Palentir - Communication via quantum entanglement, sans electromangeticwaves?

[Scott Stephens]

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/

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

 

[John Larkin]

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

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

 

[Dave]

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.

care to explain just how you transfer information from one location to
another by quantum entanglement??

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

if you know how it works, why aren't you rich and powerful?

 

[Scott Stephens]

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.

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/

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

 

[Scott Stephens]

care to explain just how you transfer information from one location to
another by quantum entanglement??

Spooky action at a distance, as Einstein would say.

if you know how it works, why aren't you rich and powerful?

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/

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

 

[Cecil Moore]

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?

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.

 

[Scott Stephens]

So would it be possible...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?

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/

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

 

[John Larkin]

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.

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

 

[Scott Stephens]

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/

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

 

[Paul Burridge]

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.

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.

 

[John Larkin]

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.

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

 

[Cecil Moore]

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.

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?

 

[John Larkin]

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)?

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.

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.

No, it had no interest in you.

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!

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.

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!

Nothing is imposed, only meaasured.

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!

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

 

[Ken Smith]

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.

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.

 

[Scott Stephens]

Why should C care about the future fate of its photons?

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

doesn't have any polarization when it is emitted. Its polarization is
only determined when it's measured.

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.

No, it had no interest in you.

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.

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.

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/

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

 

[Scott Stephens]

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?

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/

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

 

[Kevin Aylward]

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.

No, this is just another case where the cat is both fed and unfed[1]
until you check on it.

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
[email protected]
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

 

[Kevin Aylward]

All the sacred cows of physics are being slaughtered John.

Nope paul.

This is
just another one that's already dead.

Ho hummm...

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.

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
[email protected]
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

 

[Paul Burridge]

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.

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! ;->

 

[Ken Smith]

[.. I wrote ..]

No, this is just another case where the cat is both fed and unfed[1]
until you check on it.

Followed by a comment where I explain that two way communication is needed
before you have proven FTL communications.

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."

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.