Comment on Quantum teleportation demonstrated over existing fiber networks — Deutsche Telekom’s T‑Labs used commercially available Qunnect hardware for the demo, claims 90% average accuracy

• rah@hilariouschaos.com ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  when we observe them they will always be in the same state

  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.

  source

  • partofthevoice@lemmy.zip ⁨9⁩ ⁨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.

    source

    • FooBarrington@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨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.

      source
    • rah@hilariouschaos.com ⁨9⁩ ⁨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

      source
• givesomefucks@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨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.

  source

  • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    My non scientific intuitive guess is that the cable is there to reliably create the entanglement conditions.

    source
  • threeganzi@sh.itjust.works ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Any source on your claim about consciousness? Sounds very speculative.

    source

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      en.wikipedia.org/…/Orchestrated_objective_reducti…

      source

      • threeganzi@sh.itjust.works ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Thanks, that’s an interesting read. Still stand by my opinion that your statement is overly confident in explaining consciousness.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • rah@hilariouschaos.com ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    what actually makes consciousness in a brain is (hypothetically, technically) microtubules

    This is only a proposed theory, it’s very far from accepted fact.

    source

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      This is only a proposed theory, it’s very far from accepted fact.

      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…

      source

      • rah@hilariouschaos.com ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Which is why I said hypothetically…

        I think you may have misused the word “hypothetically” then.

        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

        I was taught Orch OR theory at university about 17 years ago.

        that’s why the larger theory was instantly dismissed

        Instantly dismissed by who? It’s a new theory, there will always be detractors and critics of new theories. That’s very different from being “instantly dismissed”.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• Encephalotrocity@feddit.online ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  when two particles are entangled and far apart, when we observe them they will always be in the same state?

  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.

  source