Slashdot Mirror
Entangled Particles Break Classical Law of Thermodynamics, Say Physicists
New submitter Zex_Suik writes "Japanese physicists have used one of Maxwell's thought experiments and the ability to turn information into energy to extract more energy from an entangled system than should be possible according to the laws of thermodynamics (abstract). From the article: 'Imagine two boxes of particles with trap door between them. You want to use the trap door to guide the faster particles into one box and the slower particles into the other. In a classical experiment you would have to measure the particles in both boxes to do this experiment. But things are different if the particles in one box are entangled with the particles in the other. In that case, measurements on the particles in one box give you info about both sets of particles. In essence, you're getting information for nothing. And since you can convert that information into energy, there is clear advantage when entanglement plays a role. That's hugely significant. It means that the laws of thermodynamics depend not only on classical phenomenon and information but on quantum effects too.'"
I can create something out of nothing ?
... beforehand to entangle particles? And then put one from each pair into separate boxes?
Something tells me that energy conservation still holds...
Paul B.
So you have two particles which are entangled. One is moving fast, one is moving slow. You measure one, and you then get the speed of *both*? How does that work? Does the measurement instrument have two dials?
Also, maybe the entanglement itself is worth the extra energy :)
doesn't seem to match the rest of the article. TFA talks about how they can extract more usable energy from the system using entanglement, but it doesn't violate any physical laws. The only violation is in the title!
I get how two different entangled particles can share behavior, and how you can check one to test the other, but why don't things that affect one particle cause the entangled particle to also be affected?
And the other question I had on this is with the Brownian Motion. When you throw up a barrier to stop a particle from moving, and it hits the barrier, isn't that newton's 3rd law at work? Both deflecting the particle and providing equal but opposite energy to the barrier? How is this accounted for in this conservation of energy model? That would seem to be the missing input of energy?
Lets say that little invisible demon gets knocked back a little by the deflection of the particle. He eventually has to reposition himself back where he was, in front of the door. That requires energy. And I think there is where we are adding energy into the system that we think we're getting for "free".
(I'm no quantum mechanic, I only work on Fords)
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
No information is gained, for the same reason that separating entangled particles by a great distance and then measuring one doesn't result in information traveling faster than the speed of light.
This is like saying putting a red ball in one bag and putting a blue ball in an identical bag, then shuffling the bags around, then looking in one bag gives you free information about the other bag. It doesn't.
Just sayin', before they start publishing data they should check their cables. /ducks
https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
What about the energy you need to spend in order to entangle these particles? Or it comes for free? Like the beer? Oh, never mind, keep swimming...
Can I break thermodynamics with a lucky guess?
Your post is awesome - can I use it when I want to sound insane?
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
If you make it can you break it? IE. If you can 'make' energy this way then can you 'unmake' it?
a cat somewhere dies to compensate. It all adds up.
Table-ized A.I.
Pffft, they're just looking for an excuse to play Pong all day (in reverse-paddle mode).
Table-ized A.I.
Can we combine them to get it over with quicker?
Table-ized A.I.
heretofore, the unbeknownst particle becomes an ion.
Most linux users don't know this, but the man pages were named after Chuck Norris. Chuck Norris fsck'ing hates noobs!
No problem, just invoke time-travel accidents and parallel universe triggering.
Table-ized A.I.
I wager it takes just a bit more energy to entangle the particles than they are getting out. I also wager it takes at least "just a bit more" energy to obtain information on where entangled particles are, assuming you did not create them yourself.
The summary is very misleading. This work is purely theoretical. They have not actually succeeded in doing it, contrary to what the summary would make you think.
It will be interesting to see whether someone can actually make this work in practice.
"I'm too busy to research this and form an educated opinion, but I do have time to tell everyone my uninformed opinion."
And with our love of all things military, what would an Information Bomb look like? It took Einstein to barely get us to believe Mass to Energy. Information to Energy just has a whole other creepy ring to it.
Since we and the **AA have had fun lately with modern topics in Information, I'll even let the Copyright problems (!!) go for now - how many conversion does it take to convert information from a safe source to a bomb? With the obligatory facetiousness, could someone build a bomb out of a Justin Bieber MP3?
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Maxwell's Demon only violates Thermodynamics if you don't count the energy required to sense the medium and switch gate. The demon in that case would be some externally powered system and thus the entropy is transferred from within the monitored containment out to the external apparatus and environment driving the process. Thus, no net loss of entropy.
So unless you can somehow put the 'demon' outside of our measurable universe, thermodynamics still applies.
Humans are now in the future.
When can we Star Trek?
You can start wreck anytime you please.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Your post is awesome - can I use it when I want to sound insane?
Just get an ear bud for your cell phone, and stand on the street corner during telephone conversations.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Ok I don't know anything about entanglement, so here is my question: Does it take double the energy to change the spin on an entangled particle?
Hmm, the humour and sarcasm seem to have been be lost on you.
Neato.... what's the theoretical minimum number of joules it takes to represent a bit?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Excellent! Now we have to figure out how to entangle all the information the NSA, CIA, FBI, Dept. of Homeland Security and local police forces have gathered on unsuspecting people and we can have an unlimited source of power. I love it when a plan comes together.
TFA talks about "Entangled Particles" breaking the law of thermodynamics, seemingly getting something out of nothing
I am not good at all on particle physics, but I believe that particles in their ordinary state do not come "entangled", right?
So, in order to get particles that are already in the "entangled" state, something must have happened to ordinary particles, first, right?
If so, what's the cost (in term of energy) to get originally un-entangled particles to be "entangled"?
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
it is called 4chan
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Thought Experiment
Bringing new meaning to the term "TMI".
An information bomb? A science fiction author by the name of Nick Harkaway answered that question in his book The Gone-Away World. It's probably my favorite book that I've read in the last five years (and I read a lot of books.) You should go read it.
Considering how many of those horrible time travel episodes they did, we probably already have.
There's already an entire website specifically for that purpose.
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
You have to know in advance that the particles are entangled. That extra bit of information is needed. Thus when you measure one particle, you do get that extra bit of information about the other particle. So the information about the other particle is not free but is the direct result of the apriori information about entanglement.
I haven't read TFA, but it sounds like they rediscovered the Jarzynski (in)equality.
Basically, if you slam a system with a high free energy into a state with a lower free energy, you actually have a chance to get out more work than you should in equilibrium, offset by a chance of getting less. On average, however, the expected work from the system should agree.
This would appear pathologically in such a small-scale system that is changing states so quickly.
So I can free get air-con from an entangled box somewhere on Antartica and heat from an entangled box somewhere in Death Valley. Great!
This actually implies that the energy extracted from entanglement is equal to or greater than the energy required to entangle and separate. This doesn't violate classical thermodynamics, because it isn't really a closed system.
Fugue for Aaron Swartz
It would be the perfect weapon - Justin Birber MP3's, not matter how bad, are always hits.
Not answering to one particulary. However as usually the slashdot crowed is overestimating the "srength" of the "laws of thermodynamis"
The reason might be that in the enlish speaking world all fundamental "laws of nature" are called "law".
In german this is not the case. We distinguish between laws, like "law of gravity" and "principle theorems".
Laws for instance are prooven to a certain extend and considered "always true".
The "laws of thermodynamics" are divided into a set of "principle theorems" and related or derived theorems. In other words, most of them are mind constructs that are considered usefull. But they are far from that solid as e.g. laws of gravity or laws of atomic decay are.
Keep in mind that even the most fundamental laws are no laws at all, but theorems or axioms. The law of energy conservation e.g is not a prooven law but a general agreed on principal theorem. The same is true for the law of impulse conservation.
The above said: I wont be surprised if someone finds an effect that is not predictable by thermodynamic laws (or even disprooves them) but I will be shocked if someone finds contradiction in the law of gravity e.g.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
It means that the laws of thermodynamics depend not only on classical phenomenon and information but on quantum effects too.'"
You mean they didn't already know that?
Geez!
Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
This doesn't hardly break thermodynamics at all.
They say themselves that they derive the energy from Brownian motion.
Ergo, they're simply taking energy out of the larger system.
Hey guys, guess what? If you look at only the Earth itself, it violates the laws of thermodynamics all over the place. THAT ISN'T HOW THERMODYNAMICS WORKS. You have to consider THE ENTIRE system. The earth only works by feeding off the constant output of the sun, so it doesn't violate thermodynamics.
Similarly, this may generate an increased local temperature, but the larger system balances out.
GCS/MU/P d- s:- a-- C++++$ UL++ P+ L++ E+ W++ N o K- w--- O M+ V- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5- X R++ tv+ b++ DI++ D++ G+ e++ h-
... one fundamental aspect, so let's get this out of the way: Yes, information is physical.
Which gravitational law are you talking about? Quantum gravity or General relativity
DEAR GOD NOES NOT AN AGING FIELD! It would be impossible to safely contain by putting it on a tower in the middle of nowhere or something like that! And imagine the horror if such a thing got near a supercomputer!
Even your bullshit is full of bullshit.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I am genuinely curious, especially if I think about all the spaghetti code I have available here.
Right, so just maybe the same can be said about the topic at hand.
...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
Precisely.