Using light to control light: Engineers invent new device that could increase Interne

Discussion in 'hardware' started by ronjor, Oct 2, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,727
    Location:
    Texas
    http://phys.org/news/2012-10-device-internet-download.html
     
  2. I think this might be big...

    I remember reading several years ago in Scientific American about differerent possible designs for optical "transistors." None of them were very practical.

    The switch described in the article is slow (for now) compared to current electronic transisters, but I wonder if this will be a first step toward making purely optical computing workable.

    (But NB, I've spent the past few years letting my knowledge of optical stuff get obsolete!)
     
  3. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,727
    Location:
    Texas
    One baby step at a time and the world moves forward thanks to research.
     
  4. SoCalReviews

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    You should see what researchers are working on for the next century. It may be fifty, seventy or one hundred years away before they have practical quantum computers but they are coming and the technology is more exotic, strange and beyond any type of technology that most of us are familiar with today. A new wave of technology is coming that will dramatically change the world possibly more than the radio, electronic and computer technology has changed it in the last one hundred years.

    I am not sure of how many are aware of this technology that is currently being researched but here is a teaser... According to quantum theory particles can enter into states of superposition, entanglement and exhibit non-locality. What this means is that the rules and laws of physics relating to time, space and distance that seem to apply to today's computers and the limitations based on the speed of electrons inside the chips that do computer information processing will no longer apply the same way to quantum computers....The actual calculations in a quantum computer will essentially be instantaneous with the only time component involving the information getting in and out of the quantum computing system.

    The time delay limitations on networking relating to different types of cable... copper, fiber optic, etc... will change when quantum theory is applied in data networking and communications...because there will be no cable, no fiber optic, no wireless radio transmission...none of that will be required. Applying the laws of quantum entanglement, non-locality and superposition in an information technology will mean that it will be possible for information to be transferred from one location to any other location in the known universe with zero time delay at any distance using a system based on quantum principles. According to early research there are already successful working prototypes based on the quantum entanglement of particles that have operated at a distance of several hundred miles with zero time delay...The instantaneous information transfer/change at two separate locations...hundreds of miles apart.

    The encryption of data using quantum principles will should allow for it to be theoretically impossible to break the code of quantum encrypted information regardless of how much brute force computing power is developed in the future.There are already theoretical models of how this can be done utilizing technology based on quantum theory. Some of the proposed models involve the use of quantum informational bits (in states of uncertainty) to encrypt data.
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2012
  5. Umm, sorry, this is not true. Entanglement can't be used to actually move information around, and the process that entangles particles is limited by lightspeed. (Entanglement itself is not, but only because it cannot transmit usable information.) Entanglement has some interesting theoretical uses in computing IIRC, but not as a means of instantaneous communication.

    That is probably a good thing, actually, because ability to communicate instantaneously == ability to send a signal backwards in time.
     
  6. SoCalReviews

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    This subject may be a topic for a different forum. I don't know where you get your information but yes it is in fact true and not just in theory but it has already been shown experimentally and in fact it actually has nothing to do with the "transmission" of particles or information. It is often described in that way because quantum principles are so foreign for most people that it is the best language to describe what is happening. Most people are also unaware of this technology. I have attended public lectures on this research for quantum computing given by the researchers themselves. You can also read about it on the internet in the science related articles of mainstream media, articles about future computing and in science and physics related forums.

    The truth is that nothing in fact is transmitted at all. When two particles are entangled... when the state of one particle changes then the state of the other particle changes instantaneously regardless of the perceived distance between them. Lightspeed or "the speed of light" has absolutely nothing to do with the information between entangled particles. Time, space and distance are not applicable according to quantum physics. As I mentioned before there are already scientifically verified, documented and repeated experiments where this has been done so there is nothing to debate about regarding the existence of this technology that researchers are developing.

    Regarding information instantaneously going "backwards or forwards in time"...That is a topic for another conversation. Most physicists agree that would not be possible but there are a number of recent experiments (related to time and observation) in quantum physics that have baffled researchers. For starters you can do a search and read about the "delayed choice quantum eraser" experiment.
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2012
  7. The problem, as I understand it, is that making changes to the state of an entangled particle will break the entanglement and bring you back to square one.

    (But this is awesome for encrypted communications, since it could theoretically tell you if someone intercepted an read your message...)
     
  8. SoCalReviews

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    It is a problem but not necessarily an insurmountable one. Keeping particles in their quantum state (entangled, superposition, etc.) seems to be the biggest obstacle right now for quantum computing technologies and it has been the major problem all along. There are newer discoveries and developments that have promise in reliably maintaining particles in quantum states. Some of the most recent research involves manipulating electrons in what appear to be more stable quantum states at a specific temperature zone near absolute zero.
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2012
  9. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    Entanglement won't lead to FTL transfer of information - this just isn't possible. You can have two entangled particles move at the same time but its more complicated than that. QM computers also aren't infinitely fast or anything. In a typical system we have 'on' and 'off' but on a QM system we can have those two and a superposition of both.
     
  10. Barring huge revisions to General Relativity, it is either insurmountable or will involve time travel. Probably (and hopefully!) the former.

    Edit: see here: http://www.physicsguy.com/ftl/html/FTL_part4.html#sec:ftleqvofc

    In a universe where GR applies, any instantaneous communications is guaranteed to violate causality, as a matter of basic math.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 3, 2012
  11. SoCalReviews

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    I don't know where you are getting your information about quantum computing technologies. This is not "basic math" which along with classical Newtonian physics does not provide the formulas for quantum theory. Do you claim to be a quantum physicist doing research in this field? I ask this question because my information came directly from those who are working in this field right now. I have talked about it with the physicists face to face. I have held back much more information about this because I don't have the time or energy needed to discuss it thoroughly in this forum. I posted about this topic simply because while I know it's not something most people understand or have much knowledge about who are computer and security enthusiasts...it is a fascinating subject. Questioning whether this technology is possible is not only absurd but it's not even debatable. As I said in other posts there are active working models right now that are utilizing quantum principles. As a matter of fact modern electronics and computer technology was developed using quantum principles. Questioning whether these technologies utilizing quantum entanglement, superposition and non-locality will become practical or feasible is another topic but as I posted before there are significant advances happening all the time. Some of the most well recognized corporations in the world are dedicated to funding research in quantum computing technology. Ultimately it is not my job to convince you of anything regarding this these new technologies. If you choose not to believe any of this or if you decide not to look up that information that is your choice. You don't even have to attend lectures or discuss this with the physicists in person as I have. Knowledge about this is available to anyone with a modern computer device with internet access to search engines and a desire to learn. As an example I just now did a quick random search for anyone interested on what I posted about before about quantum states at a temperature close to absolute zero. While this article was new knowledge in 2010 if you consider the rapid rate of new discoveries taking place in quantum technologies it is old news right now in 2012... http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201006/quantumchem.cfm
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2012
  12. No, but evidently neither do you.

    That's special relativity, not QM. QM does not invalidate SR.

    You got me on the "basic math" bit, but this is math. The diagrams in the link I gave work because of SR, SR works because of Maxwell's equations, etc.
     
  13. Pinga

    Pinga Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Posts:
    1,420
    Location:
    Europe
    This is all very exciting but it stikes me as funny that we never seem to be discussing what forward or change really mean. We have more technology than ever, but we also have more problems. Global disparity is still increasing, to name just one. High tech alone is not going to solve that.
     
  14. SoCalReviews

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    I never said I was a physicist but I do have a degree in science with an extensive background in computer technology and a more than thirty year personal interesting learning about in quantum physics. Please take my advice and do your own research before you posting again so as not to embarrass yourself. As I tried to explain in simple terms for you to update your own knowledge about this topic...A simple internet search yields information about exactly what I have been posting. You seem determined that your knowledge about this topic is correct. I have posted just a few of the thousands of links you can find on this topic. If you have a problem with my own knowledge I posted here and if you disagree with what the tens of thousands of internet sites and forums say in support of my posts here...then I suggest you should start a site of your own and explain why you are right that the quantum technologies I posted about are not true and why the rest of the science, physics, colleges, universities and quantum computer technology research community is wrong.

    http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/01/timelike-entanglement/

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/04/11/max_planck_quantum_network/

    http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/...s-the-way-towards-a-worldwide-quantum-network

    http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/...s-the-way-towards-a-worldwide-quantum-network

    http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2012/04/physicists-create-first-long-distance.html

    http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...-experiments-expand-to-include-eight-photons/

    http://www.kurzweilai.net/efficient...tanglement-interface-enables-quantum-networks

    http://www.kurzweilai.net/austrian-...rld-distance-record-for-quantum-teleportation

    http://www.zdnet.com/first-truly-quantum-router-demoed-by-chinese-researchers-7000002384/

    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10773-012-1154-2

    ...I could post thousands of similar links talking about real world working models of quantum computer technologies (using entanglement, superposition and non-locality) that I have discussed in my posts here but what's the point if you have already decided that you completely disagree with my posts, you refuse to do a simple five second search on the topic as I suggested and you continue to state emphatically based on your current knowledge that these technologies are impossible?
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2012
  15. SoCalReviews

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    I agree. New technologies alone will not solve this world's problems. There are many problems in the world and many of those problems are sociological, cultural, political, economic, psychological, philosophical, ethical, religious and/or spiritual. It's a massive topic. This is a security forum and I don't want to potentially stray father away from the topic this thread has already taken but there are answers available. The wisdom and understanding of how to solve those problems that technology can not solve will require a major paradigm shift in mankind's understanding of himself and his role in this universe.
     
  16. Sorry, I don't have time to read all those articles right now. Will get to it later today.

    I know quantum entanglement is a real phenomenon... My beef is with your statement that it can be used to transmit useful information faster than the speed of light. That's an extraordinary claim, and so far it seems that none of the links you've cited have indicated that. (e.g. the Wired article above explicitly uses the term "timelike.")

    IIRC William Gibson once said something about the future being here, but not distributed equally. While I think a more advanced technology base is usually a good thing, I agree that there's something else we're lacking.
     
  17. SoCalReviews

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    You don't have to believe me or take a few seconds to click on the links I posted or read a few of the tens of thousands of articles about quantum physics but before disagreeing with someone at the very least examine what they are saying. From the statements you posted you appear to be working from a paradigm of physics that is at least eighty years old. Einstein was proven wrong about quantum theory when he wrote about the implications of it...He said "God doesn't play dice"... referring to the probabilistic and uncertain nature of quantum theory. Verifiable and repeatable experiments have proven otherwise. If you understood anything about quantum theory you would realize that speed has nothing at all to do with entanglement, superposition or non-locality. You should go back and read my first reply to this same statement about the "speed of light". Here is a link from a 2008 Nature Journal of Science that explains it in more detail. Actually much more has been discovered since this article was written but it gives a good summary about this topic.

    Physicists spooked by faster-than-light information transfer

    http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080813/full/news.2008.1038.html

    -Here is a direct quote from the above article... "...quantum theory allows two particles to organize themselves at apparently faster-than-light speeds."

    -Here is another quote..."On the basis of their measurements, the team concluded that if the photons had communicated, they must have done so at least 100,000 times faster than the speed of light — something nearly all physicists thought would be impossible. In other words, these photons cannot know about each other through any sort of normal exchange of information. "

    -Here is a third quote..."The experiment shows that in quantum mechanics at least, some things transcend space-time, says Terence Rudolph, a theorist at Imperial College London. It also shows that humans have attached undue importance to the three dimensions of space and one of time we live in, he argues. “We think space and time are important because that’s the kind of monkeys we are.”

    I said basically the same thing in my post regarding the first statement. The key word is "apparent" because in reality time, space and distance between the entangled particles does not apply. You have to understand the nature of entangled particles from a quantum physics paradigm. You can not properly view quantum behavior from a Newtonian physics perspective. It's like trying to describe how to travel around a circular globe earth from a flat earth perspective. You would logically argue that you would fall off the edge of the earth if you travel far enough which is exactly what believers of the flat earth paradigm believed. While logical to the human mind it was simply an incorrect perspective. Of course few people at that time could have understood those concepts because Newtonian physics and the laws of physics, the force of gravity, etc.. was not part of their paradigm.

    Unfortunately a majority of the educated population isn't aware of this new physics and most of society is stuck in an old physics understanding of things. The concept that time, space, distance and matter either don't exist or exist in completely different states at the atomic and subatomic levels can be a difficult concept to understand when you have been educated otherwise. Quantum theory has predicted these strange properties for a long time but because the implications were so strange the physicists refused to believe they were true...until the experiments began to prove quantum theory's predictions as correct...and today it is recognized as probably the most accurate scientific theory ever proposed. When you have the time begin reading some of the links I provided. Do your own research on quantum physics and quantum states. It may take many years to begin to grasp the concepts but it's worth understanding the true nature of the quantum based universe. It can be very complex and has a tendency to challenge even the most intellectual minds.
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2012
  18. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    We've been utilizing QM facilities for years. Electron tunneling is a good example of this.

    Here's the thing about the speed of light. You can have anything move faster than it - that isn't against 'the rules'. The issue is that no information can be transmitted faster than light. That is the actual law here.

    This is why you can have two objects moving at 70% of the speed of light away from each other without it violating special relativity (and when we talk about QM we are almost always talking about special relativity on incredibly large or small scales). There is no way for those two objects to send information to each other therefor there is no violation.

    So while I can entangle object A with object B and have A move 'up' and B move 'up' I can't actually send information this way. Any measurement collapses the shared state, which defeats the purpose.

    Naturally we look into this any way because the prospect is wonderful and research can only ever yield results, whether we like the results or not.

    So you're correct that time, space, and distance between the entangled particles doesn't apply. But it's mostly irrelevant because we can't extrapolate information anyways.

    There's actually an entirely separate issue on top of this but I don't think it's worth going into as the above is the main thing. Basically to get around the above issue (because interacting breaks the chain) you have to correlate observable results. Any correlation is going to be limited to C and likely orders of magnitude lower than C.

    Basically we're still entirely limited to transmitting information at C.

    What's a lot cooler is Warp Field production, which actually can sorta kinda lead to time travel. Explaining that is too difficult and also doesn't apply to computers. It uses things we know about QM (basically creating negative space, which directly has to do with the Casimir effect).
    http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/09/harold-white-warp-field-mechanics-update.html

    edit: Not trying to step on toes here, just provide some info for readers. Before Computer Science I was planning to major in Physics.

    edit2: You actually get get faster than light information but it's not even worth explaining because it only serves to confuse. This has to do with light seeking shorter paths.

    edit3: When I say chain I'm talking about the shared structure ie: wave. And by 'break' I mean collapse. Just in case anyone's familiar enough with the terms.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativity_of_simultaneity
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minkowski_space
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_cone
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light

    edit4: QM Computers suffer from a lot of the issues above. It's not some infinitely fast device - it doesn't necessarily break encryption (only specific types, can talk more about this if people want), and you have to collapse it into typical numbers in the end. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shor's_algorithm There's some info on Shor's algorithm - a quantum algorith.
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2012
  19. SoCalReviews

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Thanks for that additional information and the new links Hungry Man. Warp field production is a theoretical concept that has been around for a while but like most of these concepts it more recently seems to be discussed more seriously. I really didn't intend for my post to take the thread in this direction but that's often what happens with this topic. Quantum theory in particular can be unsettling to the human mind educated predominantly to the Newtonian physics paradigm but in the long run it can have a very positive effect on one's outlook about life. Trying to understand the famous "double slit experiment" is a good start for most people who are curious about the theory. The quantum eraser and delayed choice quantum eraser experiments take it a step further into the quantum abyss.

    "Anyone who says that they understand Quantum Mechanics does not understand Quantum Mechanics" - Richard Feynman 1918-1988, American physicist

    The debate about quantum theory and what it predicts has been going on for a very long time in the science and physics community. It took several hundred years for Newtonian physics to be fully adopted and there are still people today who either don't understand it or have beliefs that contradict it. Quantum theory and it's abstract and non-intuitive concepts puts it right at the edge of the ability of human intellectual understanding. While entanglement and superposition (and as you mentioned...quantum tunneling) are somewhat difficult concepts to grasp they actually only represent the tip of the iceberg. Other concepts in quantum theory get stranger and more difficult to grasp. I have found it is worth studying if you are motivated to invest the time and energy. For the general population it may be a hundred years or more before society fully adopts it. There is hope though. They are starting to teach quantum physics in some high schools.

    "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." - Max Planck 1858-1947, German theoretical physicist, father of quantum theory
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2012
  20. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    This is really the crux.

    What comes out of QM is ideas like 'branes' of dimensions. It's like little drawing people trying to understand a 3 dimensional world. It is fundamentally unintuitive because we exist in a world that does not observe these things.

    Anyways I think there's plenty of info for readers now. At least links to thinks that will provide them with information if they feel like seeking it out.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.