Slashdot Mirror


Researchers Control the Flip of Electron Spin

karvind writes "According to PhysOrg, physicists in Europe, California and at Ohio University now have found a way to manipulate the spin of an electron with a jolt of voltage from a battery. In this experiment voltage was applied to Indium Arsenide based quantum dot which flipped the spin of electron inside it and emitted a photon. The scientists were able to manipulate how long it would take for the electron to flip its spin and emit a photon - from one to 20 nanoseconds. This may have possible applications in optoelectronics and quantum cryptography. Results were published in the latest issue of Physics Review Letters"

157 comments

  1. Election? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Was I the only one who thought this read "Researchers Control the Flip of Election Spin"?

    1. Re:Election? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That'd be referendum spin (French voters rejected the new EU constitution). Not particularly nerdy but the same goes for most of what ends up in the politics section here.

    2. Re:Election? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:Election? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I'm like to know who moderated the first post as redundant.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    4. Re:Election? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to know who moderated the first post as redundant.

      How much would you pay to find out?

    5. Re:Election? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why whats wrong with the mod ? I think when I meta-moderate it, I will consider it fair.

    6. Re:Election? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but I read it as: "Republicans Control the Flip of Election Spin"

    7. Re:Election? by spammacus · · Score: 1

      No. Nice to know I'm not the only tin hat man here.

    8. Re:Election? by -kertrats- · · Score: 1

      Wow, I read it that way and thought to myself, "Yes! A certain +5 post!", then I come on and find it in the first post :(

      --
      The Braying and Neighing of Barnyard Animals Follows.
    9. Re:Election? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. +4 Funny is a fair rating.

    10. Re:Election? by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Fair? By definition, the first post can't be redundent!

    11. Re:Election? by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

      not true

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    12. Re:Election? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Depends upon whether the first post's content is considered relative to the story, or to other posts. I choose to believe the latter.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    13. Re:Election? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Two mod points.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    14. Re:Election? by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

      nope, it just depends if its redundant or not

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  2. year 2100 by jlebrech · · Score: 0

    AMD release the 20 nanosecond electron flip chip.
    Quickly followed by the 19 nanosecond electron flip chip (with less electrons)

    1. Re:year 2100 by 1nt3lx · · Score: 1

      fewer electrons.

    2. Re:year 2100 by jlebrech · · Score: 1
      yeh from Intel.

      funny how the numbers game will go backwards by then.

  3. As Usual by superpulpsicle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All universities new findings take 30 years before they are applied to the corporate world.

    1.) show the slashdot how electron flips
    2.) slashdot crowd say cool
    3.) show more engineers
    4.) show sponsors, marketers, businessmen
    5.) repeat step 4 for 29 years
    6.) profit!

    1. Re:As Usual by whimsy · · Score: 2, Informative

      PCR is 20 years old and ubiquitous in industry.

    2. Re:As Usual by cnettel · · Score: 1

      Yeah, just like the transistor and the IC took 30 years from invention to commercial impact. It's like being an inventor that's 6 years older than before and now waiting for his Nobel prize, it may arrive tomorrow, or next year, in thirty years, or never. For the Nobel prize case, though, you might expect the actual prize to be handed over in December, in Sweden. Not generally so with corporate success.

    3. Re:As Usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This charming but strange solution has me juming up and down from top to bottom in excitement.

      Ehem...Can I mod myself -1 pathetic

    4. Re:As Usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I seem to recal the Underpants Gnomes having a similar strategy. Hell it worked for them!

    5. Re:As Usual by infolib · · Score: 1
      You sir, are talking out your ass:

      Giant magnetoresistance was first discovered in pure crystal layers in 1988 by Peter Grünberg of the Jülich Research Centre and Albert Fert of the University of Paris-Sud [...] IBM produced the first commercial device based on this effect in December 1997.

      Oh, btw, it's used in every hard drive produced today and is one of the reasons HD prices have been falling even steeper than RAM and CPU.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced libertarian utopia is indistinguishable from government.
  4. 20/20 Hindsight by yotto · · Score: 4, Funny

    *...voltage was applied to Indium Arsenide based quantum dot which flipped the spin of electron inside it and emitted a photon. The scientists were able to manipulate how long it would take for the electron to flip its spin and emit a photon - from one to 20 nanoseconds.*

    When you put it that way, I don't know why it wasn't this simple the whole time!

    1. Re:20/20 Hindsight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been doing this for years. No wait, are my nipples made of Indium Arsenide?

    2. Re:20/20 Hindsight by sentientbeing · · Score: 1

      According to PhysOrg, physicists in Europe, California and at Ohio University now have found a way to manipulate the spin of an electron with a jolt of voltage from a battery

      Update: researchers are now stunned to discover they can manipulate the spin with a jolt of voltage of electricity from any source.

      Not just batteries.

      --

      ------
      beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
    3. Re:20/20 Hindsight by spagetti_code · · Score: 1
      And then again, lets remove the dumbing-down and try to figure out what they *really* did...
      "...We report the observation of a spin-flip process in a quantum dot whereby a dark exciton with total angular momentum L=2 becomes a bright exciton with L=1. The spin-flip process is revealed in the decay dynamics following nongeminate excitation. We are able to control the spin-flip rate by more than an order of magnitude simply with a dc voltage. The spin-flip mechanism involves a spin exchange with the Fermi sea in the back contact of our device and corresponds to the high temperature Kondo regime. We use the Anderson Hamiltonian to calculate a spin-flip rate, and we find excellent agreement with the experimental results...

      ummmm.....
  5. Quantum computing? by Fermatprime · · Score: 1

    Does this development get us any closer to the development of a quantum computer? I don't even remember the last I heard about that branch of science...

    --
    I hate the one hundred and twenty character limit for signatures with an all-enveloping, all-destroying, incredible pass
    1. Re:Quantum computing? by cryptoz · · Score: 1

      Really? You haven't heard anything? That's strange, 'cause it's all over the news, especially in the context of cryptography...

      http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8& q=quantum+computing&btnG=Search+News 140 google news stories.

    2. Re:Quantum computing? by Cyclotron_Boy · · Score: 1

      It could definitely have implications in quantum computing. It is interesting that TFA didn't mention any application here, though. Also, I'll have to look back into the time-dependent Schrodinger equation to remind myself how this plays in quantum mechanics. Seems that the precise timing of the electron spin flip could have some interesting quantum effects... -F

    3. Re:Quantum computing? by heelios · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not exactly I am afraid. There are still huge issues to quantum computing. Namely isolation and data retrieval.

      A quantum computer (or at least it's processor) needs to be totally shielded to the outside world while it operates as any interraction or mesurement from the outside world will break the theory. Also, at this moment, you cannot retrieve the processed data without interfering, right? So as soon as you get the data from one of the virtual processors working in 'other worlds', the thing breaks and you can't get anything anymore from it. So it's in fact pretty useless I'm afraid.

      I don't think we're going to see a quantum computer in the years to come, and much less under our desks. Even if they were invented I believe our governments will keep them away from us as they could be quite mean to encryption.

    4. Re:Quantum computing? by jfern · · Score: 2, Informative

      This advance deals with manipulating the spin of a single electron (a single qubit) The hard part of quantum computing is reliably maniuplating two qubits. With single qubit operations and measurements, and a two qubit CNOT, one can perform arbitrary quantum computation.

    5. Re:Quantum computing? by jfern · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Quantum error correction can be used to fix quantum errors. If the errors are independent, local, then there is a fault tolerant threshold, below which you will be able to correct enough errors to do arbitrary quantum computation. Error correction will typically add polylog (polynomial in log n) overhead in the number of qubits and the running time. So Shor's factoring algorithm becomes O(n^3 log^a n) instead of O(n^3).

    6. Re:Quantum computing? by kmac06 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, it doesn't need to be completely sheilded. As far as 'reading' the information simultaneously detroying the quantum state, that is true...just like reading a memory cell that uses a capacitor destroys the information, yet we miraculously still build computers with them :P. Also, the application of quantum computers is quite limited (factoring numbers is one thing they can do well), don't expect to be playing Doom 6 on them.

      And don't think of that 'other world' explanation. It's not really what is happening according to current theory, just a convenient/spooky way to explain it to some lay people. And yes, IAAP

    7. Re:Quantum computing? by tzanger · · Score: 1

      Uh... sensing the charge on a capacitor doesn't destroy the charge on that capacitor. Yes, there will be some (increased) leakage by the sense amps but you're clearly stretching things here.

      While my understanding of quantum theory is not as extensive as my electrical knowlege, I'm under the impression that making an observation of a quantum bit destroys its state. The two don't seem to be anything similar.

    8. Re:Quantum computing? by Achromus · · Score: 1

      Grandparent was referring to the fact that reading the charge on the tiny capacitors in DRAM destroys the charge. Afterwards, the hardware then needs to recharge the tiny capacitors in DRAM that it read. Despite this flaw DRAM is still used, so perhaps quantum computers could recreate quantum qubits after reading their states.

    9. Re:Quantum computing? by tzanger · · Score: 1

      I realize what he's talking about, but he's not quite on the ball. Reading the charge doesn't obliterate the state, and the caps naturally decay which is what refresh is all about anyway. And as I stated, while not an expert at quantum physics, I don't believe you can refresh quantum bits the same way that you can refresh decaying charge in a cap.

    10. Re:Quantum computing? by soren42 · · Score: 1
      Also, I'll have to look back into the time-dependent Schrodinger equation to remind myself how this plays in quantum mechanics.

      Actually, the single-particle three-dimensional time-dependent Schrödinger equation does not account for spin or relativistic effects. If anything, you could use the configuration interaction method to analyze spin in a nonrelativistic Schrödinger equation.
      --

      "Adventure? Excitement? A Jedi craves not these things."
    11. Re:Quantum computing? by TheAvatar666 · · Score: 0
      Also, the application of quantum computers is quite limited (factoring numbers is one thing they can do well), don't expect to be playing Doom 6 on them.
      But you can expect to play Duke Nukem Forever on them.
    12. Re:Quantum computing? by kmac06 · · Score: 1

      You're right, it's a different principle, and the analogy wasn't correct. However, you work with the limitations you have. You can work with memory cells that lose the information when you read them, and you can work with qubits that lose their information when you read them. In fact, since this is a crucial part of the theory, this is something that is assumed from the start and is able to be worked around.

    13. Re:Quantum computing? by infolib · · Score: 1
      And don't think of that 'other world' explanation. It's not really what is happening according to current theory, just a convenient/spooky way to explain it to some lay people. And yes, IAAP

      Isn't that a rather religious statement? I mean, the many world interpretation fits the data just as does the Copenhagen interpretation (which I was taught). I personally see both interpretations as "useful" in that you can choose the most convenient one to think about the problem at hand.

      As for the spookiness, I don't see any way to construct a "non-spooky" theory of quantum mechanics, because our intution about the world was formed by playing with macroscopic objects behaving "classically" (deterministic etc.).

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced libertarian utopia is indistinguishable from government.
  6. Qualitatively by smittyoneeach · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    It seems like this is just a small-scale example of effects like this, where the whole planet does a whoopsie.
    Seems like a step in the direction of understanding gravity.
    Let's fund this kind of research, shall we?

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    1. Re:Qualitatively by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

      No, I don't think the two effects are related at all...

    2. Re:Qualitatively by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excuse me, and I don't mean to be rude or anything, but what the fuck are you talking about?

    3. Re:Qualitatively by cnettel · · Score: 1
      No, the Earth magnetic spin is a non-quantum effect, that is, the explanation is probably modelled by classical mechanics, just assuming that certain things are surrounded by magnetic fields. This is quite different, there's a single particle that you can get to enter different energy configurations by exposing it to energy. It's more related to nuclear-magnetic spin excitation, which is employed in magnetic radiology and also in "pure" NMR chemical applications, than the planet magnet.

      In addition, gravity is not related to particle spin and magnetism. Oh, well, at least not any more than we already knew, that gravity is a bastard among forces that wrecks just about any perfectly good unifying theory in one way or another.

      Now, let me walk out onto the "imagine things and make physicists laugh at you" plank (especially before I RTFA) -- I've wondered a little, in the NMR case, if it would be possible to induce nuclear fission or at least some kind of nuclear decay through heavy RF excitation of nuclei. It seems slightly reasonable that the added energy would make crossing the barrier between temporary stability and decay a little lower. Now, why you would prefer this over bombarding the stuff with neutrons, well, that's another matter...

    4. Re:Qualitatively by calidoscope · · Score: 1
      I've wondered a little, in the NMR case, if it would be possible to induce nuclear fission or at least some kind of nuclear decay through heavy RF excitation of nuclei. No.

      At least not with static magnetic fields realizable on earth - you might be able to get some interesting stuff happening with magnetar level fields.

      OTOH, there is some interesting stuff that happens with nuclear quadrupole moments and gamma ray emissions. The gamma ray emissions show some directionality when the thermal energy drops below the quadrupole resonance energy. This effect is used to calibrate microkelvin thermometers.

      --
      A Shadeless room is a brighter room.
    5. Re:Qualitatively by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > the whole planet does a whoopsie.

      Stop it already with your obscure technobabble. I'm not fucking Einstein, you know.

  7. very interesting by dkode · · Score: 0

    I have been reading alot on quantum mechanics (or at least trying to read it I should state).

    This is interesting because it gives us a large leap in attaining more knowledge, and in turn will get us much further to unlocking the full potential of the universe as a whole.

    is everyone ready? now the part comes where we attain the ultimate question, or destory ourselves in the process. hang onto your hats!

    --

    Those who trade in their freedom for security, deserve neither.
    1. Re:very interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My 65 year old professor (David Mermin, Cornell University) said that he still doesn't understand quantum mechanics (or atleast why it works).

    2. Re:very interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quantum mechanics is well described as an algorithm. Like a recipe, if you follow the injunctions, it just works. Beyond that, as far as I've been able to ascertain, no one understands Quantum mechanics.

    3. Re:very interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "...in turn will get us much further to unlocking the full potential of the universe as a whole."

      I'm pretty sure the universe, by definition, is at it's full potential. ..."as a whole." is redundant.

    4. Re:very interesting by cocoamix · · Score: 1

      Neither did Einstein. He didn't accept parts of it, anyway, which is why he pretty much wasted the last decades of his life searching for a GUT that would never work.

    5. Re:very interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't think Einstein wasted his life on arguing against QM. If it was not him, the subtleness of QM wouldn't have been exposed. And the issue raised by him isn't resolved completely. You can refer to J Bell's paper to understand why it is not a trivial problem. Currently QM is accepted because it works and there had been various non-intutive way to explain them (hidden variables, parallel universe etc). And again if you think nothing useful came out of GUT, you are only reading popular science articles and not Phy Rev papers.

    6. Re:very interesting by Tri0de · · Score: 1

      The great Richard Fenyman said that "anyone who was NOT confused by and annoyed at quantum mechanics did not understand it"!

      --
      "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."
  8. Practical bifurcation transmitters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My understanding of the problem with communication via bifurcation (seperate two particles, change the spin of one and the other will change!), is the problems of being able to manipulate and detect the spin of a single particle with convenient equipment. Could this solve that problem?

  9. Oh great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You just know that this "electronics" is going to become the new buzzword and people will insist every single computer sold have it

  10. Not exactly ... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 5, Informative

    The title of the linked-to article in Physical Review Letters is:
    "Voltage Control of the Spin Dynamics of an Exciton in a Semiconductor Quantum Dot"
    (Emphasis by be)
    Now an exciton is something quite different from an electron.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    1. Re:Not exactly ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Technically yes. But in semiconductors you cannot get isolated electron. You excite an electron from the valence band to conduction band and leave behind a hole (sorry for the technical details). The work manipulates this excited electron and flips the spin. PhysOrg is not a site for hardcore physcists.

    2. Re:Not exactly ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An exciton is a bound state of an electron and a hole in an insulator (or semiconductor), or in other words, a Coulomb correlated electron/hole pair. It is an elementary excitation of a solid.

      Oh! Well, that just clears everything up then!

    3. Re:Not exactly ... by imsabbel · · Score: 1

      Well, but excitons arent "normal" electron/hole pairs, but bound systems, which behave quite differently than the "free" positive and negatic charge carriers.

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    4. Re:Not exactly ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When dealing with semiconductors excitons are the units of interest.

      If quantum computers are realized they will benefit from the current semiconductor infrastructure... if they can utilize it.

      The "spin" put on the article by saying 'electron' instead of 'exciton' is thus vendicated (even the average slashdot reader does not distinguish between free electrons and bound electrons when discussing current or circuitry; 'bound' is usually understood).

    5. Re:Not exactly ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I knew it wasn't a real electron when I read "Indium Arsenide based quantum dot". This isn't the first time a story here has been confused about quantum dots.

  11. Mmmm... Dark exitons by gerbalblaste · · Score: 5, Funny

    "A dark exciton with total angular momentum L=2 ecomes a bright exciton with L=1."
    Finally a practical application for decay dynamics following nongeminate excitation

    1. Re:Mmmm... Dark exitons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't tell you how long I've been waiting for this. Now I can die happy.

    2. Re:Mmmm... Dark exitons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Finally a practical application for decay dynamics following nongeminate excitation
      I'm pickin' up good vibrations
      She's giving me excitations
  12. Electron spin resonance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK, not that I've RTFA, but as I understand it, we can flip electron spins rather easily. Look up 'electron spin resonance', or 'electron paramagnetic resonance'. It's a common experimental technique used to study electron energy levels in materials and therefore identify their composition.

    Basically, a magnetic field is put across a sample containing unpaired electrons, which causes their spins to align either 'with' or 'against' the field.

    Then the sample is illuminated with EM radiation, that is, a beam of photons is shone upon it. The energy of the beam --- the frequency of the photons --- is varied, until we see the electron spins flip from the 'with' state to the 'against' state or vice-versa. This energy is therefore absorbed by the electron.

    The spectrum of EM frequency vs. absorbance can tell us what types of atoms are present in the sample.

    NOW I'll go read the article...

  13. Another application I can think of by proverbialcow · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How about an ansible?

    Pair off two electrons in a shell, flip the rotation of one and you change the rotation of another - instanteously. Even if they're no longer in the same atom and millions of miles apart.

    --
    The only surefire protection against Microsoft infections is abstinence. - The Onion
    1. Re:Another application I can think of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot the more important part of maintaining spin coherence over the distance. It's easier with photons.

    2. Re:Another application I can think of by Cylix · · Score: 1

      That is precisely what I was thinking of.

      We now have a universe wide cell phone ;)

      I was trying to dig up the article on that particular experient and see if they had found further results.

      Ah, the Orson Scott Card ansible ( Ender saga) founded on junk yard parts and we didn't even have to thieve the technology from an alien race.

      --
      "You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
    3. Re:Another application I can think of by TexVex · · Score: 1

      Yes, and eventually we'll figure out subspace and warp fields, too.

      --
      Fun with Anagarams! LADS HOST, SHALT DOS. HAS DOLTS. AD SLOTHS, HATS SOLD. ASS HO, LTD.
  14. US Government not interested or not invited? by 1nt3lx · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I found myself reading this article quite mindful of the frequency of stories recently that suggest the US is headed down a dangerous path of neglect and ignorance. Not only in the arena of biological research (stem cell, et al) but in technological developments as well. This is not a matter of observation but rather official administrative policy http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/0 2/183230&tid=98&tid=103&tid=190&tid=215&tid=231&ti d=14 .

    "The study was funded by EPSRC in the United Kingdom, Ohio University, Volkswagen, and the Alexander von Humboldt Foundations, with additional support by the Scottish Executive and the Royal Society of Edinburgh"

    It seems to me that this is exactly one example of the type of technology the government should be promoting, for military benefit or not. What I am not sure of is wether the researches had the option to solicit US funding or if they chose rather to not bother?

    I don't know, it struck me as a little odd considering that we're told repeatedly about how important it is to be a world leader in economy, technology, and security here is something that promotes all three and the pentagon's fat couffers are nowhere to be found. (well potentially compromises the third, but that's another story)

    1. Re:US Government not interested or not invited? by memoriesofgreen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A couple of points;

      Just because you are part of America, it doesn't give you the right to discover everything in the Universe.

      Perhaps I am reading into your post too much, but it implies that because of a lack of funding, it should have been an US group who headed this discovery?

      Not any one group, organization or country can push forward the bounds of humanity on their own.

      I for one relish any discovery that is made. I also realize that their is a political element to everything, especially scientific discoveries.

      It is up to every civilization to grow, prosper and then fall. I, as one of Her Majesties Subjects (UK), understand that empires are fleeting.

      PS

      Their is an H in whether ("I am not sure of is wether the researches"), if you are going to proclaim yourself as a spelling Nazi (
      http://slashdot.org/~1nt3lx/journal/7289) then at least don't be hypocritical. Also a few commas wouldn't go amiss.

      --
      in the long run, we're all dead anyway.
    2. Re:US Government not interested or not invited? by Beetle+B. · · Score: 1

      They are funding it. I know, because my graduate advisor is working on it (here in the US, supported by DARPA). In fact, a lot of money in the US is going into this...

      --
      Beetle B.
    3. Re:US Government not interested or not invited? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Just because you are part of America, it doesn't give you the right to discover everything in the Universe."

      What universe are you living in?

    4. Re:US Government not interested or not invited? by 1nt3lx · · Score: 1

      I did not mean to give the impression that I felt the US should have its hand in every scientific discovery in the universe. I meant it to be a critique of our current administration's scientific policy.

      It was supposed to be a nose thumbing at the president's agenda and rhetoric.

      I am well aware that the sun will one day set on the American empire, otherwise I don't think I would have left that comment at all.

      Your points are all valid, and I agree with them.

      Whether has always been a problem word for me. Also the rarity of comma use. I can claim mastery over there, their, and they're, however. ;-) "Their is an H in whether...."

  15. As I recall... by MagicDude · · Score: 1

    As I recall, there was an episode of Deep Space Nine that played with this idea about controlling an electron's spin. There was a device which would randomly make an unusual proportion of electrons spin in one direction, the the result was that a person's luck would be changed to either unusually good or unusually bad. I thought it was an intersting idea on what might happen if you change one of the fundamental aspects of matter in that spins are always balanced, some kind of quantum conservation of momentum.

    1. Re:As I recall... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Ok, which way must I hold my ferromagnet to get good luck? Because a ferromagnet actually works through a strong bias of spins in one direction ...

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    2. Re:As I recall... by simcop2387 · · Score: 1

      it wasn't with electrons it was with neutrinos. and it wasn't exactly to one person, just a field around that person, which is why when the stations computers/replicators were used to make a larger variation of the device the larger ones caused problems all over the station with their larger field.

    3. Re:As I recall... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've got it backwards. The manipulation of the spins was just a side effect of the luck-altering device whose magical mechanism was never explained.

      They used the fact that the spin disparity increased with proximity to track down the device's location. Also, it was neutrino spins, not electron spins.

    4. Re:As I recall... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That sounds like a magic 8 ball. You spin something and you (supposedly) drastically "change your luck".

    5. Re:As I recall... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Definitely one of their stupider episodes. Their science advisor must have been on vacation that week. (At least he/she wasn't AWOL for the entire series, as happened for Star Trek: Voyager.)

    6. Re:As I recall... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah I also recall an episode of Seinfeld where George does exactly the opposite of what he thinks he should and everything turns out amazingly well for him...

      Perhaps there is some truth now to the playground ruse of "opposites day."

  16. quantum crypto by cryptoz · · Score: 2, Informative

    Cryptography is in a desperate state right now. Virtually every product that needs to include it has in implemented in such a way that it's basically useless. And so quantum crypto is rolling in more and more these days with newer and better discoveries (like the one here) coming out periodically. However, yeah, it's great, w00t, applications for quantum crypto, etc, but that doesn't really mean much. We already have messages that are unbreakable through brute-force. All that needs improvement through our crypto is more secure ways of entering information into computers and sending it without screwing up by keeping the message in RAM, storing it in a temp file, etc.

    So sure, the ability to flip the electron spin is great for quantum cryptography itself, but...how does that help anyone, really?

    1. Re:quantum crypto by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      Well, you could probably say that about dozens of past inventions and developments in science. Other people have probably done it many times in the past.

      I don't have examples handy and I'm too tired to find them, but they have probably even said that about things which we use directly or indirectly everyday in our lives nowadays.

      Almost every non-ridiculous science is useful! And even some of the seemingly ridiculous science is useful too (and I'm not one to judge what's ridiculous or not...).

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    2. Re:quantum crypto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Cryptography is in a desperate state right now."

      I know. Just the other day I saw it standing on a sidewalk holding up a sign that said "Will encrypt kiddie porn for food".

  17. Nah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it was diebold who did that in the last election.

  18. what happens when the elecron is "entangled" ... by xlurker · · Score: 1
    as I understand it, the entanglement effect only concerns the yet undecided spin before/during the first measurement which leads to the spin of the *other* entangled electron being determined at the same time. ("same time" can be tricky...)

    An explanation for this interaction taking place has been to say that the two not connected objects are actually still connected... just not connected in space but some sort of "phase-space" ...

    My question now is: are they still connected afterwards! They should be, shouldn't they??

    If the spin can be willyfully changed that could mean instantaneous transmission of data...

    Since there is no free lunch this problably will not work... either because the entanglement is only valid for one measurement or it was never there. I wouldn't be surprised if the entanglment effect is just a theoretical construct to make modelling reality easier...

    --
    ______________________________________________
    sigamajig...
  19. quantum telegraphy? by moviepig.com · · Score: 0, Redundant
    ...flipped the spin of electron inside it and emitted a photon...

    (IANA quantum physicist, but...) What if the unsuspecting electron is one of a correlated pair? When the flip occurs, does the sibling electron (perhaps a galaxy away) simultaneously flip... and maybe squirt a photon to dazzle some Arcturians?

    --
    Seeing bad movies only encourages them. Watch responsibly
    1. Re:quantum telegraphy? by k98sven · · Score: 1

      What if the unsuspecting electron is one of a correlated pair? When the flip occurs, does the sibling electron (perhaps a galaxy away) simultaneously flip

      No. Flipping the spin is performing a measurement.

    2. Re:quantum telegraphy? by Xyrus · · Score: 1

      The excited scientists set up a new experiment to show this, but were perplexed when they started getting photons flying out of the test chamber.

      Curiously they formed a pattern:

      ALL U BASES ARE BELONG TO US! W00T!

      --
      ~X~
  20. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Informative
    My question now is: are they still connected afterwards!

    No. The measurement destroys the entanglement.
    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  21. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by TexVex · · Score: 2

    Entangled quantum things aren't connected in any way except mathematically. It's nothing more than saying that if you have two electrons entangled with opposite spin, then measuring one of them tells you the spin of the other, without you having to measure it. When you measure the spin of the first one, you've disturbed it as a result, and it no longer has any relationship to the other electron at all. However, the cool and useful thing is that you have gained information about another electron without measuring it.

    --
    Fun with Anagarams! LADS HOST, SHALT DOS. HAS DOLTS. AD SLOTHS, HATS SOLD. ASS HO, LTD.
  22. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by xlurker · · Score: 1
    No. The measurement destroys the entanglement.

    what about flipping the spin before measuring?

    That may seem screwball, but doesn't simply flipping the spin effect the other entangled particle? Would it also flip? If so, would it give off any measurable signal (a photon)?

    I don't care about determining the spins of the particles (and hope they stay undeterminable), I just care about making them repeatedly give of signals at selected time intervalls...

    (I suppose that would mean that the spin shouldn't be determinable from the emitted photon, otherwise that would equal a measurement...)

    --
    ______________________________________________
    sigamajig...
  23. Entanglement doesn't work that way by Asparfame · · Score: 4, Informative

    By "Pair off two electrons", I presume you mean put them in an entangled state where the spins of the two electrons are correlated? (For example, in the state |up, down> + |down, up>).

    In that case, your system won't work. Putting one of the electroncs in this spin-flipping device would destroy the fragile entanglement. In other words, flipping the spin of one would do nothing to the other.

    This is how it always is with entanglement -- entangled particles only remain entangled as long as you leave their entangled properties alone. Once you measure or modify the properties of one, the entanglement is ruined.

    --

    There's no reason for a sig here.

    1. Re:Entanglement doesn't work that way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once you measure or modify the properties of one, the entanglement is ruined.

      But that's exactly what is desired. Your "entanglement is ruined" point actually corresponds to collapse of the entanglement wave function, and that occurs in a correlated manner until the end state is reached.

      Therefore flipping one does very much affect the other!

    2. Re:Entanglement doesn't work that way by Asparfame · · Score: 4, Informative

      Proviso: When I said that modifying the properties of one member of the pair ruins the entanglement, that was not completely correct. If you managed to come up with a scheme to flip the spin of one without measuring the spin, then entanglement would be maintained. However, this would still not flip the spin of the other electron -- the entanglement would not have a different character.

      Example: You start with the electrons having opposite (but indeterminate) spins, in the entangled state

      |down, up> + |up, down>

      (normalization constant ignored)

      Now you flip the spin of the first electron. This puts you in the entangled state

      |up, up> + |down, down>

      Entanglement is preserved, however, you have not "flipped the spin" of the second electron. You have changed the sense of the correleation though. But you still haven't transmitted any information. The spin of each individual electron was indeterminate before you meddled, and was after you meddled.

      When I said the measuring the relevant property of one of the pairs ruins the entanglement, well, that was still correct. And try as you might, there is no way to transmit classical information without performing a measurment.

      --

      There's no reason for a sig here.

    3. Re:Entanglement doesn't work that way by Asparfame · · Score: 1

      What do you mean by "occurs in a correlated manner until the end state is reached."?

      You could argue that flipping the spin of one does "affect" the other. It changes the quantum state of the pair, and the "other" is a member of the pair. But it does NOT change the state in a way that:

      a) Can be determined with measurments performed only on "the other". or
      b) Can be used to transmit information.

      --

      There's no reason for a sig here.

    4. Re:Entanglement doesn't work that way by logicerror · · Score: 1

      Could you not then use statistics as a means of gathering some information?

      Say that you create one million pairs of entangled particles with random spin. You set the spin of one hundred of the particles and then measure the other one hundred paired particle on the other end. You can then discard those one hundred pairs and repeat the process with another hundred. This would mean setting once (while in a indeterminate state) then observing once.

      This seems to fit with your explaination, but I am probably missing something.

    5. Re:Entanglement doesn't work that way by Asparfame · · Score: 1

      To "set the spin" (ie put it in a known state) is equivalent to performing a measurment, and spoils the entanglement.

      --

      There's no reason for a sig here.

  24. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by k98sven · · Score: 1

    what about flipping the spin before measuring?

    Flipping the spin is measuring in the quantum mechanical sense. Perhaps you should think 'interaction' instead of 'measurement'.

    Spin is angular momentum. Angular momentum is conserved. Thus, to change the angular momentum of something means interacting with it.

    I don't care about determining the spins of the particles

    It doesn't matter if you care or not. It doesn't matter if you look at the results or not. It doesn't matter if it's you even have a result. What matters is that an interaction happened, where you could, in theory have received information about the spin state.

  25. wow by MaroonWarrior71 · · Score: 1

    absolutely riveting.

  26. Schrödinger showed one system could steer the by xlurker · · Score: 1
    other. Google search "Quantum Entanglement" yielded this: (from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-entangle/) In the second part of the paper, Schrödinger showed that, in general, a sophisticated experimenter can, by a suitable choice of operations carried out on one system, steer the second system into any 'mixture' of quantum states he chooses, i.e., not steer the system into any one particular state, but constrain the state into which the system evolves to lie in a given set, and at the same time fix the probabilities with which the system evolves into the states from the given set. He found this conclusion sufficiently unsettling to suggest that the entanglement between two separating systems would persist only for distances small enough that the time taken by light to travel from one system to the other could be neglected, compared with the characteristic time periods associated with other changes in the composite system. He speculated that for longer distances each of the two systems might in fact be in a state associated with a certain mixture, determined by the precise form of the entangled state.

    What you're saying is that the spin is already determined and *not* yet undetermined? I've never quite known what to think about that. I would, as you suggest, also prefer the theoretical construct notion. But it seems this is not yet clear...?

    The author of the Wiki page actually begs to differ:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entang lement and implies that the entangled particles do interact :

    Although two entangled systems can interact across large spatial separations, ... but goes on to say: ... no useful information can be transmitted in this way, ...

    --
    ______________________________________________
    sigamajig...
  27. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by Asparfame · · Score: 1

    What you said it mostly correct. However, it is theoretically possible (and has been done in practice as well, in fact) to flip a spin without performing a measurment. Flipping a spin is not always a measurment.

    If you start in the state (normalization constants ignored):

    2 * |up, down> + |down, up>

    where the first electron is more likely to be measured in the up state, and you apply a "coherent spin flip" (ie a flip performed WITHOUT measuring the spin) to the first electon, you end up in the state

    2 * |down, down> + |up, up>

    This is still an entangled state, and the spin of each electron is still indeterminate. Contrary to the desires of the parent to your comment, however, you still have not managed to flip the spin of the second electron.

    --

    There's no reason for a sig here.

  28. Re:muhammed jihad! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    derka derka akalaka muhammad jihad!

  29. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by whathappenedtomonday · · Score: 1
    instantaneous transmission of data...
    are they still connected afterwards! They should be, shouldn't they??

    I think they are. I also think you make me think of Homeopathy and stuff like that. Interesting!

    --
    I hope I didn't brain my damage.
  30. Misread by duffer_01 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Ha, I first read this as "Researchers Control the Flip of Election Spin". I thought back to John Kerry and thought, hmmm, not a bad idea.

  31. Flipping a spin is not always a measurement by xlurker · · Score: 1
    in a way you're repeating the last sentence of my previous post:

    I suppose that would mean that the spin shouldn't be determinable from the emitted photon, otherwise that would equal a measurement...

    I understand that the manipulation doesn't get to lead to a way of deducing the spin. Of course "cares" don't influence reality, it was a figure of speach. cool down.

    I was assuming that the manipulation would not equal a meassurement, and it seems there are ways to do so as the my "neighbour-poster" explained.

    --
    ______________________________________________
    sigamajig...
    1. Re:Flipping a spin is not always a measurement by Asparfame · · Score: 1

      Yes.

      But flipping the spin of the first particle still does not flip the spin of the other particle.

      --

      There's no reason for a sig here.

  32. but what does "indeterminate" mean? by xlurker · · Score: 1
    does it mean the particle has a spin that simply has not been meassured yet?
    or does it mean the spin of the particle has not been (for lack of a better word) "set" yet?

    The Wiki authors aren't clear about it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement

    Saying one thing: Although two entangled systems can interact across large spatial separations, ...
    and then another: ... no useful information can be transmitted in this way,

    If the particles are interacting then information is being transmitted. To say that it's not usefull is more of a copout. It is just maybe not yet possible for us to meassure some kind information while keeping the particles in an indeterminate state (e.g. without meassuring the spin state).

    (Of course what Wiki authors write has no bearing on reality, it could be that the spin states are set, which is also the simplest explanation.)

    --
    ______________________________________________
    sigamajig...
    1. Re:but what does "indeterminate" mean? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Informative

      It means the spin does not yet have a determined value. And this can indeed be checked. There are probability inequalities (the so-called Bell inequalities, named after Bell who found them) which must hold if the result of measurement should be pre-determined for each particle. The laws of quantum mechanics violate those inequalities, and experiments by Aspect have shown that nature obeys quantum mechanics also in this respect (the violation of the Bell inequalities has been measured).

      If those measured correlations mean interaction between those systems or not depends on which interpretation of quantum mechanics you prefer. Since there are interpretations where you don't need such an interaction, it's clear that you cannot use it to instantaneously transmit information with this effect (otherwise such interpretations couldn't possibly exist).

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    2. Re:but what does "indeterminate" mean? by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      Whether it well and truly is indeterminate is a question that has tormented quite a few physicists. The idea that there isn't indeterminacy but instead there are 'hidden variables' that control it is appealing. However the greatest minds that have ever lived have word for decades on this, and have found no satisfactory model for this idea.

      These days scientists just all accept that it really well and truly is not set by the universe - it truly is in a quantum state, existing as a probability.

      See:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden_variable

  33. Must be sth wrong with me... by Gadzinka · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Must be something very wrong with my faith in politics and politicians, since I've misread the title of the article as:

    Researchers control the flip of the election spin

    It took me a while to find out what is the idiom I don't know in this sentence, before I carefully read it again ;)))

    Robert
    (of course non-native English user)

    --
    Bastard Operator From 193.219.28.162
  34. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by teratogenicbenzene · · Score: 1
    While electron spin entaglement is quite difficult, entangled photon polarization (as an information "protocol") is quite straightforward.

    An army physicist I worked with as an undergrad used entagled photon polarization as a method to make remote measurements. Because particular compounds can specifically polarize light, polarization of one photon will cause the immediate polarization of its entangled sister photon. (This means that you could, in theory, shine a laser beam at a chemical vapor a mile away, and by reading the polarization states of trapped entagled photons, remotely measure the vapor's composition)

    The facinating thing is that this "information" transferral happens instantly. A polarization change in one photon immediately results in the polarization of its sister, regardless of the distance between them.

    --
    The Secret of Life: Proteins fold up and bind things.
  35. flipping can be done without meassuring by xlurker · · Score: 1
    as one guy here has posted a few times:

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=151085&cid=126 72458

    As a simple analog it can be compared to multplying an unknown number with -1. It flips the sign but it doesn't set the sign or determine the value.

    So the grandparents question remains open... what is "entanglement"? This isn't a new question/dilemma, Einstein didn't like it and called it "spooky action".

    It boils down to the question what is an "indeterminate state"?

    does it mean the particle has a spin that simply has not been meassured yet?
    or does it mean the spin of the particle has not been (for lack of a better word) "set" yet?

    --
    ______________________________________________
    sigamajig...
  36. "indeterminate" entangled photon polarization by xlurker · · Score: 1
    so what you're saying is the "indeterminate state" in the case of the entangled photons means that their states had not been "set" yet?

    I have always been boggled how "indeterminate state" was to be understood.

    If it meant the particle has a state that simply has not been meassured yet?
    Or if it meant the state of the particle has not been (for lack of a better word) "set" yet?

    --
    ______________________________________________
    sigamajig...
    1. Re:"indeterminate" entangled photon polarization by Asparfame · · Score: 1

      Closer to "not yet set". But even that is misleading.

      We can take electrons and put them in a known "indeterminate" state, such as |up> + |down>. While you might say the spin is not "set", in fact the QUANTUM state of the spin is precisely set.

      And if we know what the quantum state of the particle is, we can put it into a determinate state even without measuring it.

      Thought experiment.

      In principle, according to quantum mechanics, one can construct a device that will perform the following transformation on an electron spin:

      |up> -> |up> + |down>

      |down> -> |up> - |down>

      This can be done WITHOUT measuring the electron's spin, because what I have described, in math jargon, is a "unitary transformation". This basically means "reversible" or "information preserving".

      Now, imagine that I have a bunch of electrons in the state |up> + |down>, and I put them through my device. What state do they end up in? We use the superposition principle to find out...

      |up> + |down> -> ( |up> + |down> ) + ( |up> - |down> ) = |up>

      (as usual, I am ignoring all of the normilization constants)

      Long story short, the indeterminate state of my input electroncs ends up in a determinite |up> state. But the device does not perform a measurment to do this.

      The indeterminate state is transformed into a determinate state without measuring (ie "setting") the spin. Thus, it is a little problematic to think that indeterminate states are just states that haven't been "set" yet, because they can be transformed to determinate states without setting (measuring) them.

      Further weirdness:

      If I measure the spins of the particles only after they come out of my device, then I get all ups.

      If I measure the spins before the device AND after the device, I get a mixture of ups and downs on both sides of the device. (why? because measuring before the device forces the electron into state |up> or state |down>, and both of these states are then transformed by my device back into indeterminate states).

      --

      There's no reason for a sig here.

  37. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by Asparfame · · Score: 1

    Perhaps you don't realize that you've made an extremely controversial statement. What you claim this army physicist did is contrary to accepted quantum mechanics since circa 1930. Do you have any evidence to back up this claim?

    According to quantum mechanics, the interaction of the "remote photon" can not produce a measurable change on the "local photon" in the way you have described.

    --

    There's no reason for a sig here.

  38. Cities In Flight reference by bSMfh · · Score: 1

    Isn't this the beginning steps towards the interstellar travel mechanism used in the James Blish series "Cities in Flight"? at amazon which was affectionately nicknamed the "spindizzy"?

  39. The End of Man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Step 1: Entangle two quantum dots.
    75% of C. Upon return, a time differential will exist between the two dots.
    Step 3: Integrate said dots into a quantum computer. one dot, when flipped, would instantly impart the change on the other.
    Step 4: Connect the output to the input.
    Step 5: Welcome our new Supreme Interspacial Omniscient Machine Overlords.
    STEP 0001:\run HUMAN_EXTERMINATION.c
  40. Re:China & Cryptography by UserGoogol · · Score: 1

    Information wants to be free.

    Sure, so do Tibetans, but information called dibs.

    --
    "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
  41. your sig (-1, Offtopic) by Dwonis · · Score: 1
    The GIMP has a very very good interface.

    Somebody needs to be taken out back and shot! ;-)

  42. Did you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Soviet Russia, Electron Flips You!!

  43. Quantum Dots, Artificial Atoms by synaptic · · Score: 1

    These appear to be the same type of quantum dots used to create artificial atoms.

    Artificial atoms, as I understand it anyway, are exhibited when these wells/quantum dots are crafted to store electrons in certain configurations (modeling "orbital shells"/energy levels?). The quantum dot has then been shown to exhibit some properties of an element corresponding to that electron configuration.

    Is there a connection somewhere here with the electron spin "flip" (whatever that means)? If you take an ordinary atom and add energy, the electrons jump/change to higher energy levels and when returning to a lower state emit the excess energy as a photon. This seems strangely coincidental.

    I'm not a physicist and maybe I'm out of touch with current terminology/models of subatomics so don't be too harsh if my explanations seem naive.

    On another note, I wonder if it's possible to model the unstable elements (112-118 and beyond) using this quantum dot approach. What fascinating properties might be exploited that would otherwise be impossible to tap due to their nearly instant decay.

  44. Could this be used for... by qualico · · Score: 1

    ...storage?

    If you can flip the spin of an electron, wouldn't that be a condensing of our current storage technology?

    However, after doing a Google for the size of an electron as compared to an atom, this road bump chucked my question out the window.

    http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy00/phy006 66.htm

    1. Re:Could this be used for... by infolib · · Score: 1
      The question of electron vs. atom "size" isn't really relevant to storage technology, even with a suitable definition of size because you'll always be using electrons attached to atoms. (Unattached electrons would repel each other, making it hard to get the same density.).

      So, an atom may hold 1-100 electrons, but no more than 2 or 3 would have the "freedom of movement" to use for bits. In practice you'd do very good to have one bit pr. atom, and for redundancy at least ten atoms pr. bit sounds like a very good idea. There has been reports of control of single atoms that could in principle be used for storage, but these systems are clunky, fragile, needs $100K equipment and must be used at extremely low temperatures. It's not feasible to pack the atoms closer than they are in ordinary solid state either. So, there's a pretty hard limit here. OTOH we could very well see 100 atoms/bit storage within my lifetime, and that should be plenty, especially if it can be produced real cheap. And imagine if we can get the density of todays hard drives in 3D instead of just 2D. I mean, we're already at the point where it's feasible to record your entire life in HDTV, so humanity isn't likely to run out of storage anytime soon.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced libertarian utopia is indistinguishable from government.
    2. Re:Could this be used for... by qualico · · Score: 1

      good answer.

      Of course, retail will continue to suck the general public dry with SDRAM prices.
      Even with new technology, we can expect prices to be inflated beyond reasonable.

      i.e. 128Mb USB RAM should not cost $50

      Can't wait till we get that storage to within humane levels.

  45. I seem to have to opposite problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Was I the only one who thought this read "Researchers Control the Flip of Election Spin"?

    I don't know about others, but I had to read your post three times before I read "Election" instead of "Electron". So I guess I'm the other way.

  46. MOD UP +1 Funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I had been drinking anything when I read your post, my keyboard would now be wet. (Well, wetter.)

  47. Ah, the old "spin-flip" ploy. I know it well. by some+guy+I+know · · Score: 1

    I know that you were probably joking, but this more thorough explanation explains how a photon could be emitted when the electron's spin flipped without violating the law of conservation of energy. How does it explain this? I have no idea.

    --
    Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
  48. Wow! Google has a news section now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I didn't know that Google had a news section. I get all my news from Slashdot and The Daily Show.

  49. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by teratogenicbenzene · · Score: 1
    Sure do. Here is a diagram as well (original paper by Dik Bouwmeester and friends is referenced at the bottom):

    http://www.zamandayolculuk.com/cetinbal/teleport ation2.htm

    --
    The Secret of Life: Proteins fold up and bind things.
  50. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    doesn't simply flipping the spin effect the other entangled particle?

    "affect".

  51. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How could you insult particle physics by comparing it to a water scam?

  52. Call me back by cstacy · · Score: 1

    Call me back when they finally get the transporter working, so they can BEAM ME UP!!

  53. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by Asparfame · · Score: 1

    This is a quantum teleportation experiement. Reading from the link:

    "Also, quantum teleportation does not allow for faster-than-light communication. Although the teleported particle attains the polarization value instantly, the people at the sending station must convey the fact that teleportation was successful by making a phone call or using some other light speed or sub-light-speed means of communication."

    This statement, from the link you quote, contradicts your implication that quantum entanglement can be used to transmit classical information faster than the speed of light. Perhaps you did not mean to imply that in your post. At the time, given the other posts to this story in that vein, that's how I read your comment.

    Aside from that, I don't see how this teleporation scheme can be used, in your words, to "shine a laser beam at a chemical vapor a mile away, and by reading the polarization states of trapped entagled photons, remotely measure the vapor's composition". Which photon is the one that passes through the vapor, photon M? If so, then a detector is needed at the site of the vapor, along with a beamsplitter and a second detector as described in the link, along with communication equipment to "phone home" when teleportations are successful.

    --

    There's no reason for a sig here.

  54. Ooops, missing reference by infolib · · Score: 1

    I lost the reference in editing. It's the Wikipedia article on giant magnetoresistance

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced libertarian utopia is indistinguishable from government.
  55. Delft University did this half a year ago too.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At Delft University they managed to do this a half year earlier as i understood their publications well.

  56. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A possible practical advantage would be bandwidth. I teleport eight states (instantly) at more or less the same time, then send one (sublight) bit meaning "i'm done on this end". Boom, 8x the bandwidth. And so on...

  57. 2 cents ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hey if i can flip a whole bunch and get these
    photons can i then flip the bunch around again and
    get some more photons and then flip .. the ..
    bunch ...
    so now they already have this computers with more
    or less voltage controlable and then using this to
    do logic stuff and math, so now add one more level
    say that spin stuff ... so is this going to be
    usefull for say quaternion math? i mean just
    voltage + - you can get "real-time" "imaginary
    math" (quare root of -1), with another state could
    get "real-time" quaternion math and hence some
    really neat-o future grafic cards from EnVidia?
    maybe all the electrons are entaggeld already? by
    nature? maybe that's why it's so difficult to do
    it? flipping one here in earth flipps another
    entaggeld one on alpha centauri? and hence messing
    up the game play of some alpha centauri kid
    playing nuke nuke'em 7.0 on his EnVidia 600800
    ultra?

  58. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by k98sven · · Score: 1

    But that's not flipping a spin. It's flipping two spins, which is different because the total angular momentum is the same before and after the flipping.

  59. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by Asparfame · · Score: 1

    Teleportation only works in this scheme 25% of the time. It would not be sufficient to say "I'm done on this end", you would need to specify which teleportation attempts were successful. Thus, you need one classical bit for each teleported quantum bit.

    --

    There's no reason for a sig here.

  60. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by whathappenedtomonday · · Score: 1

    you're right, it's a scam; one that even works on animals, though. I'm so glad that there's nothing physics couldn't explain - and every inexplicable thing therefore cannot exist at all.

    --
    I hope I didn't brain my damage.
  61. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by Asparfame · · Score: 1

    My notation was |spin of first electrion, spin of second electron>.

    Initially, I was in a superposition of |up, down> and |down, up>.

    Then, I performed an operation that flips the spin of only the first electron, leaving me in state |down, down> + |up, up>

    I have not flipped two spins. And what does angular momentum conservation have to do with it? In this case, the expectation value of total angular momentum is conserved, but there's no need for that to be true in general of a unitary operation.

    --

    There's no reason for a sig here.

  62. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by k98sven · · Score: 1

    Initially, I was in a superposition of |up, down> and |down, up>.

    Ok. I don't understand this. I don't think that's not a eigenfunction of the spin-projection of a pure spin state.

    Can you explain how this coherent spin-flip works in more detail?

  63. OBFuturama Quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you put it that way, I don't know why it wasn't this simple the whole time!

    Like letting too much air out of a balloon! :o)

  64. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by Asparfame · · Score: 1

    |up, down> + |down, up> is not an eigenstate of the spin flip operator. Correct.

    However, that doesn't mean you can't apply the spin-flip operator to it. I don't know how to explain it in more detail, other than to try and give an experimental realization, which I don't think is what you're looking for.

    Perhaps this will make more sense... let's work in "vector notation"...

    define |up, up> = (1, 0, 0, 0)
    |up, down> = (0, 1, 0, 0)
    |down, up> = (0, 0, 1, 0)
    |down, down> = (0, 0, 0, 1)

    The spin flip operator for the first electron can now be written in matrix form as

    0 0 1 0
    0 0 0 1
    1 0 0 0
    0 1 0 0

    Since this matrix is unitary (see http://mathworld.wolfram.com/UnitaryMatrix.html), then this is a valid time-evolution operator in quantum mechanics.

    I guess I really haven't said anything new here, so I doubt that actually clarifies anything. But I'm not sure what it is you don't understand.

    --

    There's no reason for a sig here.

  65. Re:what happens when the elecron is "entangled" .. by k98sven · · Score: 1

    Ok, got it.

    I made the mistake of assuming you were talking about stationary states.