As per Japanese physicist (Masahiro Hotta), energy teleporation is possible

  • Thread starter pranj5
  • Start date
  • #1
387
5
http://www.tuhep.phys.tohoku.ac.jp/~hotta/extended-version-qet-review.pdf
In the link above and by searching net with "Masahiro Hotta", anyone can find papers written by him on energy teleportation.
As per Hotta, energy can certainly be transported from Point A to Point by entanglement and at the conclusion, he said that "it may be concluded that bipartite entanglement between A and B itself is not essential for QET" (QET: Quantum Energy Teleportation). His another conclusion is "this implies that an almost classical correlation between A and B is su¢ cient to execute QET for large separation, and is expected to be robust against environmental disturbances in contrast to the entanglement fragility in the previous quantum teleportation scheme. It should be emphasized, however, that this classical correlation is originally induced by the ground-state multipartite entanglement generated by nearest-neighbor interactions".
I suggest to everybody to read papers published by Hotta in this regard and then make comments.
But, after studying the paper, a scheme of information exchange suddenly come to my mind. As per the good old Alice and Bob analogy. As per Hotta, if Alice inject energy Ea to his own particle, the output Bob will get will be Eb, and the output is less than or equal to (maximum) the input by Alice. But, whatsoever, there is an output.
I just want to propose that we can use this phenomenon for information exchange. As for example, when there is an input, there would be an output and that means 1(one). When there is no input (as per Hotta), there would be no output and that's 0(zero). I just wonder why don't we use this phenomenon for transfer of information.
At present, conventional IT is enough for us to communicate. But, problems arise when we want to communicate with something that had already left our planet. As for example, some probe in Mars can send pictures and data far more quickly and clearly than conventional method and we don't have to set large antennas to capture the very faint signal sent by the probes.
Moreover, such kind of communications will be much safer and "leakage proof". There is practically no chance for any third party to tap the data.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
DrChinese
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,417
1,215
Here is a reference to a paper which was to be published in Journal of Physics:

http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.2674

He has also had some work published in PRL. This is fairly deep theoretical work, not easily accessible (to me anyway). Also, the name "Quantum Energy Teleportation" is a bit misleading because it requires a classical channel to operate.

As far as I can tell, there has been no experiment performed yet relative to the ideas. And I am not sure what we would be looking for anyway.
 
  • #3
you can just think of transporting 3 grams - and when they be converted to energy using E = m c2 / you can learned its not an easy job.
 
  • #4
DrChinese
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,417
1,215
1. As per Hotta, if Alice inject energy Ea to his own particle, the output Bob will get will be Eb, and the output is less than or equal to (maximum) the input by Alice. But, whatsoever, there is an output.

2. I just want to propose that we can use this phenomenon for information exchange. As for example, when there is an input, there would be an output and that means 1(one). When there is no input (as per Hotta), there would be no output and that's 0(zero). I just wonder why don't we use this phenomenon for transfer of information.
1. This is a gross oversimplification, and does not really describe what Hotta claims. Doing something to A does not cause the same thing to happen at B.

2. This naturally is not possible in any variation of Hotta's claims, as his system requires a classical communication channel.
 
  • #5
DrChinese
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,417
1,215
you can just think of transporting 3 grams - and when they be converted to energy using E = m c2 / you can learned its not an easy job.
This cannot be accomplished using any kind of quantum mechanism. I would not recommend that you consider the cited paper as proving that energy can be physically transported via (quantum) entangled systems.
 
  • #6
387
5
1. This is a gross oversimplification, and does not really describe what Hotta claims. Doing something to A does not cause the same thing to happen at B.
I have gone through the paper Hotta published repeatedly. This is the base of Hotta's conclusion. As per him, the output at B would be extracted from local quantum energy field and that would cause an negative energy density there. As per him, when Alice will do a a measurement, just the information will pass to Bob's particle and it will extract energy from its local quantum field. NOT the amount of energy Alice injected will pass to Bob, just the information.
2. This naturally is not possible in any variation of Hotta's claims, as his system requires a classical communication channel.
WHY NOT? If Alice injects some energy into A, then B will extract some from its local quantum field causing negative energy density there and that can be extracted by doing measurement, which is 1 (one). If Alice doesn't inject some energy, then there will be no output at B, that means 0 (zero). WHY A CLASSICAL CHANNEL IS NEEDED TO PERFORM THE EXTRACTION OF ENERGY AT B. It's not the amount necessary here, just the energy and that's enough. Please explain why a classical channel is necessary here.
 
  • #7
295
2
It should be a rather straightforward experiment to prove if you can inject energy in a quantum entanglement, you just need to do it in your measurement, but I haven't seen it yet? As for the assumption that you can 'lend 'energy'' from the vacuum as long as you're not trying to do it locally? I don't know, why should that matter? Because it is a entanglement? Possibly so, entanglement are strange.

He should really get some experimental proof for his thoughts.
 
  • #8
387
5
He should really get some experimental proof for his thoughts.
If theory doesn't contradict the conclusion, then I am sure that we can see some experimental proof in future.
 
  • #9
DrChinese
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,417
1,215
... As per him, when Alice will do a a measurement, just the information will pass to Bob's particle and it will extract energy from its local quantum field. NOT the amount of energy Alice injected will pass to Bob, just the information.

WHY NOT? If Alice injects some energy into A, then B will extract some from its local quantum field causing negative energy density there and that can be extracted by doing measurement, which is 1 (one). If Alice doesn't inject some energy, then there will be no output at B, that means 0 (zero). WHY A CLASSICAL CHANNEL IS NEEDED TO PERFORM THE EXTRACTION OF ENERGY AT B. It's not the amount necessary here, just the energy and that's enough. Please explain why a classical channel is necessary here.
From the introduction to the paper I referenced above (i.e. from Hotta):

"Recently, negative energy physics has yielded a quantum protocol called quantum energy teleportation (QET) in which energy can be transported using only local operations and classical communication (LOCC) without breaking causality and local energy conservation."

On any measurement performed by Bob, the result seems to Bob to be independent of what Alice does. Until Bob gets some information from Alice which leads him to believe otherwise. Which information will come via classical channels. Ergo, no FTL messaging.
 
  • #10
387
5
From the introduction to the paper I referenced above (i.e. from Hotta):

"Recently, negative energy physics has yielded a quantum protocol called quantum energy teleportation (QET) in which energy can be transported using only local operations and classical communication (LOCC) without breaking causality and local energy conservation."

On any measurement performed by Bob, the result seems to Bob to be independent of what Alice does. Until Bob gets some information from Alice which leads him to believe otherwise. Which information will come via classical channels. Ergo, no FTL messaging.
Well, again from Hotta, on another paper, he described the process as "capable of supplying information within the event horizon of a black hole and also mentioned that the boundary of event horizon of black hole will reduce in this case". Therefore, it can be concluded that the "classical channel" isn't an integral part of the process and this can be done without that. Hotta, on an experiment based on quantum Hall effect to prove the validity of his theoretical findings, proposed to cut the classical channel.
The basic concept is whenever Alice add some energy to her particle, Bob's particle simultaneously suck some energy from zero point energy field present in its locality. It doesn't depend on whether Alice communicated it to Bob via any classical channel doesn't matter at all.
 
  • #11
DrChinese
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,417
1,215
...The basic concept is whenever Alice add some energy to her particle, Bob's particle simultaneously suck some energy from zero point energy field present in its locality. It doesn't depend on whether Alice communicated it to Bob via any classical channel doesn't matter at all.
pranj5,

This really isn't much of a discussion. You are stretching the words to come to some conclusion which is at odds with both convention and what Hotta says. The simple fact is that what energy you inject into Alice does not change entangled Bob in any way.

If you have a question in there somewhere, and would like to get an opinion on it, that's fine. However, your conclusions are misleading, and in my opinion, overly speculative. As such, they don't really have a place here.
 
  • #12
99
0
EDIT: Never mind. Not sure if what I posted was true.
 
  • #13
387
5
pranj5,

This really isn't much of a discussion. You are stretching the words to come to some conclusion which is at odds with both convention and what Hotta says. The simple fact is that what energy you inject into Alice does not change entangled Bob in any way.

If you have a question in there somewhere, and would like to get an opinion on it, that's fine. However, your conclusions are misleading, and in my opinion, overly speculative. As such, they don't really have a place here.
In that case, kindly explain me how this phenomenon can be used to get information from within the event horizon boundary of a black hole, as proposed by Hotta. If you have any doubt regarding whether Hotta said it or not, kindly go through the publications of him available on net. Not much so far, just 4 to 5. Not very hard to study.
 
  • #14
295
2
From the introduction to the paper I referenced above (i.e. from Hotta):

"Recently, negative energy physics has yielded a quantum protocol called quantum energy teleportation (QET) in which energy can be transported using only local operations and classical communication (LOCC) without breaking causality and local energy conservation."

On any measurement performed by Bob, the result seems to Bob to be independent of what Alice does. Until Bob gets some information from Alice which leads him to believe otherwise. Which information will come via classical channels. Ergo, no FTL messaging.
You know, to me, the point here is that you can assume that with such a theorem proved experimentally you may use it at all times after, not checking if it has been 'injected'. And that would to me indeed constitute a 'instant teleportation of energy' there after. You will take it 'on faith' sort of, in much the same way we expect that light switch to function in our room.

And why I'm having trouble accepting it is that it, to me, seem to create usable 'energy' out of 'nowhere', upsetting the conservations laws as well as the 'equilibrium' the space/matter represent. If I assume that 'energy' is of a defined quantity inside SpaceTime, also counting in the indeterministic 'energy' in a vacuum, then this would 'tap' that 'energy' to complement the 'energy' injected if I got it right. The question is also naturally what 'used energy' becomes, heat only or is there something more to that, but either way you will still lift 'energy' from where it shouldn't be possible (the vacuum) and if it is possible it should have consequences for that vacuum.
 
  • #15
387
5
You know, to me, the point here is that you can assume that with such a theorem proved experimentally you may use it at all times after, not checking if it has been 'injected'. And that would to me indeed constitute a 'instant teleportation of energy' there after. You will take it 'on faith' sort of, in much the same way we expect that light switch to function in our room.
You may call it a faith, but based on mathematical models of entanglement.
And why I'm having trouble accepting it is that it, to me, seem to create usable 'energy' out of 'nowhere', upsetting the conservations laws as well as the 'equilibrium' the space/matter represent. If I assume that 'energy' is of a defined quantity inside SpaceTime, also counting in the indeterministic 'energy' in a vacuum, then this would 'tap' that 'energy' to complement the 'energy' injected if I got it right. The question is also naturally what 'used energy' becomes, heat only or is there something more to that, but either way you will still lift 'energy' from where it shouldn't be possible (the vacuum) and if it is possible it should have consequences for that vacuum.
Not at all, as per Hotta, only the information is transported, not the energy injected into A. It will remain there.
On the papers, published by him, Hotta answered all your queries you expressed in your post. Kindly go through them before making any comment, I am sure you will be enlightened.
 
Last edited:
  • #16
295
2
Read what I wrote please, you will see that I nowhere expect any 'transportation'. I'm talking about where he, as I understood it, expect that entangled energy at the 'sink' to be 'lifted' from the vacuum. And that's ? Ah well, weird. This idea is over two years old I think?

Where is the experiment?
 
  • #17
387
5
Read what I wrote please, you will see that I nowhere expect any 'transportation'. I'm talking about where he, as I understood it, expect that entangled energy at the 'sink' to be 'lifted' from the vacuum. And that's ? Ah well, weird. This idea is over two years old I think?

Where is the experiment?
Well, that means you are actually asking the question to Hotta. You better directly e-mail him. His e-mail can be found on papers written by him.
What you have asked is actually his assumption without violating any present known laws of physics and actually based on property of entangled particles. He may be wrong but at least I will hope for the best.
In the history of science, there are a lot of examples (like theory of relativity) that was first conceived theoretically with mathematics, later experimental results were found. So far, I must admit that at present no experimental evidence is available. But, that doesn't mean that IT CAN'T BE TRUE.
 
  • #18
295
2
No, I'm not saying that it must be wrong either. Although I find it hard to digest as it assume that you can tap the vacuum. But entanglements are strange, and, maybe? It also would lead to a future in where we could start to tap the vacuum, at some time as a guess :) And that seems like opening a can of snakes to me, depending on how you see 'SpaceTime', and the way relativity expect the 'room' to be a function of 'time', and vice versa. And then we have the conservation laws coming in. If it is so that we have a 'closed universe' that must mean that tapping energy from the vacuum will have consequences. Maybe unforeseen ones too, if you can change the room it should have consequences for the 'distance' measured.

I remember reading about it, wondering if it could hold true. In a way it would mean 'free energy' if it was true. So a experiment would be very welcome. There are a lot of physicists that doesn't expect it to be possible to 'tap' the vacuum, and from a 'conservation law' point of view I find them making a lot of sense.
 
  • #19
DrChinese
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,417
1,215
...So far, I must admit that at present no experimental evidence is available. But, that doesn't mean that IT CAN'T BE TRUE.
Please follow forum rules regarding speculation. Your last statement adds nothing to the "discussion" (which is mostly you mischaracterizing Hotta).

To recap: There is no assertion by Hotta that you can intentionally teleport energy from point A to point B at a speed faster than c. There is no assertion by Hotta that energy can be pulled from the vacuum in a way that violates conservation rules.
 
  • #20
825
54
From wiki:

The extraction of the energy is accompanied by generation of negative energy density, which is allowed in quantum physics of many-body systems including quantum fields, and retains the local energy conservation law. The remote measurement, which provides the information for energy extraction, injects energy into the measured subsystem. A portion of the injected energy, which amount is larger than that of the energy extracted from the zero-point fluctuation, becomes unavailable because of entanglement breaking by the measurement, and cannot be retrieved by local operations in the measurement region. Thus, during the protocol, the amount of locally available energy decreases in the measurement region, and it increases in the energy extraction region. The injected energy is the input of this teleportation protocol, and the extracted energy is the output.

A realistic experimental proposal is provided using a semiconductor exhibiting the quantum Hall effect:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1101.2766
http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.2203

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_energy_teleportation
 
  • #21
387
5
No, I'm not saying that it must be wrong either. Although I find it hard to digest as it assume that you can tap the vacuum. But entanglements are strange, and, maybe? It also would lead to a future in where we could start to tap the vacuum, at some time as a guess :) And that seems like opening a can of snakes to me, depending on how you see 'SpaceTime', and the way relativity expect the 'room' to be a function of 'time', and vice versa. And then we have the conservation laws coming in. If it is so that we have a 'closed universe' that must mean that tapping energy from the vacuum will have consequences. Maybe unforeseen ones too, if you can change the room it should have consequences for the 'distance' measured.
Maybe you are right. But, on contrary, it opens to numerous horizons of technical achievements. I am sure that without such kind of theories and technologies, traveling to distant stars and contacting people (people from Earth) there would be just next to impossible. At least, classical methods are not capable enough. I also want to remind you that laws like "conservation of energy" probably can not look like the same when we think of it in classical way. After all, we don't have any idea how much energy is there (in the vacuum) for us to extract.
With such technologies, we can set solar panels on Mercury and teleport the energy to Earth directly and thus leaving the fossil fuels underground. Even with such kind of technologies, we can colonize Mars and other planets and probably can use the asteroid belt for mineral extraction leaving Mother Earth untouched.
WHY JUST THINK ABOUT THE BAD SIDE, WHY NOT ABOUT THE GOOD.
I remember reading about it, wondering if it could hold true. In a way it would mean 'free energy' if it was true. So a experiment would be very welcome. There are a lot of physicists that doesn't expect it to be possible to 'tap' the vacuum, and from a 'conservation law' point of view I find them making a lot of sense.
By classical means, it can not be possible because to extract the energy in a classical way, you have go below absolute zero WHICH IS THEORETICALLY NOT POSSIBLE. So, SOME PHYSICISTS are right if they view it from this viewpoint. But, Hotta's assumption is injecting energy at A will "inspire" B to extract energy from zero point level to enhance its own energy level. THAT'S A TOTALLY NEW WAY OF THEORIZING THAT CAN NOT BE DESCRIBED FROM CLASSICAL VIEWPOINT.
 
  • #22
387
5
Please follow forum rules regarding speculation. Your last statement adds nothing to the "discussion" (which is mostly you mischaracterizing Hotta).

To recap: There is no assertion by Hotta that you can intentionally teleport energy from point A to point B at a speed faster than c. There is no assertion by Hotta that energy can be pulled from the vacuum in a way that violates conservation rules.
Instead of complaining against me, why don't to take some time to read the papers of Hotta. As per him, not the energy, but the information has been teleported from A to B and the particle at B then extract energy from zero point level to enhance its own energy level.
THAT'S PRACTICALLY TELEPORTING ENERGY FROM A TO B.
 
  • #23
DevilsAvocado
Gold Member
751
91
... But, Hotta's assumption is injecting energy at A will "inspire" B to extract energy from zero point level to enhance its own energy level. THAT'S A TOTALLY NEW WAY OF THEORIZING THAT CAN NOT BE DESCRIBED FROM CLASSICAL VIEWPOINT.
There’s nothing wrong in being an optimist, wishing for new 'science fictional features'. There are (probably) more things in heaven and earth, pranj5, than are dreamt of in your philosophy. :smile:

The current problem is that this "TOTALLY NEW WAY OF THEORIZING" isn’t described in QM either...

There is absolutely no way, according to quantum entanglement, for Alice to "inspire" or affect the outcome of Bob’s measurement (or vice versa). Everything is 100% random, and you can’t even tell if there was a measurement performed in the 'other end', or not. The outcome will be 100% random in any case.

If what you are claiming is true, I’ll give you a hint on how to get an instant Nobel Prize in Physics:

Just describe this "NEW WAY OF THEORIZING" and the new "entanglement inspiring feature" in a paper, and then use this functionality to construct a fairly simple 'FTL Morse key'; a long energy extraction corresponds to "dashes", and a short energy extraction corresponds to "dots".
300px-International_Morse_Code.svg.png
Voila! The Nobel Prize in Physics will be yours, i.e. if you manage to make this work, and you are indeed able to send information at superluminal speed!

Congrats! :wink:
 
Last edited:
  • #24
387
5
There’s nothing wrong in being an optimist, wishing for new 'science fictional features'. There are (probably) more things in heaven and earth, pranj5, than are dreamt of in your philosophy. :smile:

The current problem is that this "TOTALLY NEW WAY OF THEORIZING" isn’t described in QM either...

There is absolutely no way, according to quantum entanglement, for Alice to "inspire" or affect the outcome of Bob’s measurement (or vice versa). Everything is 100% random, and you can’t even tell if there was a measurement performed in the 'other end', or not. The outcome will be 100% random in any case.

If what you are claiming is true, I’ll give you a hint on how to get an instant Nobel Prize in Physics:

Just describe this "NEW WAY OF THEORIZING" and the new "entanglement inspiring feature" in a paper, and then use this functionality to construct a fairly simple 'FTL Morse key'; a long energy extraction corresponds to "dashes", and a short energy extraction corresponds to "dots".
300px-International_Morse_Code.svg.png
Voila! The Nobel Prize in Physics will be yours, i.e. if you manage to make this work, and you are indeed able to send information at superluminal speed!

Congrats! :wink:
If you really want to understand what I have said, kindly go through the papers published by Hotta.
The theorization has been done by Hotta, NOT ME. So, he is the right person to claim Nobel Prize, not me. I NEVER CLAIMED THAT I HAVE DONE THE CALCULATIONS. I just go through the published papers and expressed my opinions based on that.
Kindly also see the see the post by Bohm2 before making remarks.
 
  • #25
DrChinese
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,417
1,215
With such technologies, we can set solar panels on Mercury and teleport the energy to Earth directly and thus leaving the fossil fuels underground. Even with such kind of technologies, we can colonize Mars and other planets and probably can use the asteroid belt for mineral extraction leaving Mother Earth untouched.
WHY JUST THINK ABOUT THE BAD SIDE, WHY NOT ABOUT THE GOOD.
I expected this to be right around the corner, and now the crackpot speculation has finally arrived. Please refrain from this here, this is not science. And this is certainly not a deduction from Hotta's work.
 

Related Threads on As per Japanese physicist (Masahiro Hotta), energy teleporation is possible

  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
40
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
68
Views
39K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
1K
Top