Special relativity violation using entanglement

Idoubt
Messages
170
Reaction score
1
As I understand it, faster than light communication is not possible, but I have a specific example which concludes that it is and I'm trying to find the mistake.

The scheme uses two things
1) An entangled Bell pair ## | \phi \rangle = | 0 0 \rangle + | 1 1 \rangle## ( neglecting normalization )
2) The fact that orthogonal states can be distinguished.

To begin with ## |\phi\rangle ## is given to Alice and Bob each having a qubit.

Bob has in his positions a copying unitary that can copy states ## |0\rangle ## and ## |1\rangle ## to an ancillary qubit and he can then measure this qubit to distinguish them, explicitly the unitary is U = |0\rangle\langle 0 | \otimes |0\rangle\langle 0 | + | 1\rangle\langle 1 | \otimes | 1\rangle\langle 0 |

The unitary acts as, ## U|00\rangle = | 00\rangle## and ##U|10\rangle = | 11\rangle ## thus a measurement of the ancillary gives the state of the qubit in Bob's possession as long as it is either ##|0\rangle## or ##|1\rangle##.

Now suppose that Bob keeps applying ##U## and measuring the ancilla. The reduced density matrix on Bob's side is, ## \rho_b = \frac{1}{2} \left( |0\rangle\langle 0 | + | 1 \rangle\langle 1| \right) ##, the maximally mixed state.
So Bob will measure 0 half the time and 1 half the time. Hence he can determine that
##P(0) = 1/2## and ## P(1) = 1/2.##

Suppose now that Alice makes a measurement on her qubit giving either 0 or 1. The collapsed state
##| \phi^{\prime} \rangle ## is now ## | 00 \rangle ## or ## | 11 \rangle ## making Bob's state ## | 0 \rangle ## or ## | 1 \rangle ##.

Now as Bob keeps measuring, he will determine either,
##P(0) = 1 ## and ## P(1) = 0 ## or ##P(0) = 0## and ##P(1) = 1 ##

Hence asymptotically he can determine that Alice has made the measurement. So the information that a measurement has been made can be operationally determined by Bob even if he is light years away.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes atyy
Physics news on Phys.org
mfb said:
Your copy looks like a violation of the no-cloning theorem.

The no cloning theorem states that you cannot build a unitary to copy an arbitrary state. However you can still create one that copies known orthogonal states.
 
Try checking if the copying unitary will entangle the ancilla and Bob's qubit,m so that after Bob's first measurement on the ancilla he will collapse his qubit.
 
atyy said:
Try checking if the copying unitary will entangle the ancilla and Bob's qubit,m so that after Bob's first measurement on the ancilla he will collapse his qubit.

Yes! This seems to be the answer. If you see the effect of the unitarty on the entire system,
(\mathbb{1}_A\otimes U_{BC}) ( \rho_{AB} \otimes |0\rangle\langle 0 |_C ) (\mathbb{1}_A\otimes U_{BC}^{\dagger}) = \frac{1}{2} (|000\rangle\langle 000| + |111\rangle\langle 111| ) and a measurement of Bob's ancilla collapses the state and destroys the entanglement. Thank you :)
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Back
Top