Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Scientists "Teleport" Quantum Information One Meter

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the teleport-a-child-and-we'll-be-impressed dept.

Communications 107

the4thdimension writes "While we may not be beaming up to the Enterprise anytime soon, a team of scientists from the University of Maryland and the University of Michigan have managed to teleport information between two atoms up to a meter apart. Until this point, only very tiny distances were able to be traveled. However, using a complicated system of photons, ions, lasers, and electromagnetics, scientists have managed to 'teleport' information contained on one atom to another atom that is in a separate sealed container. This can lead to a wide range of developments in computing and communications." Update: 01/29 22:29 GMT by T : Sorry, it's a dupe, but today's article in Time is better reading than the abstract anyhow.

cancel ×

107 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Discussed A Week Ago (5, Informative)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659465)

I think we discussed this a week ago [slashdot.org] .

Re:Discussed A Week Ago (5, Funny)

Dyinobal (1427207) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659521)

Yes it teleported 1 week through space and time. Last week you read about the attempt, this week you read about the sucess.

Re:Discussed A Week Ago (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26659567)

Last week was the success. This week is the atempt.

Stay tuned for next week's announcement about a new idea called "Quantum Physics"

Re:Discussed A Week Ago (2, Funny)

lamapper (1343009) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659635)

Obviously you do not watch Lost...

Perhaps this week is last year and last week was next year?

Did you see a blinding, flashing light in the sky?

But seriously, a meter is a bit farther than other reports I have read. Prior to this report I thought the distance was microscopic. Guess I need to go back and read last weeks report again.

One day we (err our kids) may be able to say, "Beam me up Scotty!"

Re:Discussed A Week Ago (4, Informative)

Architect_sasyr (938685) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660889)

<bofh> up scotty is the last place I'd want to be beamed.

Re:Discussed A Week Ago (4, Funny)

asliarun (636603) | more than 5 years ago | (#26664623)

<bofh> up scotty is the last place I'd want to be beamed.

Yeah, you don't want to get kilt.

Re:Discussed A Week Ago (1)

sillybilly (668960) | more than 5 years ago | (#26663423)

They did not actually encode any information. They played a game of roll two dice and if I look at one, if I measure one, I can tell what the other must be. But I can't force the other to be anything I want, because I can't force the one I look at to be what I want, the measurement outcome, the result of "looking" is up to chance, so I can't store and encode arbitrary information as I need to. I can tell what's in the black box, but that's it.

I went and read the article. What they did, or more exactly tried to do, was save a "quantum information", clone an "unmolested qubit." I don't really get quantum information yet. So I went to read some wikipedia pages. Read up on qubit, which is either molested 0 or 1, or unmolested superposition state of 0 and 1. I find out that, with a few exceptions, most quantum computing results are probabilistic, that is, the answer has a high probability of being right, and the probability can be increased by repeating the operations. There is also a no cloning theorem, where an unmolested qubit cannot be cloned into a "separable state." Entangled systems are possible, but "no well-defined state can be attributed to a subsystem of an entangled state". So basically, entangled measurements destroy the superposed unmolested qubit itself that has been "cloned" or "teleported" onto the other atom, because once the superposition collapses here, and you have a definite answer over there, you no longer have an unmolested superposition of states over there either. Once you know this one, the answer on the other one is a definite 0 or 1. It's like when two atoms are quantum entangled, molesting one is automatically molesting the other out of a quantum superposition state into a classical defined state, destroying the information qubit. Quantum qubits cannot be copied or cloned into a separable state. No such thing as a 80 megaqubit quantum harddisk. Where does that leave quantum computing. Somebody enlighten me there, because to me it seems like complete bs.

Why can't we just do it the normal way? (1)

jonaskoelker (922170) | more than 5 years ago | (#26663473)

Why can't we just do plain old regular teleportation?

http://xkcd.com/465/ [xkcd.com]

The funny thing (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26659707)

...is for the whole week in between the experiment simultaneously existed as both a success and a failure.

Re:The funny thing (2, Funny)

Nasajin (967925) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660135)

...is for the whole week in between the experiment simultaneously existed as both a success and a failure.

i.e. no different from most stories on slashdot.

Re:The funny thing (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660533)

i.e. no different from most stories on slashdot.

Most stories on slashdot are simultaneously a failure and a gigantic failure. :P

Re:The funny thing (1)

pcolaman (1208838) | more than 5 years ago | (#26661061)

i.e. no different from most stories on slashdot.

Most replies on slashdot are simultaneously a failure and a gigantic failure. :P

Fixed it for you.

Re:The funny thing (1)

tenco (773732) | more than 5 years ago | (#26662663)

...is for the whole week in between the experiment simultaneously existed as both a success and a failure.

Until some slashdotter finally observed TFA.

Re:The funny thing (1)

SBacks (1286786) | more than 5 years ago | (#26665697)

Until some slashdotter finally observed TFA.

So, you're saying it hasn't happened yet?

Re:The funny thing (1)

aqk (844307) | more than 5 years ago | (#26663157)

is for the whole week in between the experiment simultaneously existed as both a success and a failure.
Yeah, but during that week they waited, the by-now starving cat ate it.
So to see the results, they had to dissect the poor cat.
.

Re:The funny thing (1)

daveime (1253762) | more than 5 years ago | (#26663693)

Schrodingers Webpage ?

The experiment was both a success and a failure until the article was read, thus collapsing the waveform into one state or the other.

Re:Discussed A Week Ago (1)

Theoboley (1226542) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659867)

How did you generate the 1.8 Jiggawatts of power to travel through space and time???

Re:Discussed A Week Ago (2, Informative)

fireman sam (662213) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660053)

1.21 gigawatts

Re:Discussed A Week Ago (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26660413)

1.21 Jiggawatts

Re:Discussed A Week Ago (1)

pcolaman (1208838) | more than 5 years ago | (#26661069)

Warp 10

Re:Discussed A Week Ago (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26662233)

Yes, I realized that as SOON as i posted it that it was wrong... I apologize.

Re:Discussed A Week Ago (1)

BACPro (206388) | more than 5 years ago | (#26661391)

Wouldn't we have read about the success last week and the attempt this week?

Yeah but.... (1)

EmbeddedJanitor (597831) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659589)

Teleporting by a week is a fantastic breakthrough! Before now they've only managed a few nanoseconds.

Re:Yeah but.... (1)

Miseph (979059) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660517)

I'm glad to hear we've mastered traveling forward through time. This is a major breakthrough.

Re:Yeah but.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26661835)

Teleported back into time; A meter away, a week before.

Two breakthrough, one experiment.

Fuck you shit eater (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26659693)

Just because it's a dupe it doesn't mean that everybody has read it.

Cocksucker...

Re:Fuck you shit eater (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26662307)

Don't be shy... tell us how you really feel.

Re:Discussed A Week Ago (1)

againjj (1132651) | more than 5 years ago | (#26661537)

In other words:
Editors "Teleport" Summary Information One Week

Re:Discussed A Week Ago (1)

Dan541 (1032000) | more than 5 years ago | (#26664821)

I just teleported data to slashdot.

Scientists also teleport article into the future! (0, Redundant)

mooingyak (720677) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659503)

N/T

Insert Quantam Leap joke here - (1)

concoursrider (1405071) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659569)

So, let me get this straight - was Iggy responsible for this Quantum Leap?

Re:Insert Quantam Leap joke here - (5, Funny)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659655)

Ziggy says there's a 99.9999% chance you got that reference wrong.

Re:Insert Quantam Leap joke here - (1)

concoursrider (1405071) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659677)

Except /. missed my correction!

Star Trek Shenanigans (2, Funny)

NickyGotz22 (1427691) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659577)

I hope at least one scientist in that lab had the balls to shout "Beam me up Scotty!!!" during the experiment

Re:Star Trek Shenanigans (3, Interesting)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660017)

For the last time quantum teleportation isn't star trek style [xkcd.com] , its far more impressive. It's [crystalinks.com] transferring information you don't even know across space.

Re:Star Trek Shenanigans (1)

gparent (1242548) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660221)

Fucking Woosh.

Re:Star Trek Shenanigans (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 5 years ago | (#26661289)

I'd say it is more like the Ansible from Ender's Game.

Re:Star Trek Shenanigans (1)

daveime (1253762) | more than 5 years ago | (#26663705)

Bean, is that you ?

Re:Star Trek Shenanigans (1)

mrsquid0 (1335303) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660439)

The Fingerprinz song?

Is this really new? (4, Interesting)

Hogwash McFly (678207) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659583)

I watched a BBC documentary 'Visions of the Future' online a couple of days ago, and a team in Vienna had already teleported information between photons years ago. See here [google.com] , about 50 minutes in. (I recommend watching all three programmes, it's an interesting documentary). The professor in the video states that the record stands at 600 metres. I'm no physicist, so could someone explain what is so different about what has been achieved in the article? Is the difference between teleporting information between photons and atoms so distinct?

Re:Is this really new? (1, Flamebait)

davester666 (731373) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659807)

Um, this was done in the US. Therefore it is newsworthy. QED

Re:Is this really new? (4, Informative)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660359)

It's easy to teleport photons - it's the basis of quantum cryptography for which we now even have commercial applications. I believe current record is about 1000km.

However, in this experiment scientists have teleported the state of an _atom_ using photons as intermediary quantum information carriers.

Re:Is this really new? (1)

lgw (121541) | more than 5 years ago | (#26661351)

If you're talking about the existing product, the basis of "quantum" "cryptography" is shining a really dim light (or perhaps selling your product to a really dim bulb). There's more marketing buzzward than truth in both the "quantum" and the "cryptography", and further it doesn't actually solve any problems.

Of course, scifi quantum crypto is very cool, but then so is setting phasers on stun.

Re:Is this really new? (1)

frieko (855745) | more than 5 years ago | (#26662271)

What isn't quantum about exchanging quanta of light, and what isn't cryptography about computing a shared secret?

Re:Is this really new? (1)

lgw (121541) | more than 5 years ago | (#26671625)

Well, every fiber network exchanges quanta of light. The thing is, the products sold as "quantum cryptography" don't use anything related to quantum mechanics to exchange data - no entangled particles or anything like that. That's the spin, but not the product. This product is a load of crap.

Engineer: We have eavesdroppers physically tapping our cables, can you help us?

Salesdroid: I have just the thing: Quantum Cryptography make eavesdropping impossible.

E: Do Tell.

S: We encode each bit as a single photon, so no one can snoop without consuming the entire signal.

E: Ahh, so we're totally protected against an attacker who doesn't store and forward?

S: No, that's the clever bit: each bit is encoded either as polarity or frequency, and the attacker won't know which. Due to the magic of Quantum, the attacker can't read both for any bit, so he can't store and forward!

E: That sounds cool! But wait, how do *we* know whether to read the polarity or frequency of a given bit?

S: Oh, no problem, you send that information ahead of time on another channel!

E: Perhaps you missed the part where I said that we have eavesdroppers physically tapping our cables?

S: So just exchange this key using some different method known to be secure!

E: Great idea! Then we'll just send our data on our current network encrypted with that key! We don't need your product after all

S: Wait! Wait! Ours is Quantum! You can't get Quantum from our competitors!

E: Door's to the left.

Re:Is this really new? (1)

frieko (855745) | more than 5 years ago | (#26673583)

E: That sounds cool! But wait, how do *we* know whether to read the polarity or frequency of a given bit?

S: Oh, no problem, you send that information ahead of time on another channel!

Ah, that's where you're confused. You reveal the basis vectors AFTER, not before. And you reveal them publicly, perhaps via radio broadcast, NOT over a secure line.

You can't store and forward because you don't know which basis to store!

Re:Is this really new? (1)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 5 years ago | (#26662847)

Of course, scifi quantum crypto is very cool, but then so is setting phasers on "evaporate the bitch".

Fixed. "Stun" is for pussies.

Re:Is this really new? (1)

daveime (1253762) | more than 5 years ago | (#26663723)

What about all the other phaser settings ? "Limp," "Bit of a Cough," "Depression," "Bad Eyesight," "Ice Cream Van Nearby," "Sudden Interest In Botany," "Water In The Ear After Swimming," "Left The Oven On At Home."

Re:Is this really new? (1)

lgw (121541) | more than 5 years ago | (#26671509)

You're missing the point: phasers are for pussies. "Set disruptors on mutilate."

Re:Is this really new? (0)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660473)

Yeah it's new. It's the first time they've teleported quantum information between entangled atoms over this distance. I guess it's harder than doing it with photons due to... mass? Certainly it's not like you take the exact same setup you use to do photon teleportation, and it just works -- bamf! -- on atoms.

So it's nothing really 'new' in the sense that it's the same ol' teleporting-information-but-no-information-you-can-use trick just with a matter instead of energy. It's definitely something new in the sense that we couldn't do it before.

Incremental progress. I like it; I don't get why it doesn't satisfy some people.

Re:Is this really new? (1)

tenco (773732) | more than 5 years ago | (#26662689)

It's explained in last weeks story.

"Only" one meter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26659585)

It's longer than you think, Dad! Longer than you think!!

Slashdot teleports information - 5 days forward (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26659619)

Slashdot performs its own spooky quantum miracle, teleporting this information 5 days forward in time [slashdot.org] . Or was that backward?

not news (2, Funny)

jecowa (1152159) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659623)

I've been "teleporting" information several yards ever since I got a wireless router.

Re:not news (3, Funny)

drpimp (900837) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660663)

I think someone needs to read the definitions of Teleporting [wikipedia.org] and Transmitting [wikipedia.org] a little closer.

Re:not news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26662675)

*woosh*

Re:not news (1)

pcolaman (1208838) | more than 5 years ago | (#26661085)

I've been "teleporting" "information" several yards when my wife wants to spice things up in the bedroom.

Re:not news (1)

Skweetis (46377) | more than 5 years ago | (#26665567)

That's funny, I do the same thing when your wife wants to spice things up in the bedroom.

(Sorry, I couldn't resist =P)

Re:not news (1)

pcolaman (1208838) | more than 5 years ago | (#26666645)

She said you came up just a little short. (Sorry, I couldn't resist either :p)

First teleported comment (4, Interesting)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659679)

I posted it in the origial thread and it appears in the dupe thread.

BTW I am patenting 'Teleposting' as I like to call it.

Only One Problem... (1)

wa2flq (313837) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659703)

The teleported information arrived turned inside out.

It took 8 hours for a Hazmat team to clean up the walls, floor, ceiling and scientists.

What does this tell us? (1)

Man Eating Duck (534479) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659705)

Seriously... from the title of the article: "Teleportation Is Real" (picture from Startrek).

From the article: "For scientists, it's [teleportation] just very, very complex, so much so that at this point, teleportation is not a matter of moving matter but one of transporting information."

Substance of article: "It doesn't work reliably, but might be useful for not-yet-existing computers".

While this is interesting, I can't help but thinking that more to-the-point article about the real achievements of this group might be more interesting to the /. crowd. Finding one is left as an exercise for the reader :)

Re:What does this tell us? (4, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659861)

Yeah, it seems like every so often, there's another story in the media that "teleportation has been achieved," or "we can make things invisible," or "scientists have made light go faster than light." They go on to explain all the great things we could do if we could teleport things, go faster than light, and make things invisible.

Then, down near the bottom somewhere, they finally explain that no, we're not talking about real teleportation, but rather quantum entanglement that can't really be used for communication. We're not talking about real faster-than-light travel, but making a light wave that sort of looks like it's going faster than light but isn't. We're talking about something that might be useful for stealth airplanes, making them invisible to radar, and not real invisibility. Stuff like that.

And then they tag some throw-away line at the end like, "But who knows, maybe we'll be able to teleport to the moon next year!"

I hate journalists.

Re:What does this tell us? (2, Informative)

Man Eating Duck (534479) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660101)

I hate journalists.

While I agree with you, it is one way of cathing the public's eye. Journalists want to make headlines, when they can't, they make up headlines remotely tangential to whatever material they've got.

My beef is with the Slashdot editors; when I started reading Slashdot, it was because the editors chose interesting stories. They still do, this is interesting, but they choose to present this particular mainstream article as the only link in their ingress as documentation and background information. I find that sad.

Re:What does this tell us? (1)

radtea (464814) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660145)

Then, down near the bottom somewhere, they finally explain that no, we're not talking about real teleportation

While I agree with the thrust of your complaint and share your hatred of journalists, I'm at least happy to see that both the recent /. stories on this have prominently featured the word "INFORMATION" as the 'thing' teleported. It still isn't quite correct, as 'information' in the ordinary sense of the term carries more ontological weight than 'quantum state' but it is a huge improvement over the usual gibberish about 'teleporting atoms'.

Re:What does this tell us? (1)

Jabbrwokk (1015725) | more than 5 years ago | (#26661855)

Perhaps those of you in this thread who hate journalists so much should make efforts to give scientists some media training so that when they are interviewed, they speak in clear language, not jargon.

Yes, it's the journalist's job to be clear and accurate, but it's pretty damn difficult when the interview subject spews out line after line of technobabble only meaningful to another scientist.

Also, don't blame journalists for trying (sometimes succeeding, sometimes failing) to spice things up and present scientific stories to a broader audience. Only slashdot readers are going to get excited when they see "We report teleportation of quantum information between atomic quantum memories separated by about 1 meter" [sciencemag.org] and the thrilling "Quantum Teleportation Between Distant Matter Qubits" headline (the word "teleportation" is used in the abstract, so don't blame the journalist.)

At the very least, people interested in the topic can go look up the referenced abstract and read it for themselves. Granted, it requires some critical thinking skills and some initiative to do that, which might be expecting a lot from people. But without the hated journalist's efforts they wouldn't even know about the story.

Re:What does this tell us? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26667961)

Are you calling Slashdot summary providers "journalists"?

You must be new here.

Re:What does this tell us? (1)

Wandering Hoosier (621835) | more than 5 years ago | (#26673293)

I hate to contradict a good rant, but in actuality, this "teleportation" can be used for communication.

Here's the experiment, without all the theory:

1. Put the atom A into the state you want to teleport to B. Let's call the two states "red" or "blue". Put atom B into a "known" state.

2. "Stimulate" both atoms so they will fire off a photon. The photon from each will either be a "red" type or "blue" type, but we won't know which (that's important).

3. Both photons "meet" in a beam splitter, then go to separate detectors.

4. If one detector detects a "red" and the other a "blue", then continue, Otherwise go back to step 1. Key here is that this step "confirms" the atoms are now entangled. At this point, if we measured A, the result would determine the B measurement. But we're not going to do that yet.

5. Instead, apply an operation to atom A, so that subsequently measuring it doesn't lock B into a "single" state. It instead puts it into one of two states, still dependent on the initial state of A.

6. Measure A. The measurement will either be "red" or "blue".

7. Use the measurement of A to choose the final operation to apply to B. B will, due to the magic of Quantum Mechanical entanglement, now be in A's initial state, whatever that was.

If A was initially in a "red" state, then measuring B will get you "red". If it was original in the "blue" state, measuring B will get you "blue".

While this does require that you repeat until you get a "red/blue" detection and you need the final A measurement to know what operatation to apply to B, the final A measurement doesn't contain the information about its original state. You could do the final operations on B only when you received the "red/blue" at the detectors and "red" measurements of A. B will still end up in whatever state A started out in.

So, to summarize one last time:

Apply operations to ions A and B. They fire off photons simultaneously into a beam splitter and detector. If the photon detectors detects a particular condition, then operate on A and measure it. Depending on the A measurement, apply one of two operations on B. B will now be in A's original state. If A started in a "singlet" state, then in the end B will be in that "singlet" state, and measuring it will indicate what that state was.

That seems like communication from A to B to me.

Re:What does this tell us? (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 5 years ago | (#26673595)

...operate on A and measure it. Depending on the A measurement, apply one of two operations on B.

Doesn't that require a separate channel of communication, or am I misunderstanding? What I mean is, if you have to know A's state before you know what to do with B, then won't whoever measures A to then signal someone at B as to what operation to perform?

Not that I really understand your post, but it was my understanding that quantum entanglement couldn't be used for "communication" in the sense that people usually hope (faster than light communication).

Re:What does this tell us? (1)

wild_quinine (998562) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660095)

It doesn't work reliably, but might be useful for not-yet-existing computers

Kind of blows the whole concept of bandwidth out of the water, doesn't it? When you can instantly duplicate bits of information to a machine at any location...

Re:What does this tell us? (1)

Man Eating Duck (534479) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660167)

Kind of blows the whole concept of bandwidth out of the water, doesn't it? When you can instantly duplicate bits of information to a machine at any location...

"Oh my gosh, you solved their problem. They can achieve 90%, you only need to implement an error correcting algorithm capable of handling 10% of error, and you have achieved instant information transmission!".
No, really, I find their results intriguing, but that was not my point at all :)

a dupe you say... (1)

stinky wizzleteats (552063) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659763)

Sorry, it's a dupe...

Ironic?

Re:a dupe you say... (1)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659989)

Ironic?

Indead it is ironic as quantum teleportation destroys the original, if only that happened here

OMG ! They did it ! (2, Funny)

ivan_w (1115485) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659853)

Didn't they read the c'eth commandment ?

Thou shalt not teleport information from 1 atom to another atom at a speed greater than thy Lord hath deemed forbidden[1] lest thou wishes to kill thy grandfather before thou art born - and create earth engulfing black holes in the process[2].

Fools ! we are doomed !

--Ivan

[1] Ok.. I didn't read TA.. so what ?
[2] That's last sentence is not in the original text - consider this creative license.

try (1)

NonUniqueNickname (1459477) | more than 5 years ago | (#26659979)

past tense for old (repeated) news. Scientists "Teleported" Quantum Information One Meter.

The average Slashdotter... (1)

Rude Turnip (49495) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660037)

...can teleport his entire genetic code several inches. Oh look, there goes an acrobat!

Extra! Extra! Error in article summary! (1)

charlesbakerharris (623282) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660191)

I'm sorry, but I'm fairly certain that the University of Maryland and the University of Michigan are just a little more than one meter apart. I call shenanigans.

Re:Extra! Extra! Error in article summary! (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660405)

Only in the common three spatial dimensions. They're pretty much right on top of each other in the 5th and 6th dimensions, which results in all kinds of practical jokes going on between their physics departments.

Conjecture... (1)

aztektum (170569) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660279)

If I post a comment on last weeks article, will it also show up on this weeks article?

Re:Conjecture... (1)

ivan_w (1115485) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660381)

If that particular post was posted on last week's article, then you may claim success !

--Ivan

Re:Conjecture... (1)

Samah (729132) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660729)

If I post a comment on last weeks article, will it also show up on this weeks article?

More to the point, if you post a comment on this week's article, will it travel back in time to last week's article?

Re:Conjecture... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26661431)

I've been waiting a week to respond to this: yes.

Re:Conjecture... (1)

antikaos (1166401) | more than 5 years ago | (#26661581)

And what if I post the same post that I posted last week? Could I then travel back in time? or from the past to the present?

No Communication Theorem (2, Interesting)

LordBoreal51 (1085741) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660391)

I'm wondering, if this process uses entanglement how does that work with the No Communication Theorem? I thought that entanglement could not actually transfer useful information.

More Slashdot headlines (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26660513)

Researchers Split the Atom!

Man Walks on Moon!

Russian First Man in Orbit!

Darwin Announces a Theory Called Evolution!

and....

Newton Identifies a New Force, Gravity!

Back to the cutting edge news....

Wonderful... (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 5 years ago | (#26660977)

but today's article in Time is better reading than the abstract anyhow.

Indeed. Why read the article written by the guy who understands it when you can read the article written in someone's spare time when he's not covering Britney?

Quotes around teleport (1)

iconic999 (1295483) | more than 5 years ago | (#26661205)

Why the quotes around "teleport"? Either they can do it or they can't. If they can, then remove the quotes. If they can't, use a different word.

Anonymous Coward (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26661417)

Oblig.

http://xkcd.com/465/

physics and delay time (1)

mcfatboy93 (1363705) | more than 5 years ago | (#26661451)

i see one problem with this 1 lightyear = 9.4605284 Ã-- 1015 meters and the technology used to tell scientists have if this was "teloported" have to take a measure of a unit of time that is so small my calculator (the one that comes with windows) and my TI-84-SE can't calculate how small it is. how can we say it has "teloported" if we can't measure the time it takes to get from point A to point B if the smallest measure of time we have is greater then the time it takes get from point A to point B

Re:physics and delay time (1)

Seth024 (1241160) | more than 5 years ago | (#26661565)

Teleportation at the speed of light would take 3.3 ns (3.3e-9 seconds) to cover a distance of 1m. This is certainly measurable. However no time difference has been measured in this experiment because the teleportation is instantaneous.

Re:physics and delay time (1)

david_thornley (598059) | more than 5 years ago | (#26667563)

I can recognize your words individually, but they appear to me to make no sense whatsoever.

Specifically, what is this "instantaneous" of which you speak? You seem to be saying that two events happen at the same time but in different places.

Unless you want to throw out the entire theory of relativity, you mean one of two things. Either you mean that they happen at the same time in some certain reference frame, or you mean the events have spacelike separation and nothing more.

Will somebody please tell me whether this is instantaneous in the lab reference frame, or instantaneous in some other reference frame, or physicists have decided to ditch this whole relativity nonsense when I wasn't looking?

Confused (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26661723)

From the article:
Each qubit added to a quantum computer doubles the size of the system, so if you want to know the capacity of a computer that contains 300 qubits, take the number 2 and multiply it by itself 300 times. "That's more than the number of particles in the universe," Monroe says.

Perhaps Time is no longer the great source of information it once was...or they may be referring to fundamental particles, in which case the same point stands...

Is it TRULY teleportation? (1)

digitally404 (990191) | more than 5 years ago | (#26661795)

Teleportation requires dematerializing one object, and rematerializing it at another location.

Here we have two atoms, which totally inherit each others information at the speed of light.

Am I the only one who thought teleportation is instantaneous and requires only a single entity?

I can teleport already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26661983)

I can teleport already. All I have to do is go out and drink enough alcohol, and sure enough, I'll wake up at home somehow - not knowing how I got there.

Gordon? Is that you? (1)

wallsg (58203) | more than 5 years ago | (#26662851)

Hopefully there's no Dr. Gordon Freeman or Eli Vance associated with this research...

time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26662985)

As reported by the reputable science journal, "Time Magazine."

Quantum Information & SETI (1)

gpronger (1142181) | more than 5 years ago | (#26666585)

One of the thoughts that's crossed my mind as we further explore and understand utilization of quantum information is that if there is sentient beings "Out There" with some level of capability for space exploration is that it would seem that this would be a very likely way for them to maintain communication. Efforts such as SETI would then be attempting to discover background noise (I use the term "noise" here more as commentary on what most of what we communicate tends to be)of civilizations no more advanced than ourselves attempting only very nearby levels of communication.

Civilizations capable of greater levels of exploration would likely have developed means of utilizing communication along the lines of quantum information than our radio waves.

Ain't this like 4 years old news? (1)

alphatel (1450715) | more than 5 years ago | (#26667275)

http://www.quantum.at/research/quantum-cryptography/quantum-secured-bank-transfer.html

was over 1KM in distance of encrypted protocol over spooky action at a distance, hence instantaneous. Why are we writing about 1 atom over 1 meter?

Is there any way to stop propagating garbage news?

spooky motion (1)

avicho (1465419) | more than 5 years ago | (#26671057)

"Spooky motion at a distance" has been a quantum physics tenent for over a decade

Re:spooky motion (1)

LionMage (318500) | more than 5 years ago | (#26671795)

Except that it's called "spooky action at a distance," and the other word you're looking for is tenet.

Also, the phenomenon has been known for way more than a decade -- Einstein is the person who coined the term "spooky action at a distance." He died in 1955, which is over 5 decades ago.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?