Thursday, October 05, 2006

Beam Me Up; Secret Society of Scientists

Scientists in Denmark have recently transported - yes transported, as in Star Trek - a set of atoms over a sizeable distance (just under 2 feet). Here is the CNN article:

Scientists teleport two different objects

LONDON, England (Reuters) -- Beaming people in "Star Trek" fashion is still in the realms of science fiction, but physicists in Denmark have teleported information from light to matter bringing quantum communication and computing closer to reality.

Until now scientists have teleported similar objects such as light or single atoms over short distances from one spot to another in a split second.

But Professor Eugene Polzik and his team at the Niels Bohr Institute at Copenhagen University in Denmark have made a breakthrough by using both light and matter.

"It is one step further because for the first time it involves teleportation between light and matter, two different objects. One is the carrier of information and the other one is the storage medium," Polzik explained in an interview on Wednesday.

The experiment involved for the first time a macroscopic atomic object containing thousands of billions of atoms. They also teleported the information a distance of half a meter but believe it can be extended further.

"Teleportation between two single atoms had been done two years ago by two teams, but this was done at a distance of a fraction of a millimeter," Polzik, of the Danish National Research Foundation Center for Quantum Optics, explained.

"Our method allows teleportation to be taken over longer distances because it involves light as the carrier of entanglement," he added.
Quantum entanglement involves entwining two or more particles without physical contact.

Although teleportation is associated with the science-fiction series "Star Trek," no one is likely to be beamed anywhere soon.

But the achievement of Polzik's team, in collaboration with the theorist Ignacio Cirac of the Max Planck Institute for Quantum Optics in Garching, Germany, marks an advancement in the field of quantum information and computers, which could transmit and process information in a way that was impossible before.

"It is really about teleporting information from one site to another site. Quantum information is different from classical information in the sense that it cannot be measured. It has much higher information capacity and it cannot be eavesdropped on. The transmission of quantum information can be made unconditionally secure," said Polzik whose research is reported in the journal Nature.

Quantum computing requires manipulation of information contained in the quantum states, which include physical properties such as energy, motion and magnetic field, of the atoms.

"Creating entanglement is a very important step, but there are two more steps at least to perform teleportation. We have succeeded in making all three steps -- that is entanglement, quantum measurement and quantum feedback," he added.
In a related story, scientists have recently revealed a secret that has been held for 1 million years. Apparently, an organization of scientists have been recording temperatures throughout the entire globe for longer than human civilization has been thought to exist. Although the scientific community has not publicly acknowledged this secret society, their conclusions clearly indicate its existence, since the scientific method requires repeated (and repeatable) experiments, thus necessitating that mankind has been scientifically active for a thousand millennia. You can read about it here.

16 Comments:

At 10/05/2006 8:28 PM, Blogger Jordan said...

Just so no one gets their hopes up too far... my understanding is that teleportation via quantum entanglement (which I assume is what this is, since they mention that phrase at a couple points) is limited to information. So I don't think this method is expected to transport actual objects, but rather the state of those objects. I could be wrong because it's been a long time since I was up on this stuff. But anyway, my understanding of quantum entanglement is that you have two particles that are from the same quantum system. Then you physically separate them. Even though they're physically separate they still must follow the constraints on individual quantum systems--so it's as if they're still connected in the same quantum system even though they aren't next to each other. Then when you change the state of one of the particles, the other particle instantaneously must change to a complementary state, since they cannot be in the same one at the same time. But I think there's some catch...I just don't remember what. Because I'm pretty sure they've found that information is still limited to the speed of light. I should look into this again. Everything above this sentence might be wrong.

 
At 10/06/2006 12:49 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well I honestly can say I have no stinkin' idea what Jordan just said.
But I do know one thing...I'm working on this hospital project in which the doctor that will be running the joint, a CT Suite, tells us that he wants us to use Star Trek as a basis for our design...and he was definitely not joking. Might I ask, how do you design Star Trek? How or why would you think that anything Star Trek in nature would be comforting or soothing to someone who could have something massively wrong with them?! "Beam me up Scotty!" Sure, that sounds fabulous. Let me relax staring at stainless steel panels and scary looking galaxy light panels in the ceiling....mmmm...yes. That's wonderful.
But no seriously...what is Star Trek design cause I really have no clue. Anyone? He told us a fabric we picked out looked like a shower curtain. It wasn't "Treky" enough he said. I really prayed there weren't people out there like this...especially ones that could be in charge of my health. Heaven help us all

 
At 10/06/2006 12:51 AM, Blogger Chris Hill said...

Blog entry now updated with Captain Kirk (blasted blogger upload program!) and increased obviousness of sarcasm for part II.

 
At 10/06/2006 12:55 AM, Blogger Chris Hill said...

Jordan,

That makes sense. You may be wrong, but you're clear. Anyway, does that mean that an organized system of particles can be transported? In other words, could I transport a pen from point A to point B? This would resemble more of a replication (replicators were on Star Trek too - maybe this is a 2 in 1 invention), since I would now have 2 identical pens. Anyway, if that were possible, it could be immensely useful, even if humans could not utilize it (2 copies of me... plus the whole "soul" and "created in the image of God" aspect).

Also, the speed of light is pretty much the limit of everything in physics, so you're probably right on that part.

 
At 10/06/2006 1:00 AM, Blogger Chris Hill said...

Emily,

It depends which Star Trek:

Original
Next Generation
Deep Space 9
Voyager
Enterprise

Oh, and I'm a nerd/dork/geek/real-man for knowing that off the top of my head.

 
At 10/06/2006 9:41 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have NO idea which Star Trek...I didn't know there were that many! I mean I always here people ask, "the original?" but never did I know I had such a variety of design options! How wonderful. Now I must first narrow down the specific Star Trek the doctor is referring to. I really wish this wasn't a real concern of mine and only a joke. wow...

 
At 10/06/2006 11:15 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've seen every episode of ST-TNG, but I would never design my house around it. That's what makes me "not a loser".

Go to blockbuster video and pick up the film "Trekkies" - it has a lot of shots of people's houses (and even a dentist's office) that they've remodeled to resemble Star Trek. Plus, you get the added advantage of laughing at the "losers".

 
At 10/06/2006 3:57 PM, Blogger Jordan said...

Chris,
Before reading this article, I would have said that no, this form of teleportation could not be used on real objects like pens. Unfortunately, journalists do not understand what scientists do (or even science/engineering students in their freshman year of college for that matter), so from their articles it is always difficult to understand what really went on with the science. The article seems to imply that the teleportation of real objects is possible--but again, due to the "journalist barrier" I have no idea if that is true.

My understanding has been that the implications of quantum entanglement-based teleportation are much more limited. Like your pen example: I think the way it would work is you would make a pen...then for all paired particles in the pen you would take one of them...then you would physically move that to where you want it...then you would force the remaining particles in the first pen to take on a specific state (maybe by aligning the spins with a strong magnetic field?). Then, at that moment, the particles in the second "pen" that you moved away to another location would instantaneously take on complementary quantum states to the first "pen". (I'm not sure a pen would be a functional pen any more if you took half its particles.) I should probably look this stuff up before writing any more.

 
At 10/06/2006 4:01 PM, Blogger Jordan said...

Oh, so the point of that was that my understanding has always been that this kind of teleportation will only transmit information (like the quantum state info, which could be tied into a code that would have real meaning) rather than actual objects. I think you have to have two "identical" objects that are entangled, which you move far apart physically, which doesn't make it quite as useful, but they still transmit state information instantaneously.

 
At 10/06/2006 4:10 PM, Blogger Chris Hill said...

Yeah, they talked about "moving" multiple atoms, which made me seem to think there was some order that was kept in the transfer. If the way I described it before worked (regarding the dublication of objects), a "transporter" could somehow destroy each particle as it transported, thus effectively "moving" objects through light (although no mass is actually moved). There was some Outer Limits/Twilight Zone (the modern version) episode about that actually, where a person had to kill themself in order to be transported.

I think whatever we're saying about this is probably grossly uniformed. Suffice it to say, the whole idea is still pretty dang sweet.

 
At 10/06/2006 8:11 PM, Blogger Chris Hill said...

No comments on my global warming sarcasm? :_(

See that? It's a tear. Thanks a lot, everyone.

 
At 10/07/2006 12:17 AM, Blogger Sam said...

All I know about global warming is that it is now widely regarded as fact across the scientific community. Anyone expressing unbelief in it is subsequently labeled an "ignorant slut".

 
At 10/10/2006 1:21 AM, Blogger Jordan said...

Chris,
I enjoyed your comments on global warming and I am sorry that my comments did not explicitly express my enjoyment.

Also, I'd like to say that quantum computing, which was mentioned in the article, is pretty interesting and has huge implications. There is still a lot of engineering that has to be figured out before quantum computers will really be practical, but once they are it will be cool. Normal computers function deterministically. They proceed through a series of "if-else" logic. If the ball is red, do this. If the ball is orange, do this. If the ball is green, do this. If it is some other color, do this. When there are many options you can see how this takes a long time. Especially if there are exponential factors, like: if red, check->is it plastic? is it rubber? is it wood? if orange, check->is it plastic? is it rubber? is it wood?

Quantum computers can compute non-deterministically. In this case it computes the answer for all cases in one cycle. The system is, in essence, in multiple states simultaneously ("superposition"). Things like cryptography have to be redone in the quantum case, because most codes we use now could be cracked by a quantum computer in seconds.



Sam,

Al Gore says global warming is true, so it must be.

 
At 10/10/2006 6:40 PM, Blogger Chris Hill said...

Jordan.

Cool.

 
At 10/20/2006 2:43 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, I'm not an expert on the issue of global warming, but I will say that one way they can gauge temperature from ages past is from ice core samples taken from places like Antartica which somehow reflect the global temperature at that time. Also, if one were to argue that the earth is not in fact getting warmer, then exactly how would the water levels of the world's oceans be increasing considering our ecosystem is for all intents and purposes a closed system? I am definitely not some "hippie-liberal" alarmist, but the engineer in me sees certain bits of data that seem to form a trend. And even if the Earth is not getting any warmer, it would seem common sense to try to lessen our environmental impact in any ways possible if only to be good stewards of a place we are really only renting until the next tenants come along, you know?

 
At 10/24/2006 8:31 PM, Blogger Chris Hill said...

Abe,

No, I know you're not one of the "crazies". I do believe in common sense environmentalism, and we'd probably be on the same page in that regard. I have to give engineers the benefit of the doubt, because it's probably the type of degree that gets the most rational people in it.

Anyway, the ice data you cite is one of the methods the lady who was studying global warming discussed with me. I'm not an expert by any means, but she explained the global warming science pretty well to me. Apparently, data can only really be determined based on 1000 year averages. So we can say the earth was about X degrees between AD 500 and AD 1500, but we can't say that the earth was about X degrees in AD 652 (historical events sometimes give us specific details, but these are few and far between).

I accept that the earth has probably been warming very slightly over the last 150 years (the extent of our actual data). However, this is the only possibly reasonable conclusion that can be made. For all we know, the earth could have warmed 10 degrees between AD 1250 and 1400 (I'm just throwing out dates randomly, btw). All we know are averages, so having a 150 year slight rise does not seem consequential to me, especially in regards to public policy.

Besides, although I accept that it is probably true, to say that the "entire world" is warming based on temperature data from only a few points around the globe seems at least a little suspect. We have better methods today that can measure broad-scale behavior. I've even seen some evidence indicating ocean levels lowering at places.

Anyway, I guess I'm a skeptic when it comes to science. Science is skeptical in nature, so I think that that's appropriate :) .

 

Post a Comment

<< Home