Ftl superluminal 2 could not find class
I do not fully understand your question so I answer a little widely:Įxchange itself / 'communication' between two entangled photons assumed by most to be almost immediate / very much faster than the speed of light. Thus, if one takes into account the amount of time needed to establish the communication channel, that being the time to separate the particles, can it be reworked to show that it would still be capable of making up the lost time? Ahroun ( talk) 19:31, (UTC) However, the separation of the entangled pair itself cannot occur at superluminal speeds (pending results allowing the acheivement of FTL, which would render the need moot anyways). It occurs to me that in the example method provided allows the direct transfer of information at superluminal speeds. It should by measuring its part of the pairs with at least 99% probability, guess the Transmitters choice.Īs the exchange between the entangled particles takes place instantaneous it will for a growing distance between A and B create superluminal communication.Ī suggestion for transmitter and receiver - gives problems UChr ( talk) 18:55, 5 June 2011 (UTC) It keeps its choice for an agreed period – for instance 1 / 300.000 sec. The transmitter can change its measuring setup by inserting a mirror or not – choice situation, T (1) or T (0). The distance between the transmitter and the source are suitably much shorter than between the source and the receiver, so with synchronized watches the transmitter will detect its twin particle before the other twin reaches the receiver. J0lt C0la ( talk) 22:42, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Ī thought experiment – using entanglement Ī suggestion for a communication system using quantum entanglement:Ī(lice) and B(ob) are measuring corresponding particles from pairs of quantum mechanically entangled photons - so-called Bell-couples. The page for no-cloning theorem states "The no cloning theorem does not prevent superluminal communication via quantum entanglement, as cloning is a sufficient condition for such communication, but not a necessary one", yet this page says that it does. If Bob creates copies and measures them, wouldn't they all have the same spins on each axis?Ĭonversely, how is Bob measuring one of his copies different from Alice measuring her copy?Ĭontradiction with No-cloning theorem Most of what I know is from taking a one-semester class on quantum computing. Would all of that work? I'm guessing that I've missed something, since I'm not an expert on quantum mechanics. Or maybe one could compensate with classical error-correcting codes. One could compensate for that error by using many sets of three qubits to transmit each bit. There would be a probability of error in the transmission, but this error would be less than. Bob takes the second qubit and goes to some far-off distance. Then, after it's created, Alice keeps the first and third qubit. To transmit "1", Alice does nothing to her qubit."īut I was thinking, instead of just measuring or not measuring, couldn't Alice measure one qubit to transmit a 0, and measure a different qubit to transmit a 1? It could go something like this: Alice and Bob create a state which is an entanglement of three qubits. "If Alice wishes to transmit a "0", she measures (.), collapsing Bob's state (.). I'm probably missing something here, but it seems to me that you really could use qubits for superluminal communication. ADNewsom ( talk) 21:32, 24 April 2014 (UTC) Using qubits for superluminal communication However, this article has good information that would be hard to just drop into a section of FTL.
I think the FTL page is too fragmented and it should be rewritten to hold the Superluminal communication section which would be better then two separate articles. If there's no objection I'll merge within a few months. If anything, I think superluminal communication should be a sub-topic within the FTL page. 20 FTL communication under attack by quantum creationistsīecause superluminal communication is a subtopic of faster than light, the FTL page seems to encompass almost all this information and much more in a more comprehensible way.15 Direct Counterfactual Quantum Communication Using The Quantum Zeno Effect.13 Use of the space-time diagram in "proof".10 Observed/Unobserved considered Information?.7 The nonsense talked about time travel and sending information to the past.5 A thought experiment – using entanglement.4 Contradiction with No-cloning theorem.2 Using qubits for superluminal communication.