Albert Einstein previously described the phenomenon of quantum entanglement as "spooky action at a distance", however, until recently, experiments examining this strange feature of the quantum physical world were limited to relatively small distances found on the surface of the earth.
Albert Einstein previously described the phenomenon of quantum entanglement as "spooky action at a distance", however, until recently, experiments examining this strange feature of the quantum physical world were limited to relatively small distances found on the surface of the earth.
In a new study published today in the New Journal of Physics, scientists propose using the International Space Station (ISS) to test the limits of "startling action at a distance" and possibly help develop the first global quantum communication network.
Their plans include a test called the "Bell Experiment" which examines the theoretical contradiction between the predictions of quantum mechanics and classical physics, and a key experiment in quantum distribution which will use the International Space Station as a point for sending encrypted information over a greater distance than previously tested on Earth.
Their calculations show that it is possible that "major experimental goals" will soon be achieved through the ISS experiment when each experiment will last for about 70 seconds at a time.
"During several months of the year, the International Space Station passes between 5 and 6 times in a row in the right location for us to carry out the experiments. We believe that we will be able to carry out the experiment for a whole week", says one of the authors of the study Professor Rupert Orsin from the Australian Academy of Sciences.
The only equipment we need on the station is a photon detector, which can be sent to the space station and connected to a camera that is already located there and faces Earth.
In order to perform the Bell experiment, the scientists need a pair of photons that are in a reciprocal state of quantum entanglement that will be produced on the surface of the earth. One of the photons will then be sent to the space station to the camera and photon detector, while the other photon will remain on Earth and be measured here.
Entangled photons are highly correlated, even when separated over large distances. A measurement made on one of the pair of photons will determine the result that will be measured on the other photon. That means the second photon will be simultaneously affected by the measurement of the first photon.
"According to the laws of quantum physics, entanglement does not depend on distance. The Bell-type experiment we proposed will show that the particles are interwoven with each other, over large distances - about 500 kilometers - and this will be the first time this has been proven in research," says Orsin.
"Our experiments will also allow us to examine potential effects of gravity on quantum entanglement and their consequences."
The researchers also proposed a quantum distribution experiment, where a cryptographic key is produced using a stream of photons that will be shared by 2 safe sources. When a third party intervenes, it will be possible to notice it.
74 תגובות
Please Eraf, you asked for your experiment to be treated, so they are treated..
Israel Shapira
Happy holiday:)
Are you trying to convince me that the experiment shows a quantum phenomenon? This is exactly what I am saying - a simple experiment that cannot be explained otherwise.
Miracles.
On one leg: in QED
Quantum electrodynamics
The photon does not come directly from point A to B, but goes through many paths, each with a different amplitude, some of which are opposite.
In the case of the two filters, the amplitudes canceled each other out like waves in a 180 degree show.
In the case of three filters, the trajectories changed and with them the amplitudes. That is why we manage to see light.
Happy holiday.
Israel Shapira
It's just like the 2 slots experiment. The point is that here it is an experiment that anyone can do.
Without the central filter - no light passes when you add a central filter 25% of the light passes.
Which filter, the main lens in your experiment? Or did you mean QED?
Israel Shapira
If you are right - then even a single photon should have passed through the central filter.
ב
Your summary is summary, and a little more: information undoubtedly passes in no time - the state of spin or polarization. But that doesn't mean that information can be sent in an interlacing faster than light, and relativity only forbids that.
This quantum mechanics is quite a joke.
Miracles.
The lenses not only transmit the correctly polarized photons, they also change their polarization. Epigenetics of photons.
In QED it is a bit more complicated. For example: a pulse of light that barely manages to penetrate 2 cm glass, but easily penetrates 5 cm glass of the same material. Amplitude Aelec.
Can we summarize? :
From knowing the situation at point A, it is possible to conclude about the situation at point B, but it is not possible to transmit information from point A that will reach point B immediately or at a speed greater than the speed of light.
Anyone who has abused you can create a chain reaction of nanotechnology that creates as many little people as possible stuck inside atoms with mini ovens for billions of years
my question. It's an experiment that really illustrates the meaning of measurement on value in quantum theory.
Miracles.
Which experiment, topic of your article or question maybe?
They're waiting for me twice, apparently we've had enough.
No one commented on my experiments...
Wait for me, let's try again:
I just saw Morse's response (were they waiting for you?) I think I understand your question.
You write:
Reuven is at point A and transmits a message to Shimon in Morse code.
Polarization a = line.
B = point polarization.
But note: Reuven cannot choose whether to send a line or a dot. He does not know what the polarization will be before he measures it. Therefore, although the polarization will be the same at points A and B, it cannot transmit any message, even the simple message of a line or a point.
The situation is similar to a pair of shoes that has been separated and each shoe has been placed in a sealed box. If A checks his box and discovers a right shoe, he knows that B has a left shoe, and vice versa. But he has no possibility to send information to B.
flowing with you (where is water?). Point A clocks are synchronized with point B clocks. At 10:00:00 photon A is measured at point A and found in UP. At 10:00:01 photon B is measured at point B and it is also UP.
What is the problem?
Point A is one light year away from point B.
"At that time" can be at that minute.
What do you mean at that time? A second difference? Picochania? Femto?
You will never be able to check exactly at that moment. The information, on the other hand, passes - yes, it passes - in zero time.
And despite this, there is no contradiction here to relativity, which forbids sending information faster than light.
How, how?
About this in the chapter: The horror show of the intertwined particles.
At point A, polarization A is measured.
At the same time:
At point B, polarization B is measured.
Has any information passed between the two points?
B, one more time:
"Suppose you measure the polarization at point A (insert a polarizer) and then change the polarization."
If you had read that long article, you would have seen that you cannot change the polarization after the measurement. The photon is already retarded.
The same goes for the chess cube: after it has fallen, we already know what it fell on.
Reuven is at point A and transmits a message to Shimon in Morse code.
Polarization a = line.
B = point polarization.
Will the message immediately reach point B, where Shimon is, which is a light year away from point A?
Israel:
Do you really think I have the patience to read a long article every time?
You described an experiment in which a beam of photons is polarized. If you polarize them then you can change the polarization. You can activate polarization and then stop it.
A polarized photon beam can be polarized for a few hours in one direction and then for a few hours in another direction.
B'.
"Suppose you measure the polarization at point A (insert a polarizer) and then change the polarization."
How will you change the polarization after the measurement? Explain to me according to the example in the attached link:
http://quantumtantra.com/bell2.html
Israel:
Suppose you measure the polarization at point A (insert a polarizer) and then change the polarization. (You remove the polarizer or insert another polarizer that creates a different polarization or change the state of the polarizer so that the polarization changes or activate an electromagnetic field that causes the polarization to change. The method of changing the polarization is not important).
At the same time as the polarization is changed, a light pulse is sent to point B, which is a light year away from point A.
If the polarization change at point B occurs immediately (the information about the polarization change travels at an infinite speed) then at point B an immediate polarization change will be measured, but the light pulse will reach point B only a year later.
Blowing water:
Statistics are not magic. It is impossible to fill in missing information with the help of statistics. The information remains missing.
Opinion is not science. Science deals with reality and not with opinions. In science, one changes the opinion according to the reality and does not try to change the reality to fit the opinion.
Maybe yes maybe not but sure maybe
I will give you an example of everyday life. An experiment that anyone can do at home. Thus 3 lenses of polarized sunglasses. Look through both and rotate one until nothing can be seen. Now - put the third lens between the 2 lenses and rotate this lens. You will now be able to see through the 3 lenses.
Now – try to explain it…..
Miracles,
"The behavior itself depends on our knowledge of the system."
I mean what I don't know doesn't hurt? (-;
I could not understand why what you say is not similar to what I said, please explain.
Miracles.
Maybe he doesn't know, but even if we repeat the experiment a million times, somehow he always gets the same polarization of his brother in Andromeda (if the polarizers are at 0 degrees).
So how does it happen if the polarization state information does not pass to it?
B.
What is meant by "at point A they change the polarization"?
You don't know what the polarization is until you measure it, so how do you change it?
Maybe yes and
Maybe I didn't understand you. What exactly is the problem? If there are more than thirty Aces, the probability of getting three is higher, even though every card is a joker or a salted fish. If a dice is spinning, it is in a superposition of six states before falling (measurement). If the number was three on five sides and six on only one, then the chance of getting a three is five times higher than the chance of getting a six, and this despite the randomness of the situations.
As a punishment for the kitbag questions, you are tied up on Shabbat!
But statistically, you might still have managed to escape (tunneling).
The honorable Mr. B
Right now what I'm doing is repeating my opinions over and over again, and statistics is such a kind of magic that you can fill in missing knowledge with, listen - with respect
Israel Shapira:
In the entangled and polarized photons experiment you mentioned:
In order to transmit information, information needs to be transmitted about a change in polarization.
Suppose for example the following experiment:
Point A is one light year away from point B.
At point A, the polarization is changed and at the same time a light pulse is sent to point B.
If the information about the polarization change goes from point A to point B in zero time, then the pulse of light will reach point B one year after a change in polarization is measured at point B.
I doubt if anyone has performed this experiment and if this is the result they got.
Blowing water:
There is no "hocus pocus" in physics. No idle talk. There is no magic. Statistics are not magic either. Also "super position" is not magic, it's just a combination. Mode 1 and mode 2 when they are together they are called "superposition of mode 2 and mode XNUMX.
The rest does not belong to physics but to legends.
Maybe yes maybe not but sure maybe
It's not exactly what you say. The behavior itself depends on our knowledge of the system.
Israel Shapira, the response did not come about the article but about the statistical responses here, if you don't have something statistically smart to say, don't say it.
If you did not understand my response, I will explain while responding to your question:
"And whose probability is higher? Especially if three aces have already come out and not even three one?"
The probability of a 3 coming out is of course higher, but according to Einstein's "belief" the card 3 came out because that's how the cards were dealt, whether we look at it or not, it will be a 3.
According to my understanding of the quantum approach, all the cards are "joker" style, only when I look at the card, my "joker" will become a set number, as if the cards are playing "salty fish" with me - they change until I look at them and freeze in place.
It seems that the desire of some scientists for something "magical"/"fascinating", turns our inability to know reality - into an assertion that reality is random.
Statistically, most likely it's Shabbat soon, so we'll have Shabbat Shalom.
Israel Shapira
The photon knows nothing.
To the honorable Mr. B
Because we are talking about things that are in a super position, we can say that their dimension is not 3 dimensions of a space similar to ours, they are duplicated back in time and ignite in a wider dimension, if one of the positions changes it can affect the other, through their connection, and therefore their past (because which are in super position) changes from the future, the same thing only on a large scale only with multiple worlds, the parallel to which is a particle in super position, thanks and respect
Blowing water:
The roulette wheel is heavily influenced by its past. Is the roulette wheel not deterministic?
"Super position" is simply a combination of several positions. Nice phrase but not relevant.
Nothing "comes from the future". The past affects the future and the future does not affect the past.
There are no coincidences in the world. Each photon is completely deterministic. Only the measurement results are probabilistic.
There are no multiple worlds. There is only one world. one universe
Dear Mr. B
The measurement of indeed yields certain results in probability, but if you knew why you should not have done probability, but:
The state of the photon is not fully deterministic because its past can be affected by one possibility of the superposition, even if it comes from the future, although there are no random things in the world, there are multiple worlds and the possibility of one of the worlds in the future can affect ours, in short the term "deterministic" Inaccurate, although everything has a reason even if it comes from the future or another dimension. With great respect, may your name go before you, thank you
Measurement of a photon yields certain results with a certain probability.
The state of the photon is deterministic. Only the measurement results are statistical results.
And statistically there is also a situation where you... well, how do you say? Probably not a genius.
And what is the higher probability? Especially if three aces have already come out and not even three one?
And in simple Hebrew: what is the connection of your response to the topic of the article?
Gently, my brother.
Yael Petar:
"And as soon as you looked at the photon, reality was established." indeed?
A roulette wheel spins until it stops on a certain number.
Does the roulette wheel change (determine) reality? Or does reality determine the roulette wheel on which number to stop?
No measurement changes (determines) reality!! Reality is the one that dictates the measurement results!!!
It seems to me that all the commenters here understand and have delved immensely into quanta, but I can't help but ask myself if the "magic" of quanta is nothing more than a new "belief"...
Statistics are in everything, does this mean that reality is "free"? Are the cards chosen in poker? Does my card choose to be an "ace" because it "knows" that 3 aces have already been dealt or that all the other aces have not been dealt? No! There are 4 of everything, and there is some possibility that you will have an ace!
This is not a matter of passing information and there is no matter of statistics here, and if there is then God will keep us out of trouble.
If we assume that the reality is statistical, then at time T in situation Y there should be a result A or B (or C or D) and the percentages do not matter at all..
Let's say infinite (billions of millions whatever you want) parallel universes, all of which are going exactly the same up to the moment you are reading, is there a different thought in one of them? Why?
Please note, for the sake of fairness, a free reality (that is, a reasoned reality that does not require only one result - statistically) leads to the possibility that out of the infinite number of times I run naked in Harlem with anti-dark skin signs I will come out unscathed, or alternatively, out of the infinite number of times I will jump from 495 meters into Busy road on which there are also 500 people shooting at me all the way down I will come out unscathed.
I know you like to separate quanta from the more "massive" reality, but what to do?
When the world is statistical, there is no single result, and when there is no single result, there is no reason for logic to guide us, and hence the path to hocus pocus and Abra as I said is very short.
Or alternatively (because the world is statistical) it could very well be that this message caused the collapse of systems that would bring about the end of the universe, it would be somewhat funny, but I apologize in advance to those who did not like it.
If I'm talking nonsense please correct me where I'm wrong, but don't forget, statistically there is a situation where I'm a genius.
Miracles
No information has been sent from Zatomer? If it didn't pass then how does the photon on the other side know what the polarization of the other is?
Those who try to create a factual scientific discussion with "blowing water" and impart some knowledge to him - frustration and disappointment are in store for him. A demonstration of the troll's action can be found in the "Science and Knowledge" forum on YNET.
Water blowing
How will the viewer on site B know that a viewer on site A has made a measurement???
They say that if you check you have some influence, "Language"
Water blowing
We didn't change anything. We did a measurement. No information passed.
Change something on one side and it changes a little on the other side, he will want to do statistics and find out
Water blowing
Unbelievable - you don't listen 🙂
How does the other side know that a measurement was made on the first side???
Water blowing
The measurement is performed on a particle that is in superposition - using another particle that is the same as the measured particle.
Because of the violation of symmetry during the test, the result obtained while maintaining the laws of conservation of energy is one particle in a known position.
The measurement measures a particle that is in a super position and you can influence individual positions, therefore there is a statistical change that with a certain chance also stabilizes in the far part, faster than the speed of light. Thanks again
It is that I have some influence on the value of my measurement, so there is also a transfer of information, I think they wrote something here about changing the measurement, but again, our problem is that we start from an assumption in the stomach and based on that we misunderstand the data. Respectfully blowing water
Water blowing
You are hard sometimes…….
Suppose we perform the EPR experiment - and the particles reach point A and point B. Suppose I am at A and you are at B. Now I am performing a measurement on my particle.
I know what the value of the measurement is for you if you measure - but there is no transfer of information here.
You can make a measurement and get a result - but you don't know if I made a measurement or not.
Let's say we set a time and we both measure - but it won't be at the same time and we won't know who measured first.
now it's clear?
Dear Nissim, hello
Whether it is EPR or two cracks or Shavin Bell Island, the theory of relativity falls on the fact that information does indeed travel faster than the speed of light, and it does not come naturally to humans that you can turn things back in time. Thanks
Water blowing
I have no idea what you mean. You are the one who claimed, as I understood you, that the EPR experiment contradicts the theory of relativity.
The same with an experiment in quantum entanglement, it's not that the data was on both sides together before, it is possible to influence a data on one side and get a change that is shown by a statistical difference on the other side, that is, transfer of partial information, but still transfer of information. Thanks and regards
Dear Mr. Nissim, Hello.
They did a lot of experiments on this, the problem is that people come with what they have in their stomachs and then bend reality and their understanding of the data, I can illustrate it to you with a simple experiment - the two cracks, and you will see that the particle that passed through the second crack can, after testing, suddenly appear from the first crack, but If, again, it doesn't sit right in your stomach that the particle went back in time, because your personal feeling is that it is not possible, it is difficult to convince and surely it is information, thank you very much.
Water blowing
Yael is right - there is no contradiction to the theory of relativity here. Information did not move from one place to another.
Yael.
Information undoubtedly passes - the state of the electron spin or the polarization of the photon - but this does not mean that information can be sent through entanglement, and relativity forbids only that.
By the way, in the Wikipedia entry on entanglement, it is said that Einstein claimed that entanglement, or more precisely non-locality, does contradict relativity, and this is because information travels faster than light. This was precisely his argument against the completeness of quantum mechanics.
So who are we to argue with the maestro?
A little expansion on several dimensions.
If a thing is single and then changes and is still single, you can say that what was at the beginning is the cause, but, if it is duplicated and superpositioned, it may be that its connection, its cause, is from one of the future duplications, and here it is possible to say that the reason is from one of the future duplications, and because the dimension is duplicated His is considered different.
Maybe I didn't write it the clearest but, thank you to those who read, with respect
It seems as if the point is that you don't have to translate literally every joke that gets into the article. Certainly if he doesn't pass the translation well in the first place.
If the use of the word ghosts can be understated, it puts Israel Shapira into hyperventilation
Honorable Yael
True, it is possible to influence the past, information is transferred (but partial and still information)
We need to look a little at what dimensions the space has in the past and in the future and in addition:
There is only one reason from the future
Thank you, with respect
blowing water,
If you could communicate faster than the speed of light, you could influence the past.
Quantum entanglement is not about transferring information. Before you looked at the photon both states exist together. And as soon as you looked at the photon, reality was set. It is not about transferring information, but about looking at reality. There is no violation of the causality implied by the theory of relativity.
"spooky action at a distance"
The meaning is not scary even though it is one of the translations of this word in Hebrew
It comes more from the concept of weird as the show of a ghost that appears and disappears from our world a moment here and a moment there
Effect from a distance without range
Not like classical physics, where there is a past, present and future, everything is intuitive and clear
In quantum physics the wave-particle behaves like the description of a ghost and thus this name was attached to it
By Albert Einstein who didn't quite get it
Dear Ms. Yael Petar, I am not sure about the distance limit, but what I am sure of is that even if statistical information and bits are transmitted, it is considered information and the speed of light is broken. Thanks
Israel Shapira,
exactly. According to the theory it should work even at very large distances. The purpose of this experiment is confirmation in reality, and this can support the theory and contribute to its proof.
It doesn't matter what is the buffer between the 2 particles. As soon as you make a measurement on the first particle, the wave function of the second particle collapses at exactly the same time and the very measurement affects the second particle. In the past we claimed that there is a contradiction to the theory of relativity because the reaction of the second particle is instantaneous, meaning that information supposedly passed here faster than the speed of light, and this is exactly what "startled" Einstein, that's why he calls it spooky. But when you look at it again, you see that there is no contradiction to the theory of relativity because there is no actual transfer of information here.
Theoretically, shouldn't the interweaving always work regardless of distance, even millions of light years away?
And will the interweaving work even if there are several suns between the interwoven particles?
Not startling, but 'ghostly', meaning an action of ghostly origin, an action of the 'world beyond', an action of metaphysical origin.
Asaf,
The point of this experiment is to test the quantum entanglement at larger distances, which so far have not been tested in the experiment.
oak,
Although this is indeed a strange phenomenon, I think it is more appropriate to call it "frightening" in this context.
500 km, isn't that a range that is also possible on Earth?
And if photons are already being sent, then they sent a laser beam to the moon and back (the astronauts left a mirror there), so maybe it is possible to do an experiment at a distance of 600000 km (times the distance from the earth to the moon)
And why does it have to be done in space?
I assume that they have already tested the maximum range of the operation on the drone since it is known that it only works for short ranges, so it is not clear what is the point of checking it again in a more complicated way in space?
These experiments are conducted in dark and closed places in order to avoid background noise
As soon as someone lights a cigarette on Earth, the cigarette emits billions upon billions of photons, the same way a flashlight will have to ask everyone to turn off the light and someone to cover the sun and someone to cover the moon and also ask someone to cover the stars
Small point:
A translation of spooky might be appropriate in general as scary/frightening, but in the connotations here it seems more appropriate to translate it to "strange". That is, "strange action from a distance" - or something with a character more similar to that than alarming (I don't really have a perfect translation).
Small point:
A translation of spooky might be appropriate in general as scary/frightening, but in the connotations here it seems more appropriate to translate it to "strange". That is, "strange action from a distance" - or something with a character more similar to that than alarming (I don't really have a perfect translation).