.