|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Scientists teleport two different objects
In article ,
Alan Anderson wrote: wrote: BTW, I have to say that now I have a rudimentary grasp of how it works, I find the term "teleport" somewhat misleading. Wayne has the same complaint. As do I, for that matter. All that's happened is that two particles have assigned the same property. No, what's happened is that one particle has *lost* its property (or has had it randomized), and another particle has been assigned the property that the first particle *used* to have. Right. Much like when I connect two monitors to one computer with a KVM switch -- when I flip it, the picture disappears from one screen and appears on the other. I have therefore (to use the conventions of the press on this topic) teleported the monitor from one place to another. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Scientists teleport two different objects
Joe Strout wrote:
No, what's happened is that one particle has *lost* its property (or has had it randomized), and another particle has been assigned the property that the first particle *used* to have. Right. Much like when I connect two monitors to one computer with a KVM switch -- when I flip it, the picture disappears from one screen and appears on the other. I have therefore (to use the conventions of the press on this topic) teleported the monitor from one place to another. Leaving aside the issue that a KVM switch does exactly the opposite of what you're talking about, the distinction is twofold. First, the picture on a computer monitor can be described perfectly by the numbers producing it, with no uncertainty principle keeping you from knowing as much about it as you wish. Second, you *can* display the same picture on multiple monitors at the same time; you do not *have* to remove it from one in order to place it on the other. Quantum teleportation requires that the source object's state be destroyed before the target object can receive it. I believe teleportation is an appropriate word for such a "destructive perfect copy at a distance" process. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Scientists teleport two different objects
: Alan Anderson
: Leaving aside the issue that a KVM switch does exactly the opposite of : what you're talking about, That depends only on how you hook it up. Well... there are some complications, but certainly the simple mechanical switches would do it. : First, the picture on a computer monitor can be described perfectly by : the numbers producing it, with no uncertainty principle keeping you : from knowing as much about it as you wish. Yes, that being the difference between quantum and classical. Not between teleporting and telecommunicating. : Second, you *can* display the same picture on multiple monitors at the : same time; you do not *have* to remove it from one in order to place : it on the other. Yet, what if the drivers on your video card can only drive one monitor? Sure, you could hook an amplifier in, but even so, whether it is possible to copy vs move doesn't seem the dmoniant issue. The thing is, you're moving a state, not a particle; software not hardware. And moving a state is, in the classical world, communication, not portation. Software is stuff you can send over an ethernet connection, hardware is stuff you can't. And what's going on here is you're sending a bit of classical information, and a packet of quantum spookiness, which when you get it where you're going you can induce a particle to aquire here a state some particle there lost. Which seems much more like sending a description of something to do to an object than anything else. You're saying limits of the quantum world make it a portation, yet even so, it is *still* going to be inevitably misleading because of the tranditional connotation of the word "teleport". And one simple way to tell that it's misleading, is that people immediately say "gosh, maybe we can scale this up to get treknological transportation", whereas you haven't even started to be able to transfer coherently a whole object, or indeed a particle of any sort. And the ability to transfer, oh, spin state of some of the particles on a quantum level doesn't even start to head in that direction. Now of course, everybody is their own Humpty Dumpty. And there are rational justifications for the usage as you've just shown. But using the term "teleport" for this operation is inevitably going to be misleading, whether it's "proper" or not. And after all, people call it quantum cryptograpy, implying communication, not quantum postal service, implying portation. Which seems altogether less misleading. Wayne Throop http://sheol.org/throopw |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Scientists teleport two different objects
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mauro Frau: maurofrau dvd about apollo 14 | yo | UK Astronomy | 0 | August 19th 06 05:08 PM |
Scientists Issue Unprecedented Forecast of Next Sunspot Cycle | Mike Simmons | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | March 6th 06 07:09 PM |
Near Earth Objects -- what lies ahead? (Forwarded) | Andrew Yee | News | 0 | December 6th 05 04:44 PM |
Scientists Find Huygens Probe Landing Site, Release New Animation of Titan | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 4 | November 30th 05 10:26 PM |
Scientists Prepare to Place Einstein on the Rim of a Black Hole(Forwarded) | Andrew Yee | Astronomy Misc | 0 | June 2nd 04 12:07 PM |