Breaking the Light Speed Barrier?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the possibility of transmitting binary data faster than the speed of light using quantum entanglement. Participants explore the implications of entangled particles and whether their properties can be manipulated to achieve superluminal communication. The conversation includes theoretical considerations and challenges related to the nature of quantum entanglement.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • The original poster (OP) proposes that if super-asymmetrical entwined particles are moved far apart while retaining entanglement, it might be possible to transmit binary data faster than light by manipulating their spins.
  • One participant argues against the possibility of faster-than-light communication, stating that altering one entangled particle does not affect the other in a way that allows for information transfer.
  • Another participant discusses the nature of quantum entanglement, explaining that while measurements of entangled particles are correlated, the information does not travel faster than light, as the results are random and cannot be used for communication.
  • A later reply suggests that if binary states are assigned to the spins or polarizations of entangled particles, it could be argued that the information is not useless, challenging the previous assertion about randomness.
  • One participant critiques the use of popular science articles as sources for understanding quantum mechanics, reinforcing the idea that entanglement cannot be used for superluminal communication.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the feasibility of using quantum entanglement for faster-than-light communication. While some assert that it is impossible, others explore the implications of assigning binary states to entangled particles, indicating a lack of consensus.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in understanding quantum entanglement, particularly regarding the definitions of information transfer and the implications of randomness in measurement outcomes. There are unresolved questions about the nature of correlations in entangled states and their potential applications.

SWIRF
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
If we have a pair of super-asymmetrical entwined particles, and move them a light year away so that they retain their quantum entanglement, and we set a clockwise spin as 0 and a counter-clockwise spin as 1. Would it be possible to transmit binary data faster than the speed of light?

If we hold that quantum entanglement has no distance limitations and changes to one happen instantaneously to the other, would that not be a method for transmitting data faster than the speed of light? Even if it is just a binary operation. But what if we had a cluster of these particles?
could 100 entwined pairs on each side be used to multithread binary data faster than light speed?
or a billion?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
SWIRF said:
1. Would it be possible to transmit binary data faster than the speed of light?
No.

Indeed, altering one pair of entangled particles does nothing to the other, just as dying one sock of a pair doesn't change the other.
 
"For example, if two entangled particles are measured in quick succession, the measurement of one particle can instantaneously affect the other particle, no matter how far apart they are. This is because the particles become correlated, meaning that if one particle changes its state, the other particle will undergo the same change. For example, if you measure the spin direction of one entangled particle and it's to the right, you can know that the other entangled particle's spin direction will be to the left. "

SPACE.COM


"

Is quantum entanglement faster than light?​

Asking about speed is a very interesting question. You might as a "normal human being" think that if I measure the polarization of one photon, that sets the state of the other photon. That thinking is fine, as long as the other photon measurement happens after the first measurement. But there is already a problem. If that second photon is measured on Pluto, it might take 6 hours for light to get there, so because information cannot travel faster than the speed of light, the second photon wouldn't know what state it should be. But it turns out that that second measurement will always match the first no matter when it was measured. So, it seems like the necessary information must have traveled faster than the speed of light. Big problem, but entanglement's weirdness gets it out of an astronomical speeding ticket.

In the case of entanglement, the information that appears at your Pluto measurement station is not useful information (in the ordinary sense). It is random just like the random result that came out of that first measurement (but matching random). So, the key point is that you could not take advantage of news of a crop failure and send a buy or sell order to your stockbroker on Pluto at faster than the speed of light before the Plutonian markets had time to adjust. It is only "randomness" that appears to travel faster than light, so the galactic traffic cop just lets you off with a warning."

----
the information wouldn't be useless if we assigned binary states to spin states or polarization states.
If we found a way to dye one of these socks, the other would in fact change color as well :)
 
Last edited:
@SWIRF your space.com reference is a pop science article. Those are not good sources for learning actual science. @Vanadium 50 gave you the correct answer to your question: you can't use entanglement to send information faster than light.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50 and Dale
Moderator's note: Thread level changed to "I".
 
The OP question has been answered. Thread closed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 276 ·
10
Replies
276
Views
14K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K