"investigate innovative approaches that enable revolutionary advances in the fundamental understanding of quantum information science".
Funny - I feel I do that every Friday night after a few pints of ol' Wifebeater.
US military boffinry bureau DARPA*, which sees the bleeding edge as a blunt instrument, is getting into quantum effects. The Pentagon mad-science profs have offered government funding for researchers who can help them obtain Quantum Entanglement Science and Technology (QuEST). Initially, the DARPA chaps are fairly non-specific …
interestingly, although entanglement allows "signals" to travel faster than the speed of light, and it does, these signals can not carry any information, the first-measured thing will be a random 0 or 1, and the second will be its inverse.
No-one has yet managed to work out how this can be used to transmit information, if indeed it can at all.
Odd that "meaningful information" and "correlated garbage" are physically different things, one can go faster that light, the other not.
Not THIS old chestnut.
While indeed there does appear to be a phenomenon known as "spooky action at a distance" most of this is attributable to the fact that velocity and position can't be accurately known at the same time.
Hence the well-oft-trotted-out “explanation” of when you look at something and try to measure its physical properties you magically change it.
This well-known but completely misunderstood quantum effect is largely a myth.
It IS impossible to convey data by this means, for reasons elegantly explained above by Kevin.
Much quantum weirdness is simply “weird” because we have no language in which to describe what is going on and we have no mind or senses that are capable of treating these phenomena objectively.
It is POINTLESS discussing the practical application of quantum computing until we have a firm handle on the quantum universe itself.
Sure, we can fabricate semiconductors (a direct application of quantum effects) but we have next to no real grasp of what is really going on at the Planck level.
Unless we evolve to be able to see and manipulate the granularity of the quantum realm all this is just so much waffle.
Actually entanglement has been used for communication (very primitive though).
What was done was a beam of entangled particles was shot through a beam splitter and then into a collector for each beam. In front of one beam was placed a peice of cardboard with UCLA (I beleive) cut out of it. Supprisignly both collectors showed UCLA even though the second collector was totally unobstructed. I can not find an online reference to this experiment but recall it from a book called "Entanglement: The Greatest Mystery in Physics" by Amir D. Aczel.
doesn't always mean we should.
I'll openly admit I'm not the smarted man in the world, but anything that is prefixed by DARPA or Department of "Defense" automatically means weaponization. There are few projects/programs that can truly be defined as strictly "defensive", in posture or nature. Without exception, every system in the our arsenal can be used for offensive purposes. The 'net' will forever be a legacy of DARPA funding.
Quantum entanglement is expressed in more dimensions than spatial... An effect may become entangled with another effect in the near(?) future and it is theoretically possible to construct a kind of time machine communication device that enables message transport from the present to some UPTIME and the reverse. Imagine how convenient it would be for a soldier to ask his special SpookyBud where the enemy will be in twenty minutes? The same soldier in the UPTIME mode will receive the message and wing back a reply that the enemy is five steps behind him and is about to pull the trigger on a Party Popper. The possibilities are quite entangling... to say the least. Now I hear that at the moment just before the big bang when everything came into Being, the big vacuum BORROWED energy from the future because SOMETHING must occupy NOTHING as a basic element of reason and surely creation and all of the ever after is REASONABLE? Tut tut, and all THAT rot.
Don't you just LOVE science... whatever THAT is. ALL science is merely a highly codified GUESS.
Humph! Go figure.
Crypto or anyone - familiar with Unkenholz's cipher generation scheme?
Three copper wires, say black, blue, red, connect the remote terminals; the two operators randomly and independently connect either the blue wire to the black or the black to the red. Where the operators' choices DO NOT COINCIDE the three wires forma a single open-ended conductor - there's no circuit, no energy transmission, and they can each add a secure bit to their cipher key.
I can't find anything about it onlinle dated after around 1984
"I have such FAITH in science that I am vulnerable to disillusionment in the name of orthodoXy." ..... By george abney Posted Tuesday 1st April 2008 08:21 GMT
Golly Gosh, george, that is no vulnerability to disillusionment, it is an executable for enlightenment ...... although undeniably XXXXCentric/far from orthodoXy.
The post above by Greg Fleming is erroneous. No one suggets that by measuring, or attempting to measure, the position of atomic or sub-atomic particles, that their position "magically" changes. Very simply, the "light" (electromagnetic radiation) used to view the particles actually pushes the particles out of position. For him to refer to this simple fact of physics as a "well-trotted out explanation" is petulant and preposterous.
Furthermore, this is not a quantum effect of any kind. It is simply action-reaction.
I don't know what "phenomenon" Mr Fleming refers to as "spooky action at a distance." That is not a scientific reference with which I am familiar.
Quantum entanglement has nothing to do with one particle "acting" upon its twin partner. It is, rather, our observation that twin particles are communicant instantaneously and certainly hyperluminally.
The "Planck effect" is not relevant to quantum physics. It is based upon newtonian/einsteinian physics which are not relevant to the consideration and evaluation of quantum phenomena.
Mr. Fleming suggest a species evolution is required before we can "grasp the granularity" of quantum physics. He advances his belief that "we" have no "mind or senses", nor "language" capable of "treating these phenomena objectively."
I suggest that anyone keen on this subject read Fritjof Capra's excellent book, written many years ago, "The Dao of Physics". It discusses quantum physics elegantly and succinctly.
Perhaps Mr. Capra, that book's author, is of a more advanced species.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019