Slashdot Mirror


First Teleportation of Multiple Quantum Properties of a Single Photon

KentuckyFC writes Photons have many properties, such as their frequency, momentum, spin and orbital angular momentum. But when it comes to quantum teleportation, physicists have only ever been able to to transmit one of these properties at a time. So the possibility of teleporting a complete quantum object has always seemed a distant dream. Now a team of Chinese physicists has worked out how to teleport more than one quantum property. The team has demonstrated it by teleporting both the spin and orbital angular momentum of single photons simultaneously. They point out that there is no reason in principle why the technique cannot be generalized to include other properties as well, such as a photon's frequency, momentum and so on. That's an important step towards teleporting complex quantum objects in their entirety, such as atoms, molecules and perhaps even small viruses.

107 comments

  1. Let's all hope ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Let's all hope that this knowledge can be used for a noble cause one day.

    Like shaving a few milliseconds off the telecoms links between international stock-exchanges, allowing fortunes to be made for the lucky few via arbitrage!

    1. Re:Let's all hope ... by fraxinus-tree · · Score: 2

      The ability to teleport 1-2 tons of complex machinery intact wherever you want renders nuclear weapons pretty much useless.

    2. Re:Let's all hope ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why bother with that? This can teleport the gamma rays.

    3. Re:Let's all hope ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or a virus directly into the bloodstream of enemy leaders...

    4. Re:Let's all hope ... by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Just some of them.

      Sneaky.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    5. Re:Let's all hope ... by morgauxo · · Score: 1

      Tons? Really? I think you have REALLY REALLY misplaced a decimal point somewhere in those calculations.

    6. Re:Let's all hope ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Just a small grenade into the rear pocket of the pants for such an asshole as yourself would be enough. Then we could start dreaming about a world with less small-dicked bastards who think they could nuke their way to success, but never had the balls to actually face anyone outside of a MMORPG environment.

    7. Re:Let's all hope ... by nblender · · Score: 2

      "Tea. Earl Grey. Hot."

    8. Re:Let's all hope ... by gmhowell · · Score: 2

      "Tea. Earl Grey. Hot."

      "Ship's counselor's pants. Gone. Now."

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    9. Re:Let's all hope ... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Ship's captain's hair. Gone . no.. oh wait.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    10. Re: Let's all hope ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She's Betazoid so she must feel awkward in pants anyway.

    11. Re:Let's all hope ... by flargleblarg · · Score: 2

      The ability to teleport 1-2 tons of complex machinery intact wherever you want is insignificant next to the power of the Force.

  2. Sounds too good to be true... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not a quantum physicist, but I'd like to wait for other teams to replicate this study before believing it's real. Sometimes things that are too good is simply too good to be true.

    1. Re: Sounds too good to be true... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Robert Henderson and team did it in June of this year

  3. Random musing by wierd_w · · Score: 0

    This is just random musing, but I would love to see a complex camera built using some of these entanglement properties.

    Using entangled photon light sources and multiple CCDs with a single entry aperture and some beam splitters, (So the the multiple CCDs get the exact same entangled photons), I expect some very interesting photography would result.

    I realize that would mean using a laser lightsource, making it unsuitable for photographing people (unless they shut their eyes), but I could definitely see such an instrument being constructed and used using conventional components.

    1. Re:Random musing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. We could capture an interference pattern on high-resolution film. I suspect some interesting photos there.

    2. Re:Random musing by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      I expect some very interesting photography would result.

      Can you elaborate? I lack the knowledge to know what might be interesting about it.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    3. Re:Random musing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just what do you think would be produced? The quantum state of photons would have no discernable effect on a photograph.

    4. Re:Random musing by wierd_w · · Score: 2

      Here's an example of such "Interesting" photography.

      http://news.nationalgeographic...

      Having detectors for the many different properties of the photon, rather than just "IS/isNOT entangled", (which is why there needs to be many CCDs with a single aperture), could reveal a wealth of information about a photographed object.

    5. Re:Random musing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is just random musing, but I would love to see a complex camera built using some of these entanglement properties.

      Using entangled photon light sources and multiple CCDs with a single entry aperture and some beam splitters, (So the the multiple CCDs get the exact same entangled photons), I expect some very interesting photography would result.

      I realize that would mean using a laser lightsource, making it unsuitable for photographing people (unless they shut their eyes), but I could definitely see such an instrument being constructed and used using conventional components.

      WARNING: Do not look into laser with remaining eye.

    6. Re:Random musing by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      Can you elaborate?

      Depending on when and how you look at the photo afterwards, you would either see Schrödinger's Cat in it blowing a raspberry and flipping a bird . . .

      . . . or you wouldn't.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    7. Re:Random musing by doggo · · Score: 1

      Porn. He means porn.

    8. Re:Random musing by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      Untrue.
      http://news.nationalgeographic...

      There is nothing preventing photons of different wavelengths from being entangled, allowing one wavelength to expose an image, while another scans the subject-- As demonstrated by the above article. This is vastly different from normal photography.

      Similarly, there shouldnt be any real reason why different polarizations couldnt be entangled.

      A very sophisticated compositing scanner could be constructed that uses entanglement + interaction with a subject with simultaneous measurement to break the entanglement at the sensor. There is a great deal of benefit to having the exact same light hit many sensors.

      Even in regular photography, you can get HDR this way.
      http://www.wired.com/2010/09/c...

    9. Re:Random musing by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      If by "porn", you mean "Possible realtime recording (in visible light) what the interactions of radio frequency light with soft tissues in the body are", and other radical imaging ideas, then yes. "Porn."

    10. Re:Random musing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having detectors for the many different properties of the photon, rather than just "IS/isNOT entangled",

      There is no "is/is not entangled" property you can measure of a single photon. The only way to tell if a photon or any particle is entangled is too measure both halves and look at the statistics of the results. If you know the exact setup of an experiment, you can deduce what will be entangled or not. But if you just had a device with light coming into it from only one half of a pair, you can't tell if it is entangled or not without outside information.

  4. Heady stuff by pezpunk · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wow ... just one step closer towards man's ultimate dream of being able to teleport small viruses.

    --
    i could live a little longer in this prison
    1. Re:Heady stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they can launch 200 'dead' smallpox viren directly into my blood stream without that big needle and all the strange filler-fluids, I am in favor of this advancement in vaccine technology.

    2. Re:Heady stuff by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      or live ones into your enemies.

      Teleportation is a better weapon than nukes.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    3. Re:Heady stuff by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Since we have NO idea what teleportation entails, you're statement hold exactly zero(0) weight.

      Natlieportation is another matter.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    4. Re:Heady stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One word: Ebola.

  5. one step closer by tverbeek · · Score: 1

    One step closer to those Heisenberg compensators that Miles and Reg were always trying to fix.

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  6. Whoever injected the senseless fear element... by RhettLivingston · · Score: 1, Redundant

    into this announcement needs to be drummed out of the industry. Whether it was the researcher or someone along the announcement chain that introduced the mention of transmitting a virus in order to (I have to assume) increase the viewership of the announcement, it is a tactic that does far more harm to science than the reward justifies. Science the world over is being limited far too often by unreasoned fear. Let us at the least not encourage it. But let us also go further than that and make sure that people who try to take advantage of this fear for profit receive no further support from the true science community.

    1. Re:Whoever injected the senseless fear element... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You're an idiot. The point of transmitting a virus is that it's a relatively large object, a step about molecules in the list "atoms, molecules and maybe even viruses". Any fear of the word "virus" is in your own head.

    2. Re:Whoever injected the senseless fear element... by RhettLivingston · · Score: 1

      And you're naive. The point could have easily been made with many terms other than one that's top in the news now due to the Ebola scare.

    3. Re:Whoever injected the senseless fear element... by Richard_at_work · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why is the mention of teleporting a virus immediately taken as something bad? I read it and immediately took it to be the next step beyond a simple molecule - a virus can be not much larger than a molecule, but at the same time can be many times more complex and would also demonstrate
        that teleportation wouldn't have any adverse effects on such things as DNA or RNA strands.

      Basically, a virus is the step between a simple molecule and an actual living organism.

      To me it would be the logical step after molecules.

    4. Re:Whoever injected the senseless fear element... by belthize · · Score: 2

      The point of teleporting a virus is to see if you can teleport a (nearly) living organism and have it remain viable. It's the obvious next step after molecule and before bacteria or Donald Trump.

      Just because half the world is freaking out over ebola doesn't mean viruses wouldn't be an obvious thing to try or that we should avoid mentioning them.

    5. Re:Whoever injected the senseless fear element... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I viewed it as a potential cure for some viral infections.

    6. Re:Whoever injected the senseless fear element... by doggo · · Score: 1

      And if anyone's fear-mongering here, it's you. Besides just being nuts.

    7. Re:Whoever injected the senseless fear element... by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Teleportation will be a better weapon than nukes. Those not thinking about consequences are horribly short sighted.

      Just watch what the govt/military does once actual atoms can be teleported.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    8. Re:Whoever injected the senseless fear element... by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      AND a weapon to wipe out a city/country/population.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    9. Re:Whoever injected the senseless fear element... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The mention to virus betrays a bellicist 'lapsus linguae'. They could simply mention the possibility of teleporting DNA sequences.

    10. Re:Whoever injected the senseless fear element... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      oh shut up.
      Why do you think it would be a weapon? what do you know about teleporting mass? have you a clue o the energy involved.
      Please, show your math to back up your statement. IT would e a great work that would need to show how to teleport thing far i advance of what anyone can even theoretically do.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    11. Re:Whoever injected the senseless fear element... by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      So it's inconceivable to teleport ebola to your enemy's camp?

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    12. Re:Whoever injected the senseless fear element... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is inconceivable with quantum teleportation, considering it only works when you classically deliver entangled particles to both terminals, and both terminals actively participate, with the receiver waiting for classically transmitted instructions and performing operations on their half of entangled pairs based on those instructions. You might as well try send ebola in a wooden horse at that rate.

  7. Big jump by gmuslera · · Score: 2

    From single photons, to complete atoms, to complete molecules, to a proof of concept on something that could be called alive (or at least working enough to be able to reproduce in the right environment). Each one of those steps are pretty big jumps in complexity, that may bring their own showstoppers to the party. But probably will give hard numbers to the real impossibility of teleporting humans.

    1. Re:Big jump by delt0r · · Score: 1

      Quantum teleportation dose not any thing anywhere. It copies the quantum state from one particle to another particle. In doing so it destroys the quantum state of the original. So only the quantum state is "teleported". Molecule configuration is not a quantum "state" in this sense. You cannot teleport methanol state onto some hydrogen, carbon and oxygen and get a second methanol molecule.

      Quantum teleportation has nothing to do with the sci fi version of teleportation.

      --
      If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
    2. Re:Big jump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can create entangled between the states of "has electron (or photon)" and "has nothing" in a cavity, and teleport that property. Conceivably this can be extended to more complex arrangements and position of atoms. However, creating extremely complicated entanglements between multiple possible states is rather impractical. I wouldn't be surprised if someone does find a way to teleport a simple molecule in our lifetimes, but doubt much more complicated arrangements than that. Even if it were possible, the use would probably be minimal, as a setup to create entanglement between the states of having a molecule or not means it has to be able to create the molecule in the first place. It is not like you could transport hard to make stuff and save effort of making it somewhere else.

    3. Re:Big jump by delt0r · · Score: 1

      You can create entangled between the states of "has electron (or photon)" and "has nothing" in a cavity, and teleport that property.

      No you can't. You can only teleport superimposed quantum state. That is not even a quantum state.

      --
      If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
    4. Re:Big jump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you not seen annihilation and creation operators applied to photons in a cavity before? The number of photons is a quantum state in such setups, and there have been experiments that use microwave photons in a cavity for various experiments, especially some weak measurement ones. Creating an entanglement of that with another state is pretty straightforward, as you just need something that acts differently whether or not there is a photon in the cavity, e.g. a second photon and a non-linear medium. Or you can end up something similar like cavity QED, which has applications in quantum computing too.

    5. Re:Big jump by delt0r · · Score: 1

      Have you seen annihilation and creation operators on electrons, protons, atoms or even molecules? BTW my friends back in the physics department still work on this stuff. You don't teleport chemistry, you teleport quantum entangled state. I am not pulling this out of my arse.

      --
      If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
  8. xkce by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    obligatory xkcd strip

    1. Re:xkce by INT_QRK · · Score: 1

      Thank you.

  9. Teleportation WITHOUT data. by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 1

    I imagine that teleportation of complex objects would be a technique that did NOT require gathering data independent of an object. I figure anything transported would either have the "space around it" reassigned -- kind of like a carrier wave, or they would be smashed into a super dense object that had to transfer 100% of the energy to a receiver. Basically, you use the "equal and opposite" properties of physics to guarantee data transmission. However, you may have to jump on another pad if you are uncomfortable with suddenly being left handed.

    --
    >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    1. Re:Teleportation WITHOUT data. by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      Or with having the chirality of all of your constituent proteins being backward, and should you desire that you would like to continue eating normal food.

  10. Re:Viruses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember that military tech is at least 100 years more advance than what we have access to

    Right, which is why helicopters played such a prominent role in the American Civil War.

  11. Skeptical about orbital angularmomentum in photons by goombah99 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It can exist, but virtually every paper I've ever read, especially any that mention optical vorticies confuses Orbital Angular momentum with simple minded othogonal function decompositions of spatial light patterns. Any spatial pattern including this printed page can be written in terms of legendre polynomials or YLMs but that in itself does not give it orbital angular momentum quantum numbers. That's a whole nother ball of wax. To understand the latter you have to puzzle out why you think a half-wave plate (a circular polarizer) is a linear device that doesn't change the frequency of the photon. (after all, for every reversal of polarization, the earth or whatever the device is attached to has to accelerate to absorb the equal and opposite polarization).

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  12. not "quantum" not "teleportation" by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    unless it is *non-local* then this is just clever re-arrangement of non-teleported light wave (aka photon)

    this research is not what it purports to be...it's not like a "transporter" in Star Trek at all

    here's more on non-locality: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:not "quantum" not "teleportation" by radtea · · Score: 5, Informative

      this research is not what it purports to be...it's not like a "transporter" in Star Trek at all

      TFS was actually doing pretty well until the last few sentences. What is being "telepored" are "quantum properties", which are nothing at all like classical properties and which are certainly unrelated to "objects".

      The process is "quantum" in the sense that the information is hidden behind the quantum veil of the carrier wave. There is more to quantum phenomena than non-locality, although non-locality is one of the more spectacular ways it manifests.

      Quantum "teleportation" happens to properties. Imagine you have a house of indeterminate colour, and a "colour teleporter" that consists of a beam of light between your house and another house a few miles away that will carry that colour of that house to your house. You turn the "teleporter" on, wait for the beam of light to establish itself, your confederate at the other end aims the "teleporter" at the first house, and your house becomes the colour of the first house at a time L/c later, where L is the distance the light has to travel and c is a well known constant.

      This is a pretty close analogy to what is happening during "quantum teleportation"--and remember, if you stick you hand in the space the information is being "teleported" through you will get a hole burned in it by the perfectly ordinary laser beam that is used to carrying the information.

      To leap from this "colour teleoportation" to the claim that "scientists teleported a house from one neighbourhood to the next" would be clearly and egregiously false, yet that is what discussions of quantum "teleportation" always end up with: people talking as if photons, atoms, molecules and viruses are being carried through space and reconstructed at the other end.

      To see how wrong this is, consider a case where there is actual teleportation vs quantum "teleportation" of an electron to the Moon. In the case of actual teleportation, an important quantum number changes: the count of electrons on the Moon. In the case of quantum "teleportation" the Moon's electron number stays exactly the same. So the two final quantum states are completely different in these two cases. The processes have nothing to do with each other and it is misleading and wrong to talk about them as if they do.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    2. Re:not "quantum" not "teleportation" by timeOday · · Score: 1

      I think the word "teleportation" is being dumbed down in the same way that "cloning" was re-defined to include only what is currently possible, rather than the full sense the word had previously. See also: invisibility.

    3. Re:not "quantum" not "teleportation" by globaljustin · · Score: 1

      good explanation, thanks!

      i understand the concepts, IMHO, but i don't have the background to explain it as well

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    4. Re:not "quantum" not "teleportation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was going to use a Totem Tennis analogy poles apart, but what the hey... I put too much spin on it and backhanded myself.

  13. Scotty is a mass murderer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every time Scotty beams somebody up, what he is really doing is annihilating the person and replacing him with a copy of himself that will believe itself to be the original. So the original crew of Starship Enterprise are all dead and replaced by copies, and many of those copies have been subsequently obliterated and replaced by copies of the copies, and so on and so forth.

    1. Re:Scotty is a mass murderer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On a pedantic note...murder is the unlawful killing of someone. Since Scotty isn't breaking any laws, he's not committing murder. He's killing people...sure...but it's not murder.

    2. Re: Scotty is a mass murderer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you think Scotty always takes the stairs?

  14. What a weapon! by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    Thank god this requires more equipment and ability than some freak can cook up in his basement. Imagine teleporting ebola to an enemy nation. If one could release several deadly viruses into an enemies home there would be some assurance of death. HIV, ebola, TB, and Malaria all infested into a home environment with a touch of anthrax and I think we could count on a lethal result. Teleportation gives a whole new meaning to germ warfare.

    1. Re:What a weapon! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just so you are aware, quantum teleportation does not work like star trek teleportation. I cannot arbitrarily make a particle or virus appear somewhere...

    2. Re:What a weapon! by geekoid · · Score: 1

      You're ancestors must have stood outside the cave bitching about the dangers of fire. I'm pretty sure you exist due to some ancient ancestor managing to get a pity fuck before wondering off away from the 'dangers' of fire.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  15. Breakthrough in Chinese Food delivery by Pro923 · · Score: 1

    Teleportation of pork fried rice directly into my stomach

    1. Re:Breakthrough in Chinese Food delivery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better to teleport back from the stomach to the plate (Or to the garbage can to survive the excessive grand mother sunday diner) in order to eat ad vitam æternam.

  16. Re:Viruses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    s/years/times $ more expensive/

  17. not by ITRambo · · Score: 1

    Agreed. Some researchers, apparently to obtain funding, redefine entanglement effects as teleportation. Much cooler sounding.

    1. Re:not by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Seriously.
      I am so fucking sick of morons trying to pass of entanglement parlor tricks as full-on, causality-violating teleportation.

    2. Re:not by geekoid · · Score: 1

      That's not what's happening.

      But any excuse to bitch about thing you don't understand.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:not by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Yes, THEY"RE the morons, the physicists.
      Certainly it's not you or you lack of understanding, it's them.

      Well aren't you a special rainbow?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    4. Re:not by sexconker · · Score: 1

      I'm not special, I'm just not dumb enough to believe entanglement that doesn't actually transfer any information isn't teleportation.

    5. Re:not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The process transfers quantum information, but requires a classical channel to do so. There is no causality violation involved and physicists have been quite adamant in presenting and defining teleportation in this sense, that people who think entanglement is being used for FTL stuff don't understand it.

  18. Re:Viruses by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

    I know that you're a loon, but I'd just like to point out that ebola is not a small virus - it's pretty big as viruses go. (800 - 1000 nm, cf 30 - 300 nm for typical viruses)

    --
    Watch this Heartland Institute video
  19. sad by Cardoor · · Score: 1

    they aren't teleporting anything. they're cloning. and then killing the poor poor photo.

  20. comms by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

    I wonder, could the already know technology be used for faster than light communication ? (quantum state on, state off, state on state on, etc like bits on a wire)

    --
    blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    1. Re:comms by Pro923 · · Score: 1

      I thought about this. If someday, we had space vehicles that could travel really fast - call it speed:V. We'd send out the vehicle, travelling toward the destination planet at speed V. We'd also send out a comm vehicle at speed V/2. This comm vehicle would always be mid way between the vehicle and the planet. At some time, the comm vehicle would start transmitting entangled photons in both directions. It would take time for the initial connection to be established, but then theoretically, we'd have photon pairs at both ends - which perhaps we could use for communications... I dunno.

  21. win for viruses by angularbanjo · · Score: 1

    They need to replicate and distribute. Find the idea that they can benefit from their vectors in novels ways will only be of opportunistic value to them.

  22. Re:Viruses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They only flew at night. With the lights off. In stealth mode. Noone knew they were there.

  23. In 2001 Alex Chiu warned us... by kylemonger · · Score: 1

    "Teleportation must be invented. If we don't invent teleportation, China will throw nuclear bomb everywhere. Especially now everyone can live forever."

    -- Alex Chiu

    But what if the Chinese themselves invent teleportation? What then?!

  24. Heady Stuff Indeed! by tomxor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you can teleport something as large as a virus then you can probably also fiddle with the data in between and are probably a substantial way toward arbitrarily assembling various forms of matter (i.e. molecular assembly), at which point you basically have a 3D printer from start treck.

  25. Spin of photon is always 1 by HuguesT · · Score: 2

    The spin of a photon is a boson is always 1. That's not too hard to transmit. Approximately 0 bits are needed. Furthermore, the momentum of a photon is always h\nu, with \nu the frequency. So if you know the frequency of a photon, you also know its momentum, with another 0 bit to transmit. Finally I don't think a photon can have an orbital quantum momentum. Electrons can have those. That is unless things have changed since I last took a class on quantum mechanics.

    In other words the summary is the worst I've seen in a long time.

    1. Re:Spin of photon is always 1 by ralphsiegler · · Score: 1

      Photon does have angular momentum (you are right, not an orbital one), but that really just the same as "spin" with a helicity, plus or minus h-bar depending on whether right or left-hand polarized We can add energy to your list; If you know frequency, you also know energy and momentum of photon

    2. Re:Spin of photon is always 1 by geekoid · · Score: 1

      The fact that you describe it as moving bits underscores your ignorance.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Spin of photon is always 1 by ralphsiegler · · Score: 1

      Howso? Plenty of quantum mechanical properties can be specified in finite number of bits. Polarization of photon can be specified in 1 bit for left or right handed, as example.

  26. bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what a crock of shit. I love that random "and small viruses" bollocks at the end, it reminds of the news report the other week about prehistoric germs potentially frozen in the ice near some random siberian village or some shit, and with the global warming these could get out, and "possibly cause a world ending epidemic".

  27. data in between? by pablo_max · · Score: 1

    What do you mean "data in between"?
    I was given to understand that there is no in between at the quantum level. That it would be an instantaneous event regardless of distance.

    1. Re:data in between? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      A virus is far outside the quantum world and firmly in the macro world.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  28. Re: Viruses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    speaking as a defense contractor ... sad to learn that apparently 100 years from now consumers will be running java applets hosted by 400mhz Solaris 9 servers. :(

  29. Frequency? by khelms · · Score: 1

    Explain this to the dumb folks (like me). I thought frequency was a property of a wave, which involves multiple photons. How does a single photon have a "frequency" which I thought denotes at what inteverals multiple photons pass by.

    1. Re:Frequency? by Pro923 · · Score: 1

      No one _really_ understands it. This has to do with the "duality" of a particle to behave like a wave and a particle at the same time. The famous "dual slit" experiment demonstrates it, and it's more or less the foundation of what quantum physics is based on. Sure, people would answer you and pretend they understand it. But the truth is, no one really does. I saw a scientist on a documentary before admit that - sure everyone understands at some level how magnetism works and what it is. But at the root of it, no one really understands that either - what is physically going on to actually push two magnets away or pull them towards each other.

    2. Re:Frequency? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      A question like that indicates you aren't dumb. Ignorant? yes, but then aren't we all?

      A photon can exhibiting properties of both waves and particles. You can also use number states(Fock)

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Frequency? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This has to do with the "duality" of a particle to behave like a wave and a particle at the same time.

      90% of what tries to address the "paradox" of wave/particle duality is poorly diluted quantum mechanics and doesn't reflect actual work or understanding. There is no paradox or issue with things acting like waves and particles in different regimes, just as there are no issues with any other theories that have limiting cases. Regardless, underlying quantum mechanics is the uses the wavefunction without any issues from such "duality." Besides some philosophical arguments over interpretations, quantum mechanics makes a lot of straightforward quantitative predictions, which just requires some experience with calculus to actual calculate.

      I saw a scientist on a documentary before admit that...

      So yeah... someone trying to dilute and give a superficial explanation.

      But at the root of it, no one really understands that either - what is physically going on to actually push two magnets away or pull them towards each other.,

      In that sense no one understands anything. You can keep asking "Why?" for anything. The issue of "what it really means" is for philosophy, and not for science to deal with. Science just finds ways to describe the world that makes testable predictions. Quantum mechanics makes a lot of quantitative predictions confirmed by tests, and making those predictions are rather straightforward with math in many cases. Unless you confusing being able to intuit what something does as understanding it, in which case just about any system can be made to trick your intuition with enough complexity.

  30. Frequency? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    I doubt that is possible.
    First, the energy of the photon is related to its frequency. Teleporting that would mean you instantly transfer energy.
    What happens to the original source photon, would it in reverse get the frequency of the target? So at least the law of conversation of energy is honoured?
    Is it even possible to entangle two photons with different frequencies? I'm only aware about entangling experiments where the photon sources are lasers (all photons have the same frequency).

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  31. viruses by McFly777 · · Score: 1

    .begin gallows humor.

    Great... Right now we have to worry whether Ebola will mutate to be airborne; at which point you wont be able to be the the room with a sick person. In a few years we may have to worry that Ebola will mutate to tranport itself... Then nowhere will be safe.

    .end gallows humor.

    (Yes, I know it doesn't work that way.)

    --

    McFly777
    - - -
    "What do people mean when they say the computer went down on them?" -Marilyn Pittman
  32. Re:Viruses by gmhowell · · Score: 1

    They only flew at night. With the lights off. In stealth mode. Noone knew they were there.

    That's why Herman's Hermits survived so long: omniscience.

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  33. Re:Skeptical about orbital angularmomentum in phot by boristdog · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yeah. What goombah99 said.

  34. The MPAA and friends are not going to be happy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because... you wouldn't download a car!

  35. steven wright by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Last night everything in my apartment was replaced with an exact duplicate"

  36. virus? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    does teleporting a virus sound like a bad idea to anyone else?

  37. QOOP by Iconoclasism · · Score: 1

    Is anyone else thinking "quantum object oriented programming"?