ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Somebody PLEASE tell Bill Shatner re: entanglement

robinmark

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 11

Report this Aug. 29 2006, 6:58 am

I do not know the symbol for frustration, but that recent documetary is still eating away at me (I mean, I don't think about it when I am busy, but when that book of his catches my eye, I get - uh, "ticked"-off! Not because it is not fabulous; it is. But one thing is missing and sticks out like a sore thumb! He speaks to ONE physicist, and declares that what has already been done can't be done! Well, what will soon be done using units (if that is the right word for something so multifaceted as this!) called "qubits" instead of binary "bits" with which to compute. Our hard drives will be seen as relics. Our lives will change. Replication or whatever they wish to call it will have to change our lives on a personal and global level. And, yes, most, if not ALL of the "problems" surrounding teleportation (read David Darling's "The Impossible Leap" [which is misleading since he clearly sees this not only as possible, but simply a matter of time - and not "eons" of time, but perhaps a century at most at the rate they have been moving]).

There are still theoretical and empirical "bugs" in the "beaming" they have been doing (like the identical .75 perfection they got in identical, yet very separate experiments with what "theorists of the very small" call "huge" objects.) I'd say they are doing great for the extremely short experimental time -- about 12 years from single photon to an atom or ion!! A calcium one at that. ("Hey, I've got bad heartburn; beam me a Tum!") That will happen, I think, in most of our lifetimes, and I am not a 20-something (but I *was* too young to have "forgotten" the sixties -- and I didn't understand my parents' love of Star Trek until I grew up myself: "late boomer," you might say).

And once they knock out the bugs, get the computers fired up, do lots of testing, the ultimate in secure transportation awaits (if you don't think so, check out what's going on with air travel these days, let alone on our freeways, highways and even dangerous surface streets). If we can dream it, we will undoubtedly at least try to do it, and if we experience success, we'll keep at it until we make something that is theoretically possible or even probable, a reality. A fact, not a fiction. And that silly movie "the fly" is sheer poppycock, but read Darling's book - lovely sense of humor. Rodenberry was much, much closer to the reality that he could not have predicted unless he DID read the complete papers of Einstein. (Einstein, Polesky and Rosen, in a 1935 paper, where they write briefly about entanglement, which apparently struck Einstein as "spooky action at a distance.")

I believe it was Darling who said that if they could actually create that incredibly complex notion of an "annular confinement beam," emitting from the ship's teleportation system, they would have been in Noble Prize territory!!!!!! He doesn't think that is workable, but he also rules nothing out.
I suppose if a future starship that was able to create enough propulsion to create CDP (distorting the space-time "fabric of the cosmos much as sailors manipulate the wind and water without an outboard motor - Rodenberry told Jeffries, to paraphrase, 'no fire, no flame, no rocket jets" . . . as I said, I don't have the quote here, but that's pretty much it), they could first shuttle down to a good-bet planet (what Trek calls "M-class," or habitable for earth-like life forms). Upon arrival, they could set up the transporter machinery and not need an "annular confinement beam." Seems safer, too, because you're not going in half-blind to what you might find. If something felt either wrong or too good to be true, or whatever, the shuttlers could fly right back to the starship and break orbit and go on to something else. Look, this planet is getting crowded and ecologically unsound and we know we need to set up habitable zones on Mars while trying to terraform it. (Careful, folks: if Mars was recently "alive," then what killed it?? Do try to figure that out first.) We need to consider all possibilities for speedy transport.

So, please tell Bill Shatner to revise the book, and do an addendum to the documentary based on said book - he's got the energy! The one thing that was supposed to be impossible: "beaming" - turned out to be one of the simplest, and something that Einstein had already stumbled upon. (Or at least one version.)

Peace,
RM

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am

Quote (robinmark @ Aug. 28 2006, 7:58 am)
I do not know the symbol for frustration, but that recent documetary is still eating away at me (I mean, I don't think about it when I am busy, but when that book of his catches my eye, I get - uh, "ticked"-off! Not because it is not fabulous; it is. But one thing is missing and sticks out like a sore thumb! He speaks to ONE physicist, and declares that what has already been done can't be done! Well, what will soon be done using units (if that is the right word for something so multifaceted as this!;) called "qubits" instead of binary "bits" with which to compute. Our hard drives will be seen as relics. Our lives will change. Replication or whatever they wish to call it will have to change our lives on a personal and global level. And, yes, most, if not ALL of the "problems" surrounding teleportation (read David Darling's "The Impossible Leap" [which is misleading since he clearly sees this not only as possible, but simply a matter of time - and not "eons" of time, but perhaps a century at most at the rate they have been moving]).

There are still theoretical and empirical "bugs" in the "beaming" they have been doing (like the identical .75 perfection they got in identical, yet very separate experiments with what "theorists of the very small" call "huge" objects.) I'd say they are doing great for the extremely short experimental time -- about 12 years from single photon to an atom or ion!! A calcium one at that. ("Hey, I've got bad heartburn; beam me a Tum!") That will happen, I think, in most of our lifetimes, and I am not a 20-something (but I *was* too young to have "forgotten" the sixties -- and I didn't understand my parents' love of Star Trek until I grew up myself: "late boomer," you might say).

And once they knock out the bugs, get the computers fired up, do lots of testing, the ultimate in secure transportation awaits (if you don't think so, check out what's going on with air travel these days, let alone on our freeways, highways and even dangerous surface streets). If we can dream it, we will undoubtedly at least try to do it, and if we experience success, we'll keep at it until we make something that is theoretically possible or even probable, a reality. A fact, not a fiction. And that silly movie "the fly" is sheer poppycock, but read Darling's book - lovely sense of humor. Rodenberry was much, much closer to the reality that he could not have predicted unless he DID read the complete papers of Einstein. (Einstein, Polesky and Rosen, in a 1935 paper, where they write briefly about entanglement, which apparently struck Einstein as "spooky action at a distance.")

I believe it was Darling who said that if they could actually create that incredibly complex notion of an "annular confinement beam," emitting from the ship's teleportation system, they would have been in Noble Prize territory!!!!!! He doesn't think that is workable, but he also rules nothing out.
I suppose if a future starship that was able to create enough propulsion to create CDP (distorting the space-time "fabric of the cosmos much as sailors manipulate the wind and water without an outboard motor - Rodenberry told Jeffries, to paraphrase, 'no fire, no flame, no rocket jets" . . . as I said, I don't have the quote here, but that's pretty much it), they could first shuttle down to a good-bet planet (what Trek calls "M-class," or habitable for earth-like life forms). Upon arrival, they could set up the transporter machinery and not need an "annular confinement beam." Seems safer, too, because you're not going in half-blind to what you might find. If something felt either wrong or too good to be true, or whatever, the shuttlers could fly right back to the starship and break orbit and go on to something else. Look, this planet is getting crowded and ecologically unsound and we know we need to set up habitable zones on Mars while trying to terraform it. (Careful, folks: if Mars was recently "alive," then what killed it?? Do try to figure that out first.) We need to consider all possibilities for speedy transport.

So, please tell Bill Shatner to revise the book, and do an addendum to the documentary based on said book - he's got the energy! The one thing that was supposed to be impossible: "beaming" - turned out to be one of the simplest, and something that Einstein had already stumbled upon. (Or at least one version.)

Peace,
RM

Well teleportation of people by quantum entanglement is impossible.

First the particles in question must be brought to a state of entanglement. For normal matter it means reducing it to a bose Enstein condensate, which would kill you.

Second there will alway be information lost. At best several qubit of data, at worst 25 % and we cannot control what data is lost.

Even for Quantum computing there are problems, physicist will tell that the entanglement of particles only exist as long as the particles donot ungo acceleration, that means quantum computers on space craft can only operate when their drive are off.

The Teleporter of Star Trek donot operate via the method of quantum entanglement anyway, the only Quantum entanglement teleporter we seen in Sci Fi was on the Show Andromeda and it was very limited in use ( it require the ship to be adjacent to a Black Hole)..

And Gene Rodenberry was not the first to use Teleporter in Sci Fi.

It just a brunch of Star Trek Hype..

Whitestar7

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 419

Report this Aug. 29 2006, 12:33 pm

Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Well teleportation of people by quantum entanglement is impossible.

First the particles in question must be brought to a state of entanglement. For normal matter it means reducing it to a bose Enstein condensate, which would kill you.

Second there will alway be information lost. At best several qubit of data, at worst 25 % and we cannot control what data is lost.

Even for Quantum computing there are problems, physicist will tell that the entanglement of particles only exist as long as the particles donot ungo acceleration, that means quantum computers on space craft can only operate when their drive are off.

The Teleporter of Star Trek donot operate via the method of quantum entanglement anyway, the only Quantum entanglement teleporter we seen in Sci Fi was on the Show Andromeda and it was very limited in use ( it require the ship to be adjacent to a Black Hole)..

And Gene Rodenberry was not the first to use Teleporter in Sci Fi.

It just a brunch of Star Trek Hype.


Yes, I recalled watching an episode where Harper is testing out the quantum teleporter on a fruit with disasterous results. Of course, when Dylan wanted to teleport himself to his wife's ship, whose been searching for him ever since, he teleported without incident.

1) But how was he able to teleport to his wife's ship when she couldn't teleport aboard the Andromeda?

2) Why would the Andromeda quantum teleporter require a black hole in order to function?

3) From your description, it sounds like the quantum teleporter in Andromeda is similar to the transporter in one respect: both kills the original person and replicates a clone on the receiving end, correct?

Whitestar7

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Aug. 29 2006, 2:43 pm

Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 28 2006, 1:33 pm)
Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Well teleportation of people by quantum entanglement is impossible.

First the particles in question must be brought to a state of entanglement. For normal matter it means reducing it to a bose Enstein condensate, which would kill you.

Second there will alway be information lost. At best several qubit of data, at worst 25 % and we cannot control what data is lost.

Even for Quantum computing there are problems, physicist will tell that the entanglement of particles only exist as long as the particles donot ungo acceleration, that means quantum computers on space craft can only operate when their drive are off.

The Teleporter of Star Trek donot operate via the method of quantum entanglement anyway, the only Quantum entanglement teleporter we seen in Sci Fi was on the Show Andromeda and it was very limited in use ( it require the ship to be adjacent to a Black Hole)..

And Gene Rodenberry was not the first to use Teleporter in Sci Fi.

It just a brunch of Star Trek Hype.


Yes, I recalled watching an episode where Harper is testing out the quantum teleporter on a fruit with disasterous results. Of course, when Dylan wanted to teleport himself to his wife's ship, whose been searching for him ever since, he teleported without incident.

1) But how was he able to teleport to his wife's ship when she couldn't teleport aboard the Andromeda?

2) Why would the Andromeda quantum teleporter require a black hole in order to function?

3) From your description, it sounds like the quantum teleporter in Andromeda is similar to the transporter in one respect: both kills the original person and replicates a clone on the receiving end, correct?

Whitestar7

1) The problem was in order to send the information to recreate dilan from the entangled particles, it required the entire processing power of the andromeda, and there was notenought Processing power to teleport both Dilan and his girlfriend.

2) There two way a blackhole can be useful, one as an entropy sink. This could allow them to transfer all the information without any lost or very low lost of data of the particles spin states.

The second is that the Blackhole can be used as a storage medium, the highest density of data that can ever exist would be on the horizon of blackhole. ideally you can retrieve the data with minimum lost of 2 Qubits..

3) yes the Dilan on the other end would be a clone compose of matter that was entangle and then given the spin state of the original dilan.

Whitestar7

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 419

Report this Aug. 31 2006, 8:31 am

Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Well teleportation of people by quantum entanglement is impossible.

First the particles in question must be brought to a state of entanglement. For normal matter it means reducing it to a bose Enstein condensate, which would kill you.


1) Is there a way to prevent from killing the teleportee in this method and compensate?

Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Second there will alway be information lost. At best several qubit of data, at worst 25 % and we cannot control what data is lost.


2) Perhaps you could compensate by adding more rocks and convert them into energy?

Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 28 2006, 1:33 pm)

3) From your description, it sounds like the quantum teleporter in Andromeda is similar to the transporter in one respect: both kills the original person and replicates a clone on the receiving end, correct?



Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)


3) yes the Dilan on the other end would be a clone compose of matter that was entangle and then given the spin state of the original dilan.


3) Have other crew members used the quantum teleporter besides Dylan?

Whitestar7

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Sep. 01 2006, 12:47 pm

Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 30 2006, 9:31 am)
Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Well teleportation of people by quantum entanglement is impossible.

First the particles in question must be brought to a state of entanglement. For normal matter it means reducing it to a bose Enstein condensate, which would kill you.


1) Is there a way to prevent from killing the teleportee in this method and compensate?

Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Second there will alway be information lost. At best several qubit of data, at worst 25 % and we cannot control what data is lost.


2) Perhaps you could compensate by adding more rocks and convert them into energy?

Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 28 2006, 1:33 pm)

3) From your description, it sounds like the quantum teleporter in Andromeda is similar to the transporter in one respect: both kills the original person and replicates a clone on the receiving end, correct?



Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)


3) yes the Dilan on the other end would be a clone compose of matter that was entangle and then given the spin state of the original dilan.


3) Have other crew members used the quantum teleporter besides Dylan?

Whitestar7

1) No, you are not moving the particles in questions, you are switching their basic property of spin. If a subject is alive when you do this, he won't survive the process, especially if you need to place his atoms in to a state of quantum coherence..

Only way i know is freezing them to near absolute zero and then exposuring them to a magnetic field..

2) You hoping the lost info is from the rock, there no way to insure it will be..

3) Yeah the teleported object is basically a clone build from the particles that were entangle from the original.

4) Harper was going to use it to rescue Dylan from a Blackhole but it wasn't needed. I believe in one episode it was used by another character..

Whitestar7

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 419

Report this Sep. 01 2006, 1:52 pm

n/a

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Sep. 01 2006, 1:56 pm

Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 31 2006, 2:52 pm)
Quote (lanceromega @ Sep. 01 2006, 12:47 pm)
Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 30 2006, 9:31 am)
Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Well teleportation of people by quantum entanglement is impossible.

First the particles in question must be brought to a state of entanglement. For normal matter it means reducing it to a bose Enstein condensate, which would kill you.


1) Is there a way to prevent from killing the teleportee in this method and compensate?

Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Second there will alway be information lost. At best several qubit of data, at worst 25 % and we cannot control what data is lost.


2) Perhaps you could compensate by adding more rocks and convert them into energy?

Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 28 2006, 1:33 pm)

3) From your description, it sounds like the quantum teleporter in Andromeda is similar to the transporter in one respect: both kills the original person and replicates a clone on the receiving end, correct?



Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)


3) yes the Dilan on the other end would be a clone compose of matter that was entangle and then given the spin state of the original dilan.


3) Have other crew members used the quantum teleporter besides Dylan?

Whitestar7

1) No, you are not moving the particles in questions, you are switching their basic property of spin. If a subject is alive when you do this, he won't survive the process, especially if you need to place his atoms in to a state of quantum coherence..

Only way i know is freezing them to near absolute zero and then exposuring them to a magnetic field..

2) You hoping the lost info is from the rock, there no way to insure it will be..

3) Yeah the teleported object is basically a clone build from the particles that were entangle from the original.

4) Harper was going to use it to rescue Dylan from a Blackhole but it wasn't needed. I believe in one episode it was used by another character..

But won't freezing kill the teleportee?

Yeah that my point.. The process is fatal in all it steps.

Whitestar7

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 419

Report this Sep. 01 2006, 2:05 pm

Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 28 2006, 1:33 pm)

Have other crew members used the quantum teleporter besides Dylan?

Whitestar7


Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Harper was going to use it to rescue Dylan from a Blackhole but it wasn't needed. I believe in one episode it was used by another character..


Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 28 2006, 1:33 pm)

But won't freezing kill the teleportee?


Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Yeah that my point.. The process is fatal in all it steps.


1) What about using nanotechnology instead?

Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 30 2006, 9:31 am)

Have other crew members used the quantum teleporter besides Dylan?

Whitestar7


Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Harper was going to use it to rescue Dylan from a Blackhole but it wasn't needed. I believe in one episode it was used by another character..


I would imagine that the Andromeda crew have also determined that the quantum teleporter kills the original person and creates a clone.

2) Aside from the blackhole, is this the main reason why they stopped using the quantum teleporter?

Whitestar7

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Sep. 01 2006, 3:42 pm

Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 31 2006, 3:05 pm)
Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 28 2006, 1:33 pm)

Have other crew members used the quantum teleporter besides Dylan?

Whitestar7


Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Harper was going to use it to rescue Dylan from a Blackhole but it wasn't needed. I believe in one episode it was used by another character..


Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 28 2006, 1:33 pm)

But won't freezing kill the teleportee?


Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Yeah that my point.. The process is fatal in all it steps.


1) What about using nanotechnology instead?

Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 30 2006, 9:31 am)

Have other crew members used the quantum teleporter besides Dylan?

Whitestar7


Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Harper was going to use it to rescue Dylan from a Blackhole but it wasn't needed. I believe in one episode it was used by another character..


I would imagine that the Andromeda crew have also determined that the quantum teleporter kills the original person and creates a clone.

2) Aside from the blackhole, is this the main reason why they stopped using the quantum teleporter?

Whitestar7

1) in dilan case nanobots were use instead of the freezing method, but imagine all the particles of your bodies having their spin states alter by a host of micro machines.. The effect is the same, you are reduce into a bose Einstein condensate in order for entanglement to occur...

2) Maybe that it require the power of a quantum computer of Andromeda main frame for it to work, plus without the blackhole it trend to cause a mess..

Whitestar7

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 419

Report this Sep. 01 2006, 5:37 pm

Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 28 2006, 1:33 pm)

But won't freezing kill the teleportee?


Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Yeah that my point.. The process is fatal in all it steps.


Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 28 2006, 1:33 pm)

What about using nanotechnology instead?


Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

in dilan case nanobots were use instead of the freezing method, but imagine all the particles of your bodies having their spin states alter by a host of micro machines.. The effect is the same, you are reduce into a bose Einstein condensate in order for entanglement to occur...


1) So, the nanobots were unable to prevent him from dying and he was killed and cloned by the quantum teleporter, correct?

Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 28 2006, 1:33 pm)

I would imagine that the Andromeda crew have also determined that the quantum teleporter kills the original person and creates a clone. Aside from the blackhole, is this the main reason why they stopped using the quantum teleporter?


Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Maybe that it require the power of a quantum computer of Andromeda main frame for it to work, plus without the blackhole it trend to cause a mess..  


2) But do you think one of the reasons why the Andromeda crew stopped using the quantum teleporter was that it killed and replicated people?

Whitestar7

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Sep. 05 2006, 2:07 pm

Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 31 2006, 6:37 pm)
Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 28 2006, 1:33 pm)

But won't freezing kill the teleportee?


Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Yeah that my point.. The process is fatal in all it steps.


Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 28 2006, 1:33 pm)

What about using nanotechnology instead?


Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

in dilan case nanobots were use instead of the freezing method, but imagine all the particles of your bodies having their spin states alter by a host of micro machines.. The effect is the same, you are reduce into a bose Einstein condensate in order for entanglement to occur...


1) So, the nanobots were unable to prevent him from dying and he was killed and cloned by the quantum teleporter, correct?

Quote (Whitestar7 @ Aug. 28 2006, 1:33 pm)

I would imagine that the Andromeda crew have also determined that the quantum teleporter kills the original person and creates a clone. Aside from the blackhole, is this the main reason why they stopped using the quantum teleporter?


Quote (lanceromega @ Aug. 29 2006, 11:26 am)

Maybe that it require the power of a quantum computer of Andromeda main frame for it to work, plus without the blackhole it trend to cause a mess.. ¿


2) But do you think one of the reasons why the Andromeda crew stopped using the quantum teleporter was that it killed and replicated people?

Whitestar7

1. i would have assume that the nanobot basically kill him.  

2. Actually they never express that view, they like the Crew of Enterprise opinion seem to ignore the fact the finish Dilan or teleport object is just a clone of the orginal.

It just that Andromeda Teleporter had many bugs that made it unusable unless park next to a blackhole..

robinmark

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 11

Report this Sep. 15 2006, 8:52 am

I think we have "a failure to communicate" OR Lance . . . has not fully reviewed the latest teleporation experiments and articles. A lot of it has to do with misunderstandings surrounding the "Uncertainty Principle." The Principle never posited an utter "loss" of data, as far as I have studied it (I will admit that my Ph.D. is in sociology, but unlike some, I have a genuine respect for the work of those in the physical sciences: in fact, I see some important connections.) The Principle is clear that one cannot predict EITHER time or place when manipulating "observed" quantum particules. One aspect can be manipulated, but not both. And there is a way to, shall we say, "compensate" for this strange "observer" effect, and that is by throwing away the observed data. Yes, this is both complex and carries a bit of mystery that intrigued even Einstein himself, but nothing in the world of science should EVER be declared "impossible." Why? Because such a declaration is a gauntlett thrown. And there are those people who will always respond to a dare. And some of them will be right. Most of the cutting edge young physicists are embracing quantum computing, and no macro teleportation can take place before the computing hurdle is cleared. So the .75 fidelity figure found in redundant experiments of "huge" objects (as theorists of the very small conceptualize "huge") cannot, by virtue of the Principle itself, result in "lost" data. It is simply misplaced data and it may well be possible to finally figure out why some of the data is misplaced (or mistimed - not both). Scientists would have to determine with very, very small living objects if this fidelity rate is ironclad when quantum computing figures into the picture, and most importantly, what it would take in the process to "kill" a living object simply by manipulating the wave states of OTHER particles with which these particles are "entangled." Changing is not killing. But, surely, we do not want to "change" living beings into something which they are not. Since we do not yet have such computing, nor empirical data by which to make such assesments, it seems quite inappropriate to make a blanket assertion that this process would absolutely "kill" a subject. The real problems run far deeper: 1) What IS human consciousness, personality, memories, and soul? Are they reducible to the states of the smallest particles that make each one of us, US? 2)And, no, of course Gene Rodenberry didn't "invent" this, but his "classical teleportation" left much room for further research, which is now bearing intriguing fruit. 3)I would suggest that anyone truly intrigued by all of this actually read Darling's book and consider the possibilities. To simply assert that a physical law would "kill" a living being without sufficient explanation (jargon is very much like statistics: since most laymen do not know the jargon, it is easy to use it to make one's positions seem so very sound. I have never been impressed by jargon, as it excludes people and is often an attempt to show others that one is oh so very much wiser than those others.) Nothing personal: i have had face-to-face arguments with people in other fields who refused to explain in language that is accessible to people from a variety of academic disciplines. It is an easy trap in which to fall. It is also easy and somewhat satisfying to simply say something is "impossible," be done with further experimentation, and having never tried, be assured of failure and thus of being absolutely right! The whole point of science fiction is to free the imagination to consider the presently "impossible" and inspire the young to try things they otherwise would never have given a second thought. I can tell you one thing: there is the very real possibility that teleportation by whatever means may involve a "kind of killing," but to me it is no different than "killing" the analog sound waves when making a digital recording. When CD's first appeared, this was a very disturbing point for many people. They felt that something crucial was "lost" in the process. But I have visited Studio B in Nashville and have heard original masters through those mondo speakers, and nothing but a digital recording can recreate that immensity and richness of sound. Yes, in the early days, many digitilizations were "cold" as some observers felt. Perhaps some sound was "killed" in the process. But these days, digital recordings are far more accurate renditions of sound than any ¿analog recording could ever be, even IN Studio B, and on those incredible speakers with the incredible master tapes running. The soul of the music is now retained. It takes time and persistance, but if you can dream it, and you have the capability to make the attempt, some day, somewhere, someone will try to teleport a living object by one means or another. And there are a variety of ways. So a blanket statement of "killing" is really quite over the top. Sorry to take your time; I am sure you have somewhere to, uh, drive. And you had better be careful, my friend, because the statistics are not much in your favor. Or mine. But we do it, anyway.
Peace and Long Life,
RM

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Sep. 15 2006, 1:14 pm

Quote (robinmark @ Sep. 14 2006, 9:52 am)
I think we have "a failure to communicate" OR Lance . . . has not fully reviewed the latest teleporation experiments and articles. A lot of it has to do with misunderstandings surrounding the "Uncertainty Principle." The Principle never posited an utter "loss" of data, as far as I have studied it (I will admit that my Ph.D. is in sociology, but unlike some, I have a genuine respect for the work of those in the physical sciences: in fact, I see some important connections.) The Principle is clear that one cannot predict EITHER time or place when manipulating "observed" quantum particules. One aspect can be manipulated, but not both. And there is a way to, shall we say, "compensate" for this strange "observer" effect, and that is by throwing away the observed data. Yes, this is both complex and carries a bit of mystery that intrigued even Einstein himself, but nothing in the world of science should EVER be declared "impossible." Why? Because such a declaration is a gauntlett thrown. And there are those people who will always respond to a dare. And some of them will be right. Most of the cutting edge young physicists are embracing quantum computing, and no macro teleportation can take place before the computing hurdle is cleared. So the .75 fidelity figure found in redundant experiments of "huge" objects (as theorists of the very small conceptualize "huge") cannot, by virtue of the Principle itself, result in "lost" data. It is simply misplaced data and it may well be possible to finally figure out why some of the data is misplaced (or mistimed - not both). Scientists would have to determine with very, very small living objects if this fidelity rate is ironclad when quantum computing figures into the picture, and most importantly, what it would take in the process to "kill" a living object simply by manipulating the wave states of OTHER particles with which these particles are "entangled." Changing is not killing. But, surely, we do not want to "change" living beings into something which they are not. Since we do not yet have such computing, nor empirical data by which to make such assesments, it seems quite inappropriate to make a blanket assertion that this process would absolutely "kill" a subject. The real problems run far deeper: 1) What IS human consciousness, personality, memories, and soul? Are they reducible to the states of the smallest particles that make each one of us, US? 2)And, no, of course Gene Rodenberry didn't "invent" this, but his "classical teleportation" left much room for further research, which is now bearing intriguing fruit. 3)I would suggest that anyone truly intrigued by all of this actually read Darling's book and consider the possibilities. To simply assert that a physical law would "kill" a living being without sufficient explanation (jargon is very much like statistics: since most laymen do not know the jargon, it is easy to use it to make one's positions seem so very sound. I have never been impressed by jargon, as it excludes people and is often an attempt to show others that one is oh so very much wiser than those others.) Nothing personal: i have had face-to-face arguments with people in other fields who refused to explain in language that is accessible to people from a variety of academic disciplines. It is an easy trap in which to fall. It is also easy and somewhat satisfying to simply say something is "impossible," be done with further experimentation, and having never tried, be assured of failure and thus of being absolutely right! The whole point of science fiction is to free the imagination to consider the presently "impossible" and inspire the young to try things they otherwise would never have given a second thought. I can tell you one thing: there is the very real possibility that teleportation by whatever means may involve a "kind of killing," but to me it is no different than "killing" the analog sound waves when making a digital recording. When CD's first appeared, this was a very disturbing point for many people. They felt that something crucial was "lost" in the process. But I have visited Studio B in Nashville and have heard original masters through those mondo speakers, and nothing but a digital recording can recreate that immensity and richness of sound. Yes, in the early days, many digitilizations were "cold" as some observers felt. Perhaps some sound was "killed" in the process. But these days, digital recordings are far more accurate renditions of sound than any ?analog recording could ever be, even IN Studio B, and on those incredible speakers with the incredible master tapes running. The soul of the music is now retained. It takes time and persistance, but if you can dream it, and you have the capability to make the attempt, some day, somewhere, someone will try to teleport a living object by one means or another. And there are a variety of ways. So a blanket statement of "killing" is really quite over the top. Sorry to take your time; I am sure you have somewhere to, uh, drive. And you had better be careful, my friend, because the statistics are not much in your favor. Or mine. But we do it, anyway.
Peace and Long Life,
RM

actually no.. Quantum teleportation does deal with the uncertainty principle in several ways.

Einstein originally throught up the experiment to attempt to disprove it, and support a theory of Hidden variable..

He believed that all of the quantum strangness was due to the fact that qualities such as spin, and particle position were encoded but not detected till a particle attributes were measure, unlike the Born's belief that such qualities didnot exist till they were measure.

His throught experiment ( which was not conducted at the time) would have show that by measuring the spin of one particle, one would automatically know the spin of the other, what he did not predict that one could alter the spin of the unmeasured particle by altering the spin of the measured particle, this is the heart of Quantum entanglement and Teleportation.

Quantum teleportation does not physical move a particle ( like quantum tunneling which also depend on the uncertainty principle) it alters the unmeasure properties to that of its measure partner.

Basically to entangle particles, you first must bring them to a state of uncoherence , this is similar to Bose - einstein condensate where all particle involve behave in the manner of quantum particles. this is a very delicate state, and as it stand no exact explaination of why particle stop acting in this manner ( know as collasping the quantum wave function), we know that measuring a particle ( or collection of particles) attributes does this, but the why is still a mystery.

Data can be transfer because we can send a key telling the observer of the unmeasure particles how we are changing their twin. Can we teleport people in this manner, No..

Cause first we must alter the spin of every particle of your body to a state where we can entangle them with other particles.. Hate to tell you that physically altering you in this manner will kill you. No if and or but!

Data will be lost during quantum teleportation due the nature of the process, this lost of data is cover by the Bell theorem which disproved Einstein original Hidden Variable Theory by showing that the changes done by altering the spin of one particle of the entangle pair would fit a ratio of measurements that show that second particle spin was actually being alter by the measurement process.

The uncertainty principle come in effect due to fact that it limits how accurately we can measure any pair of quantity whether it spins, energy,momentum or position of a particle.

People are not data, even if they were, the lost of any data in the process would mean the transfer person would not be the originally or exact copy. A lost of a single Quibit would be fatal. With Data transmission, usually an error checking scheme is sent, lost data is recover or resent, I cannot picture being done for a person or physical objects.
All data transmission have noise that means original data is alway corrupted on some level, the type of data sent is what determines the level of error correction is needed ( if any).

The Fact that the spin states data must be sent via another channel show that this is not true transfer of particles from one location to another, the only reason physicists even call this whole process of Quantum entanglement teleportation is that the current interperation of Quantum reality, set in the 1940's does away with the notion of particles being real entities, only their measured qualities are. So if first particle is id by it spin, momentum,etc, altering it entangle partner characteristics to that of the measure particle make it appear that the original has been teleported...Whether you want this interperation to match a macroscopic object like a person doesnot seem to me to be a valid one.

as for not being up to date, I read about 40 different physics journels a month, and my degrees PHD in Nuclear Engineering and Electrical engineering enable to attent multiple conferences on Quantum teleportation and computing each year.

Whitestar7

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 419

Report this Sep. 15 2006, 1:54 pm

Quote (robinmark @ Sep. 15 2006, 8:52 am)
Yes, this is both complex and carries a bit of mystery that intrigued even Einstein himself, but nothing in the world of science should EVER be declared "impossible." Why? Because such a declaration is a gauntlett thrown. And there are those people who will always respond to a dare. And some of them will be right. Most of the cutting edge young physicists are embracing quantum computing, and no macro teleportation can take place before the computing hurdle is cleared.

Scientists would have to determine with very, very small living objects if this fidelity rate is ironclad when quantum computing figures into the picture, and most importantly, what it would take in the process to "kill" a living object simply by manipulating the wave states of OTHER particles with which these particles are "entangled." Changing is not killing. But, surely, we do not want to "change" living beings into something which they are not. Since we do not yet have such computing, nor empirical data by which to make such assesments, it seems quite inappropriate to make a blanket assertion that this process would absolutely "kill" a subject.

To simply assert that a physical law would "kill" a living being without sufficient explanation (jargon is very much like statistics: since most laymen do not know the jargon, it is easy to use it to make one's positions seem so very sound. I have never been impressed by jargon, as it excludes people and is often an attempt to show others that one is oh so very much wiser than those others.)

Hi Robinmark.

In regards to quantum teleportation, here is a direct quote from the following article:

"Teleportation is the name given by science fiction writers to the feat of making an object or person disintegrate in one place while a perfect replica appears somewhere else. How this is accomplished is usually not explained in detail, but the general idea seems to be that the original object is scanned in such a way as to extract all the information from it, then this information is transmitted to the receiving location and used to construct the replica, not necessarily from the actual material of the original, but perhaps from atoms of the same kinds, arranged in exactly the same pattern as the original. A teleportation machine would be like a fax machine, except that it would work on 3-dimensional objects as well as documents, it would produce an exact copy rather than an approximate facsimile, and it would destroy the original in the process of scanning it. A few science fiction writers consider teleporters that preserve the original, and the plot gets complicated when the original and teleported versions of the same person meet; but the more common kind of teleporter destroys the original, functioning as a super transportation device, not as a perfect replicator of souls and bodies."

Here is the link:

http://www.research.ibm.com/quantuminfo/teleportation/

The article specifically stated that in order to teleport a particle, the original must be destroyed in the process and a replica is created at the receiving end. Based on this assessment, we already know that if a person were to undergo the quantum teleporter, he or she will be destroyed and replicated. Although this technology will never be a means for transporting people from place to place, it does, however, show great promise for quantum computers, which would perform 10 times faster than todays computers and best of all, quantum cryptology will be 100 percent secured, that is, sending photons entangled in a quantum state makes it impossible for an eavesdropper to intercept a message.

Now sometimes what we dream, think, or wish something be possible doesn't always coincide or obey the laws of the Universe. In fact, the Universe could care less about what we dream, think, or wish to be possible. And other times we've accomplished impossible dreams or ideas, but with surprising and often unexpected results. Here are a couple of examples. In the book entitled, "From The Earth To The Moon", Jules Verne envisioned humans venturing out to the moon via a superhuge rocket cannon. Now any sensible person knows that the moment you shoot people from a cannon, they would be instantly killed. Even Verne knew this, but he couldn't have imagine any other way of getting his characters to the moon at that time. Today, we can go to the moon, thanks to space shuttles, but its a far cry from the way Verne imagined.

The same goes for Roddenberry's transporter. He created the transporter because he couldn't afford to land the Enterprise on a planet every week, it was prohibitively expensive. Scientists were greatly inspired by the transporter concept and developed quantum teleportation into a reality. Just like in the Verne example, quantum teleportation works in a similar way like the transporter in one respect: teleporting quantum information, NOT physically teleportating people. Thus, our inventions does not always achieve what we dreamed about and sometimes not in the way we expect it.

To reiterate, quantum teleportation will lead to quantum computers and 100 percent cryptology. One other thing. While I think it's important (and healthy) for humans to dream about things are currently impossible, it's also equally important to learn all we can about our universe because if we do that, the bridge between imaging the impossible, coupled with our increasing knowledge of the universe, the possibilities will be limitless.

Whitestar7

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum