Scientists Achieve First Ever Quantum Teleportation

Scientists Achieve First Ever Quantum Teleportation

No, it won't let you beam straight from your house to work, but it's still really cool.

PolicyMic reports that scientists from the Netherlands have been able to successfully perform quantum teleportation, whereby two objects in remote locations can affect each other as though they were directly attached. Its a feat which Albert Einstein himself once dismissed as "spooky action at a distance."

In a new paper published in the journal Science, physicists at the Kavli Institute of Nanoscience at the Delft University of Technology said they were able to "reliably teleport information between two quantum bits separated by three meters, or about 10 feet." This goes against Einstein's notion of particle entanglement, and is a huge breakthrough for quantum mechanical theory - and information transmission as we know it.

The experiment in question sent quantum data on an electron's spin state to another electron about 10 feet away, with the information being sent as though the two electron's were directly connected. The scientists are hoping to increase the distance from 10 feet to a kilometer for their next attempt.

And before some of you write this off as a "boring" use of science, a few things to keep in mind: one, this science powers the "quantum entanglement" communication technology employed by Mass Effect's Normandy, and two a perfected version of this tech would allow for the almost instantaneous transmission of data across almost any length of distance. It would outrace even some of the fastest internet providers today, like Google Fiber.

PolicyMic also notes that a closed quantum network would make it much harder for an outside party to determine what content is being accessed.

And, of course, there's also the excitement of proving wrong one of the greatest scientific minds that ever lived.

"There is a big race going on between five or six groups to prove Einstein wrong," said Ronald Hanson, one of the lead researchers. "There is one very big fish."

Source: PolicyMic

Permalink

near instantaneous communication that can reach across galaxies?

evilnancyreagan:
near instantaneous communication that can reach across galaxies?

You're not thinking big enough. If perfected, this technology would be instantaneous communication across the entirety of the universe. It's kind of amazing.

What I want to know, more than anything else, is if they've found a way around the "entangled pair" restrictions, or even if it's theoretically possible to have malleable connections.

Agayek:

evilnancyreagan:
near instantaneous communication that can reach across galaxies?

You're not thinking big enough. If perfected, this technology would be instantaneous communication across the entirety of the universe. It's kind of amazing.

What I want to know, more than anything else, is if they've found a way around the "entangled pair" restrictions, or even if it's theoretically possible to have malleable connections.

AND solve the spectrum problem :D

Hold your horses guys, while the distance issue is the main thing here don't expect it to have much difference for most communication here on Earth. To start with there is the fact that unless you had a such a device placed next to your computer and one next to the server you want to access you are still held up by the light speed barrier and the speed electrons can move down wires as well as the access speeds of both computers themselves, the amount of time saved would indistinguishable for the end user here on Earth.

The second aspect is that it wouldn't change a thing as far as unwillingness to upgrade infrastructure, there should be more than enough bandwidth from the tier 3(?) providers for just about everything but the companies that connect you to those backbones want to maximise profits and will avoiding giving you the service you pay for. There have even been reports from the ISPs that supply ISPs that they consistently report overloaded and congested services and get ignored, they simply don't want to buy more.

Agayek:
You're not thinking big enough.

Actually I am thinking that it may be possible for some distant, macroscopic being to be remote controlling my every thought and action. I'm just waiting to find a plumbob above my head :X

*sigh*

Once again, no, quantum entanglement does not allow outside instantaneous communication at any distance. You get inverse results at each side, so each side will know what result the other side got, but there's no way to input information in such a way that the other side gets it. I read a 1, so I know that you read a 0. But if I want to transmit some information to you... Back to light speed or less.

It does allow encryption that can only be broken by the other side, so that's cool.

And how did this all work?
Because Quantum.

Pyrian:
*sigh*

every party has a pooper :P

Well, I reject your reality and substitute it with my own!

It's a more fun place and it doesn't require me to do any fact-checking B]

Whats this? Transmit data fast3r than google fiber, And We Cant Snoop Around It?

Both NSA, and big cable will activly lobby to prevent this from happening in the u.s. im sure of it

evilnancyreagan:

Pyrian:
*sigh*

every party has a pooper :P

Well, I reject your reality and substitute it with my own!

It's a more fun place and it doesn't require me to do any fact-checking B]

Hello, fellow MythBusters fan! =D I concur, sanity is much like gravity. It's relative.

Annnd it's time for today's thrilling edition of "There's an XKCD for that!"

image

big deal, for FTL communication we just need the astronomican

the emperor protects

...

on a more serious note, holy shit science is amazing

Pyrian:
*sigh*

Once again, no, quantum entanglement does not allow outside instantaneous communication at any distance. You get inverse results at each side, so each side will know what result the other side got, but there's no way to input information in such a way that the other side gets it. I read a 1, so I know that you read a 0. But if I want to transmit some information to you... Back to light speed or less.

It does allow encryption that can only be broken by the other side, so that's cool.

I don't follow, if one side read a 0 and the other got a 1, don't you then have the foundation for communication via binary?

I find it hilariously coincidental that the username of the author is "BlametheWizards" were you a part of it too OP?

I kid I kid.

I only wish we can live for 300 or so years. I can only think back to reading articles on the first invention of airplanes. What was once thought of as a silly science gimmick and a toy became (after a war of course) one of the fastest modes of transportation in a matter of years.

Obviously this is no where close to that level yet, but just IMAGINE how advanced this tech would be centuries right now.

harrisonmcgiggins:
Whats this? Transmit data fast3r than google fiber, And We Cant Snoop Around It?

Both NSA, and big cable will activly lobby to prevent this from happening in the u.s. im sure of it

Well they are doing an excellent job blocking Google Fiber so it's not even an "I'm sure of it" kind of thing. It's a hard case definite. Unless of course those companies make the tech market standard first.

Jadak:

Pyrian:
*sigh*

Once again, no, quantum entanglement does not allow outside instantaneous communication at any distance. You get inverse results at each side, so each side will know what result the other side got, but there's no way to input information in such a way that the other side gets it. I read a 1, so I know that you read a 0. But if I want to transmit some information to you... Back to light speed or less.

It does allow encryption that can only be broken by the other side, so that's cool.

I don't follow, if one side read a 0 and the other got a 1, don't you then have the foundation for communication via binary?

No, because you do not decide what you have on your side, thus you cannot affect the one on the other side either.
To give a crude example on layman's terms (the real deal is a fair bit more complicated, you see): Imagine having two wooden boxes. One has a black stone in it while the other has a white stone in it, but you don't know which is which.
Now, if you open one of these boxes, and it's the white stone, you automatically know that the other box is the one with the black stone. The case of entangled particles is further complicated by that they exist in both states at once, so it would be like if you would have a grey stone that had a 50/50 chance to turn white or green upon opening the box and the other would automatically turn the opposite color.

And herein lies the problem: You cannot influence what "color" you get on your end. It's random, a 50/50 chance. It's not like you pick white and the other box would become black on the other end of the world instantaneously, you just get a random result with the guarantee that the other box/particle would be the exact opposite.

If you don't know what result you get, you cannot use it for communication, and if you "cheat" and take a peek inside the box to see what color the stone is, the two are no longer entangled and thus you cannot use them for communication. Really, this whole thing is nothing more than an experiment designed to further our understanding of the standard model drummed up by the media on a slow news week into something it is simply not. Kind of reminds me of last week's "Start Trek replicator" article...

Oh my god, that would make multiplayer gaming and porn on mars feasible!

NuclearKangaroo:
big deal, for FTL communication we just need the astronomican

the emperor protects

...

on a more serious note, holy shit science is amazing

To be honest I don't think it will catch on, just think of all the paper work it would create every time daemons came rampaging out of the data centre.

GabeZhul:

Jadak:

Pyrian:
snip

I don't follow, if one side read a 0 and the other got a 1, don't you then have the foundation for communication via binary?

No, because you do not decide what you have on your side, thus you cannot affect the one on the other side either.
To give a crude example on layman's terms (the real deal is a fair bit more complicated, you see): Imagine having two wooden boxes. One has a black stone in it while the other has a white stone in it, but you don't know which is which.
Now, if you open one of these boxes, and it's the white stone, you automatically know that the other box is the one with the black stone. The case of entangled particles is further complicated by that they exist in both states at once, so it would be like if you would have a grey stone that had a 50/50 chance to turn white or green upon opening the box and the other would automatically turn the opposite color.

And herein lies the problem: You cannot influence what "color" you get on your end. It's random, a 50/50 chance. It's not like you pick white and the other box would become black on the other end of the world instantaneously, you just get a random result with the guarantee that the other box/particle would be the exact opposite.

If you don't know what result you get, you cannot use it for communication, and if you "cheat" and take a peek inside the box to see what color the stone is, the two are no longer entangled and thus you cannot use them for communication. Really, this whole thing is nothing more than an experiment designed to further our understanding of the standard model drummed up by the media on a slow news week into something it is simply not. Kind of reminds me of last week's "Start Trek replicator" article...

Thanks, I actually learned something. I see this a lot as well with biology topics and pisses me off sometimes. I'm not as good with physics though. Still this is a nice 'breakthrough' isn't it? Could it have no real world applications?

NSA is not happy...

I'm sorry, I've seem to have drooled all over the place, hmm such delicious science.

I hope this will see application in our computers "soon". Maybe actual secure communication will become possible now.

How expensive is this stuff anyway?

J Tyran:
Hold your horses guys, while the distance issue is the main thing here don't expect it to have much difference for most communication here on Earth. To start with there is the fact that unless you had a such a device placed next to your computer and one next to the server you want to access you are still held up by the light speed barrier and the speed electrons can move down wires as well as the access speeds of both computers themselves, the amount of time saved would indistinguishable for the end user here on Earth.

Actually, I can see stock markets being one of the first things to take an interest in this technology if they ever manage to develop it properly. Even a micro-second matters for them.

Next to that, this has apparently interesting implications for things like cryptography and data tapping which sounds like something quite a bit more important at this point.

Well this is cool - can't wait to see if they'll figure out how to make this work at longer ranges

iseko:
Could it have no real world applications?

It has interesting implications for cryptography. You can have an utterly random key that both sides know and becomes useless if intercepted.

J Tyran:

The second aspect is that it wouldn't change a thing as far as unwillingness to upgrade infrastructure, there should be more than enough bandwidth from the tier 3(?) providers for just about everything but the companies that connect you to those backbones want to maximise profits and will avoiding giving you the service you pay for. There have even been reports from the ISPs that supply ISPs that they consistently report overloaded and congested services and get ignored, they simply don't want to buy more.

The thing about this if it can be gotten to a working point is that is would be point to point, so no infrastructure is needed. Their are no wires that need to be put into the ground, you would just have two boxes that talk to each-other at any distance.

BlameTheWizards:
And before some of you write this off as a "boring" use of science, a few things to keep in mind: one, this science powers the "quantum entanglement" communication technology employed by Mass Effect's Normandy, and two a perfected version of this tech would allow for the almost instantaneous transmission of data across almost any length of distance. It would outrace even some of the fastest internet providers today, like Google Fiber.

I think I preferred our old "almost uselessly shallow" style of science reporting to this new "actually false and incredibly misleading" flavor. It's one thing to restate an article in simpler terms, but its quite another to add your own input and speculation regarding a subject you don't know anything about and propagate misunderstanding amongst your readers. That's the opposite of reporting.

For one thing, as has already been said many times, that's not how entanglement works. It doesn't allow transmission of information faster than the speed of light, that would break causality. Less crucially, Google Fiber is called "fast" because it has high bandwidth, or volume of data it transfers over time, not because the data actually moves faster.

I get that this is exciting, but you have a job to do. Report.

GabeZhul:

Jadak:

Pyrian:
*sigh*

Once again, no, quantum entanglement does not allow outside instantaneous communication at any distance. You get inverse results at each side, so each side will know what result the other side got, but there's no way to input information in such a way that the other side gets it. I read a 1, so I know that you read a 0. But if I want to transmit some information to you... Back to light speed or less.

It does allow encryption that can only be broken by the other side, so that's cool.

I don't follow, if one side read a 0 and the other got a 1, don't you then have the foundation for communication via binary?

No, because you do not decide what you have on your side, thus you cannot affect the one on the other side either.
To give a crude example on layman's terms (the real deal is a fair bit more complicated, you see): Imagine having two wooden boxes. One has a black stone in it while the other has a white stone in it, but you don't know which is which.
Now, if you open one of these boxes, and it's the white stone, you automatically know that the other box is the one with the black stone. The case of entangled particles is further complicated by that they exist in both states at once, so it would be like if you would have a grey stone that had a 50/50 chance to turn white or green upon opening the box and the other would automatically turn the opposite color.

And herein lies the problem: You cannot influence what "color" you get on your end. It's random, a 50/50 chance. It's not like you pick white and the other box would become black on the other end of the world instantaneously, you just get a random result with the guarantee that the other box/particle would be the exact opposite.

If you don't know what result you get, you cannot use it for communication, and if you "cheat" and take a peek inside the box to see what color the stone is, the two are no longer entangled and thus you cannot use them for communication. Really, this whole thing is nothing more than an experiment designed to further our understanding of the standard model drummed up by the media on a slow news week into something it is simply not. Kind of reminds me of last week's "Start Trek replicator" article...

But wait! Couldn't this still be used to transmit data? Imagine I had 2 pairs of entangled particles, and I gave you one of each pair. In their current form they are both grey (indeterminate), but each corresponds to a certain outcome of an event. Could a person on one end not send information about that event by "peeking" at one of the particles and thus collapsing the paired particle on the other end? Sure, you may not be able choose whether a given particle will be white or black, but you can choose which pair of particles to collapse.

Unless there's no way of knowing whether a particle has already been collapsed, in which case I really don't see how quantum entanglement is any different at all than a pair of marbles.

Olas:

GabeZhul:

Jadak:

I don't follow, if one side read a 0 and the other got a 1, don't you then have the foundation for communication via binary?

No, because you do not decide what you have on your side, thus you cannot affect the one on the other side either.
To give a crude example on layman's terms (the real deal is a fair bit more complicated, you see): Imagine having two wooden boxes. One has a black stone in it while the other has a white stone in it, but you don't know which is which.
Now, if you open one of these boxes, and it's the white stone, you automatically know that the other box is the one with the black stone. The case of entangled particles is further complicated by that they exist in both states at once, so it would be like if you would have a grey stone that had a 50/50 chance to turn white or green upon opening the box and the other would automatically turn the opposite color.

And herein lies the problem: You cannot influence what "color" you get on your end. It's random, a 50/50 chance. It's not like you pick white and the other box would become black on the other end of the world instantaneously, you just get a random result with the guarantee that the other box/particle would be the exact opposite.

If you don't know what result you get, you cannot use it for communication, and if you "cheat" and take a peek inside the box to see what color the stone is, the two are no longer entangled and thus you cannot use them for communication. Really, this whole thing is nothing more than an experiment designed to further our understanding of the standard model drummed up by the media on a slow news week into something it is simply not. Kind of reminds me of last week's "Start Trek replicator" article...

But wait! Couldn't this still be used to transmit data? Imagine I had 2 pairs of entangled particles, and I gave you one of each pair. In their current form they are both grey (indeterminate), but each corresponds to a certain outcome of an event. Could a person on one end not send information about that event by "peeking" at one of the particles and thus collapsing the paired particle on the other end? Sure, you may not be able choose whether a given particle will be white or black, but you can choose which pair of particles to collapse.

Unless there's no way of knowing whether a particle has already been collapsed, in which case I really don't see how quantum entanglement is any different at all than a pair of marbles.

Unfortunately there is no way to know weather a particle is still entangled or not, because any measurement you take would collapse it. Picture you have two boxes with two colored lights in each alternating lighting up extremely fast with the other box alternating at the same rate but always the opposite color. If any one peeks into either box the lights in both boxes instantly freeze on whatever color they are on. Because the lights are in a box if you open one the other person does not know if the lights have stopped alternating or not. The only way to observe the light is to open the box, which action would of course trigger the stop it's self.

Interesting, but I have a hard time getting excited about scientific breakthroughs like this that have little or no practical application in the present. In part because of the point others have made, that if this does turn out to be useful it will just be blocked by the powers that be. Most of the industries that would be most revolutionized by this seem likely to oppose it to retain their current infrastructure. Honestly, had I made this discovery I probably would have kept it under wraps, developed a product, and worked to get it out there before fully announcing how I did something so it wouldn't be as easy to trap the cat in a bag (so to speak).

That said, if this can be made to work practically, my first thought for the communications technology would be to use it on satellites and remote controlled vehicles sent to other planets, in order to cut down on the transmission lag and reporting. Being able to put something down on Mars for example that is able to act and react in real time would be... huge.

Therumancer:
Interesting, but I have a hard time getting excited about scientific breakthroughs like this that have little or no practical application in the present. In part because of the point others have made, that if this does turn out to be useful it will just be blocked by the powers that be. Most of the industries that would be most revolutionized by this seem likely to oppose it to retain their current infrastructure. Honestly, had I made this discovery I probably would have kept it under wraps, developed a product, and worked to get it out there before fully announcing how I did something so it wouldn't be as easy to trap the cat in a bag (so to speak).

That said, if this can be made to work practically, my first thought for the communications technology would be to use it on satellites and remote controlled vehicles sent to other planets, in order to cut down on the transmission lag and reporting. Being able to put something down on Mars for example that is able to act and react in real time would be... huge.

Except that, you know, we have already discussed how you cannot use quantum entanglement to communicate in this thread, and quite extensively at that.

Also, "the powers that be"? Really? >_>

GabeZhul:

Therumancer:
Interesting, but I have a hard time getting excited about scientific breakthroughs like this that have little or no practical application in the present. In part because of the point others have made, that if this does turn out to be useful it will just be blocked by the powers that be. Most of the industries that would be most revolutionized by this seem likely to oppose it to retain their current infrastructure. Honestly, had I made this discovery I probably would have kept it under wraps, developed a product, and worked to get it out there before fully announcing how I did something so it wouldn't be as easy to trap the cat in a bag (so to speak).

That said, if this can be made to work practically, my first thought for the communications technology would be to use it on satellites and remote controlled vehicles sent to other planets, in order to cut down on the transmission lag and reporting. Being able to put something down on Mars for example that is able to act and react in real time would be... huge.

Except that, you know, we have already discussed how you cannot use quantum entanglement to communicate in this thread, and quite extensively at that.

Also, "the powers that be"? Really? >_>

To be fair I'm pretty tired (and I still haven't really slept since I wrote this). I only skimmed the discussion but to me it seemed like most people seem to be discussing this considering the limitations that Einstein defined, when the whole point of this is that Einstein is being proven wrong. What's more I'm speaking in the context of the article in terms of a perfected technology (where it references Mass Effect) not saying that we actually have this technology yet. Hence why I mentioned what occurred to me for one of the first uses IF we perfect it, rather than saying "we can communicate with probes right now".

When I use a term like "the powers that be" I'm being intentionally vague, corny, but it works. The way I see it is this, any kind of new technology is going to interfere with the current business structure as it renders things that people make billions of dollars off of in jeopardy. Unless a major telecommunications company could somehow get an early monopoly on this and fight for it, your pretty much looking at a situation where all of them have a vested interest in killing the technology in it's infancy before it ever reaches the potential talked about. After all the safest way to make sure nobody is rendered obsolete in a new race, is to ensure nobody has the tech. It sounds stupid, but consider that this is a big part of why alternative energy technologies and things like that have been so slow to get started, there is a vested interest by the current energy companies to not want them out there, if alternative energy had managed to actually get one or two of these huge companies as a patron early on, things would have been different, but all of them wanted to play it safe and keep with what was working rather than putting tons of cash into developing a new technology and then having to promote it, and of course inevitably worrying about the government breaking up the monopoly before they can recoup the development costs... which is not a bad thing mind you, since I dislike monopolies, but at the same time not allowing them hampers development because you basically have to share the technology you develop with business rivals after potentially sinking billions of dollars of your own money into it. The pros and cons of monopolies and how banning them has hurt technological development and encouraged businesses to want to play it safe within current models. Everyone wants others to share tech with them and cut them into the business, very few companies want to innovate and take that risk. Not to mention security concerns by the authorities, since as a general rule the more power you give citizens, the more retarded they are going to be with it, and given the potentials for abuse I can see here (which goes beyond simple communications, as I said it seems like it would allow you to do make uninterruptable signals which could be used to control virtually anything you wanted to set up). When you consider that they limit flight (jet packs, gyrocopters, etc...) heavily for security reasons and to maintain order, you can just imagine the controls they'd want to put on this.

Physicists have been teleporting photons for years now.

http://www.zmescience.com/science/physics/quantum-teleport-15042011/#!TDEhd

It is interesting to see they've progressed onto particles with actual mass though.

Not that they're actually transmitting that mass, of course. :)

Therumancer:
What's more I'm speaking in the context of the article in terms of a perfected technology (where it references Mass Effect) not saying that we actually have this technology yet. Hence why I mentioned what occurred to me for one of the first uses IF we perfect it, rather than saying "we can communicate with probes right now".

But the article is fundamentally wrong, that is the whole point!

It is not a technological limitation, so that quantum entanglement could be used for communicating once the tech is perfected; quantum entanglement literally cannot be used to transfer information. Period.

You see, this is the reason I really hate lazy scientific journalism; they keep giving people the wrong idea and once it takes root it takes way more effort to explain the actual science to them...

Therumancer:
Unless a major telecommunications company could somehow get an early monopoly on this and fight for it, your pretty much looking at a situation where all of them have a vested interest in killing the technology in it's infancy before it ever reaches the potential talked about. After all the safest way to make sure nobody is rendered obsolete in a new race, is to ensure nobody has the tech.

But then again, I guess it wonn't be hard to kill a communications technology that cannot be used for communication. :P

Therumancer:
It sounds stupid, but consider that this is a big part of why alternative energy technologies and things like that have been so slow to get started, there is a vested interest by the current energy companies to not want them out there, if alternative energy had managed to actually get one or two of these huge companies as a patron early on, things would have been different, (...)

I'll just say this: The problem of alternative energy mostly stems from the media, on two fronts: over-hyping any sort of alternative energy technology that is obvious not cost-effective yet and only exists as experimental or proof-of-concept (the electric cars and solar panels come to mind) while also giving spotlight to frauds and con-men (the perpetual motion machine crowd), both of which leads to disappointment when they fail to live up to the hype and reduced public interest and grants towards actually working tech.

On the other end of the spectrum we have the vilification of the nuclear industry, where we are making ridiculously safe and efficient fission power plants (the newest generations are so advanced that the don't even generate radioactive waste products as they chain down the daughter-products to common lead), but the public is far less likely to hear about these instead of the media drumming on the malfunctions in decades-old power plants and dragging up Chernobyl and the other "nuclear incidents" over and over again, and thus torpedoing our actual best chance at averting the inescapable energy crisis that will come with the depletion of the planet's oil reserves.

But I digress, the whole "alternative energy debate" is an especially nasty beehive that I usually want to avoid as much as possible, but I just really wanted to point out that most of the development problems stem from unwarranted expectations and media scare-mongering instead of some sort of shady conspiracy by "big oil" or something.

I don't know much at all about the underlying physics unfortunately, but that sounds pretty cool. Even if it doesn't have any real world applications (I'm reading QET-communication couldn't work) it's still cool.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here