givesomefucks@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
The firm’s T‑Labs used commercially available Qunnect hardware to demo quantum teleportation over 30km of live
Bit disingenuous to talk about teleporting things along a fiber line…
Also shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how quantum entanglement works…
But it’s actually pretty huge that they’re able to do this.
School_Lunch@lemmy.world 12 hours ago
As someone who also doesn’t fully understand quantum entanglement… is it that when two particles are entangled and far apart, when we observe them they will always be in the same state? Is there any way to manipulate that state? If so, it seems like it would be pretty straight forward to use it for faster than light communications.
rah@hilariouschaos.com 12 hours ago
The two particles are in different but directly related states. For example in some circunstances with two entangled photons, it will necessarily be the case that one photon has horizontal polarisation and the other vertical polarisation. The two will never have the same polarisation.
You can’t know which photon is in which state without measuring one. The effect of taking the measurement travels faster than the speed of light. Measurement is not modifying though; you can’t say “I want this photon to be measured as vertically polarised”, you can only ask “what is the polarisation of this photon?”. So you can’t transmit information faster than light, unfortunately.
partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 10 hours ago
Quantum is a struggle for me to understand because, I feel like the current explanations don’t suffice why you can’t transmit information. To me, this still sounds perfectly viable for information transfer… just don’t encode information via polarization. You would encode it as a primitive derived from whether or not state collapse has happened yet or not.
Using the same/similar mechanism they can use to determine collapse happens to both entangled particles at the same time time (faster than light), can they not also determine whether or not collapse has happened at all?
Maybe it’s that checking for collapse will actually cause collapse, thus ruining the information channel. But, perhaps then, you just add more entangled particles. Have some mechanism established with “throwaway” particles that can have their state collapsed either as a chain reaction or via the polling process.
Obviously I’m not the smarted person here… probably a lot wrong with my above assumption. But my point is really that explanations about quantum seem to be unsupportive to the claims they make about quantum.
FooBarrington@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
AFAIU you can’t determine whether the state on the other side has been collapsed. All you can say with certainty is the state on the other side after you have collapsed yours.
rah@hilariouschaos.com 10 hours ago
I’d recommend this excellent series if you want a good grounding:
www.rigb.org/…/arrows-time-back-future-1999
And I also found this video which I haven’t watched but I expect will be good and probably attacks your pondering more directly:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_0o2fJhtSc
givesomefucks@lemmy.world 12 hours ago
Yep
The thing is if it’s entangled, why is there a fiber cable?
If it’s teleportation, why is there a cable?
However what actually makes consciousness in a brain is (hypothetically, technically) microtubules forming a very tiny cable inside of which quantum superposition is able to be maintained while we are conscious. When even brief quantum entanglement used to be insanely hard.
Like, it’s hard to tell what really happened from OPs article. But there should be much better articles explaining it, and this could actually end up being crazy important. Like, 20-30 years from now this might be how we finally get a real AI.
webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 4 hours ago
My non scientific intuitive guess is that the cable is there to reliably create the entanglement conditions.
threeganzi@sh.itjust.works 8 hours ago
Any source on your claim about consciousness? Sounds very speculative.
givesomefucks@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
en.wikipedia.org/…/Orchestrated_objective_reducti…
rah@hilariouschaos.com 12 hours ago
This is only a proposed theory, it’s very far from accepted fact.
givesomefucks@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
Which is why I said hypothetically…
Although up until a year ago the very idea that quantum entanglement could happen in the brain was treated as a joke for like 30 years and that’s why the larger theory was instantly dismissed…
Which is why I added the “technically” as well.
If we’re being technical even gravity is just a theory. But it’s not like being deny the existence of gravity…
Encephalotrocity@feddit.online 12 hours ago
They will be an opposite states of each other the moment observing collapses their waveform. This effectively removes their entangled state. It cannot be used to communicate information faster than c.