My Favorite (to date) take down of Creationism.

[_Franktalk]

Spotlight,

It seems that groups of atoms can be entangled.

http://www.livescience.com/50280-record ... ngled.html

Is it possible in theory to make a computer chip where the atoms inside are entangled with some atoms at a distance? Is it possible to design the chip in such a way that information can be fed into a chip in one place and the same information can come out of a chip somewhere else?

[_spotlight]

Can information be transmitted using entangled particles?

"No, according to currently accepted theory, quantum entanglement cannot be used to transmit messages instantaneously. The reason is that although entanglement apparently allows two particles to communicate with each other instantly over distance, the message that is sent is always completely random and cannot be influenced by the holders of either particle."
https://www.quora.com/Can-we-deliver-in ... tanglement

Is it possible to design the chip in such a way that information can be fed into a chip in one place...

You don't get to choose the state that the wave function collapses to whether or not it represents a single particle or a group of particles. But good questions.

[_Franktalk]

Spotlight,

In the future could we find a way to collapse a probability in such a way to force a state? If we could do that then would we be able to send information by entangled particles?

[_Franktalk]

Spotlight,

It does seem that some people are going forward with entanglement communication. They have found a way to pack more information into single photon.

http://phys.org/news/2015-06-method-qua ... hoton.html

It also seems that some people are marching ahead with finding a way to transmit information. So it does seem we may be close to actually transmitting classical information using entanglement.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 84E.f01t02

[_Gunnar]

Spotlight,

It does seem that some people are going forward with entanglement communication. They have found a way to pack more information into single photon.

http://phys.org/news/2015-06-method-qua ... hoton.html

It also seems that some people are marching ahead with finding a way to transmit information. So it does seem we may be close to actually transmitting classical information using entanglement.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 84E.f01t02

This is beginning to sound more and more like the ansible communication technology used in the Ender's Game series of novels by Orson Scott Card. Dare we hope that such an instantaneous means of communication is really, theoretically possible?

[_spotlight]

Spotlight,
In the future could we find a way to collapse a probability in such a way to force a state? If we could do that then would we be able to send information by entangled particles?

The gist of Bell's theorem is that there are no hidden variables. What that means in laymen's terms is that there are no reasons/causes for the randomness of nature with respect to QM. The randomness really is intrinsic to the way nature operates. God really does play dice as Einstein put it.

So as experiments up to the present have validated Bell's theorem the answer is no. If we could force a particular collapse of the wave function then by whatever means that could be done would amount to the existence of those hidden variables or causes of the collapse. That's as clear as I can explain myself at the moment. Hope I am making sense.

But if it were possible to collapse the wave function then it would be possible to have superluminal communication. All you'd need is two different collapsed states and you could send a string of 1s and 0s. So your understanding is correct there.

[_spotlight]

Spotlight,

It does seem that some people are going forward with entanglement communication. They have found a way to pack more information into single photon.

http://phys.org/news/2015-06-method-qua ... hoton.html

It also seems that some people are marching ahead with finding a way to transmit information. So it does seem we may be close to actually transmitting classical information using entanglement.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 84E.f01t02

Teleportation techniques greatly improve the quantity of information that can be sent but the process of communication itself remains subluminal. There is nothing in the 2nd referenced abstract to indicate otherwise. Classical is by definition subluminal and does not involve QM's nonlocality or spooky action at a distance.

However, some argue that superluminal communication could be achieved via quantum entanglement using other methods that don't rely on cloning a quantum system.[clarification needed] One suggested method would use an ensemble of entangled particles to transmit information,[4] similar to a type of quantum eraser experiments where the observation of an interference pattern on half of an ensemble of entangled pairs is determined by the type of measurement performed on the other half.[5][6][7] In these cases, though, the interference pattern only emerges with coincident measurements which requires a classical, subluminal communication channel between the two detectors.[citation needed] Physicist John G. Cramer at the University of Washington is attempting to perform one type of these experiment and demonstrate whether or not it can produce superluminal communication.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superlumi ... munication

At the AQRTP Workshop we considered the question of whether quantum nonlocality was a possible medium for FTL communication. In the context of standard quantum mechanics there is good reason for believing that it is not. Eberhard has proved a theorem demonstrating that the outcomes of separated measurements of the same quantum system, correlated by nonlocality though they are, cannot be used for FTL observer-to-observer communication. A possible loophole in Eberhard's theorem could arise if, following the work of Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg, one modifies conventional quantum mechanics by introducing a small non-linear element into the standard QM formalism. It has been shown that in slightly non-linear quantum mechanics, the observable nonlinear effects that would arise would make possible FTL communication through nonlocality.

This result is not particularly satisfying because the experimental work, mainly in atomic systems, that followed Weinberg's description of non-linear observables placed very low upper limits on the possible size of such effects. Our AQRTP Workshop participants turned to the question of where one might look for quantum nonlinearities with a better chance of finding them than in atoms. We concluded that such a breakdown in quantum linearity would most likely be observed at the smallest scales of time and distance, i.e. in experiments conducted at the highest available energies. To our knowledge, however, no consideration has been given to Weinberg-type quantum linearity tests by the high-energy physics community.

http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw70.html

So it may be possible if the expression of QM contains a non-linear element in its formalism that has to date escaped notice.

He appears to be legit.
http://faculty.washington.edu/jcramer/

[_Franktalk]

Spotlight,

Yes, it was unclear if they were talking about classical information or classical parts. But it is clear that we are just beginning to find our way around this entanglement observation. It is possible that some of the research is classified if paid for by the military. So it is possible that more is known beyond that which is published. And of course the future remains open.

Just as the discovery of electromagnetic waves led to electronics we may see many practical devices spring from entanglement as well. So would you entertain the possibility that information could be transmitted using entanglement in the future?

Do we know all of the properties of dark matter? Do we know if dark matter follows the same rules of QM that normal matter follows?

[_The CCC]

Franktalk:

Thanks for the quick response. Now explain how a quantum jump fits with your answer. In simple terms since I really don't know much about all of this sciency stuff.[/quote]

Electrons do it all the time. Or do you mean Quantum Entanglement? Which Einstein called "Spooky action at a distance.

[_spotlight]

Franktalk:

Thanks for the quick response. Now explain how a quantum jump fits with your answer. In simple terms since I really don't know much about all of this sciency stuff.

Electrons do it all the time. Or do you mean Quantum Entanglement? Which Einstein called "Spooky action at a distance.

I think he was referring the the collapse of the wave function but he can correct me here if he likes.