Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Teleportation: via QM,GR, or FMR?

  1. Sep 23, 2004 #1
    Quantum teleportation of the information about particles has been widely reported. Quantum teleportation of macro-physical objects pertains to the remote future.

    The wormholes of GR are similar to teleportation. But they are quite massive.

    The Kerr black hole involves mass and rotation. The Kerr-Newman solution is described by mass, charge, and rotation. Interestingly, the magnetogyric ratio of Kerr-Newman is identical to that of the electron.

    In FerroMagnetic Resonance, the precession frequency of the magnetic moment of a ferromagnetic material equals the product of the magnetogyric ratio of the electron and the applied magnetic field. Precession is a form of rotation and high angular frequencies can be obtained. The ferromagnetic material will not rotate; the magnetic moment will precess through it.

    The above may mean that the resonant superpostion of an enormous number of magnetic moments could create a Kerr-like wormhole. The rate of change of energy wrt time is power. The power to create and sustain the wormhole is equal to the product of the applied magnetic field and the precession frequency. There are (roughly) 10^28 electrons per cubic meter of iron.

  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 24, 2004 #2
    Ferromagnetism and Negative Energy

    Given groups of magnetic moments, U1 and U2 in a ferromagnetic material. At saturation, all of the moments are aligned with the applied field. Below saturation, some moments are aligned with, and some are aligned against, the direction of the field.

    In the mixed state, the energy of the moments aligned with the field is:

    E1 = -B U1 cos(theta)

    where theta is the angle between B and U1.

    The energy of the moments aligned against the field is:

    E2 = -B U2 cos(phi)

    where phi is the angle between B and U2; phi = theta + pi

    The total moment, U, equals the product of the saturation magnetization, Ms,
    and the volume of the ferromagnetic material.

    For theta equal to zero,

    E1 = -B U1
    E2 = B U2

    If U2 < U1, then the sum of the energies is negative.

    FerroMagnetic Resonance can be performed below saturation. The power is positive because it is derived from the product of the applied field and the precession frequency.

  4. Sep 25, 2004 #3

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    You are confusing potential energy with negative energy - as in the energy of negative mass with an anti-gravity field. Your example only speaks to the state of a particular dipole. If the sign is negative, it requires energy to change the state of the dipole. If the sign in positive, the dipole has stored energy and can do work.
  5. Sep 25, 2004 #4
    One large dipole

    (Check my earlier post to see how the following equation was derived)

    E = -B U1

    The lowest potential energy is below zero.

    Negative potential energy can violate the "weak energy condition" and permit wormholes.

    U1 is the group of dipoles aligned with the applied magnetic field. U2 is the group of dipoles aligned against the direction of the field. A group of dipoles may be considered one large dipole.

    A large dipole has the lowest potential energy when aligned with the field. To move it out of this negative state, work must be done on the large dipole.

  6. Sep 25, 2004 #5

    Tom Mattson

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Hello Larry, welcome to Physics Forums. I'd like to point out that we don't host overly speculative theories here. So to give you the benefit of the doubt, I'd like to ask some questions that could bring this idea of yours more sharply into focus.

    How? The wormoles of GR correspond to solutions of Einstein's field equations. Quantum teleportation is a prediction of a completely different theory. Can you mathematically link the two? Or has it been done elsewhere?

    Same question: How? The electrodynamics you mention is described by QED, which is a completely different theory from GR.

    I'm not sure as to the veracity of this claim. If it hangs on the dipole energy simply being negative, then the claim is false, because the zero of energy can always be reset. We could just as well define the dipole energy as E=-μ.B+C, where C is large enough to make the energy positive. It would make no difference whatsoever to the physics.

    Can you please clarify, with full mathematical detail?

    Last edited: Sep 26, 2004
  7. Sep 26, 2004 #6


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The energy required to preserve alignment between a number of particles being quantum tunneled increases exponentially with the number of particles involved, as I understand it.
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2004
  8. Sep 26, 2004 #7


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    I think it would go up faster than that. Say you have to maintain three particles A, B, and C. You have to mainain the relationships A-B, A-C, and B-C, and assuming the relationships are symmetrical that's three, in accordance with your idea. But now consider four particles A, B, C, and D. There are relationships A-B, A-C, A-D, B-C, B-D, and C-D; six of them, not four. This is also assuming that only binary relationships count. But atoms, for example are multiple relationships between particles and would have to be preserved. Overall , it's going to be a big number. :biggrin:
  9. Sep 26, 2004 #8
    Equations ARE needed

    Tom Mattson wrote:
    >I'm not sure of the veracity of this claim. If it hangs on the dipole energy simply being negative, then the claim is false, because the zero of energy can always be reset.

    You're absolutely right, Tom. I had read this some time ago, but I couldn't recall it.

    Harold Aspden ascribes a negative potential energy density to the magnetic state. I don't have access to his equations, so I can't say any more.

    On the topic of FMR and wormholes, we need to remember that Wheeler observed that an electron could be described as one. A superposition of more than 10^28 electrons in ferromagnetic material, under resonant conditions, may lead to a macro-physical wormhole. Without the appropriate equations, this will remain only a speculation.

    Thank you for your comments,

    Last edited: Sep 26, 2004
  10. Sep 26, 2004 #9

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Are you saying that you just made this up; that this is a guess based on...what?
  11. Sep 26, 2004 #10


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Sounds like Wheeler's "an electron is a little wormhole" (part of his original geometridynamics) plus ~105 * avogadro's number of electrons to make a macroscopic blob, plus (wave of the hand please, maestro!) resonance to line them all up and notionally coalesce them - maybe a fermionic condensation?
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2004
  12. Sep 27, 2004 #11
    No Concoction Involved

    Ivan Seeking wrote:
    >Are you saying that you just made this up; that this is a guess based on...what?

    Since I have other responsibilities to attend to, I can not reply immeadiately. I will specify the nature of my "guess" in the next post.

    In the meantime, recall that a complete description of gravity requires a merging of QM and GR. Instead of teleporation via QM, GR, or FMR, perhaps it requires a combination of all three.

  13. Sep 28, 2004 #12
    Some Details

    Let's plug some numbers into the following equation.

    Fc = centripetal force

    Fc = Q (Wp r) B


    L = length of cylinder = 0.32m
    r = radius of cylinder = 1.00m
    V = volume of cylinder = 1m^3
    n =10^28 electrons/m^3 of iron
    N = nV = 10^28 electrons
    Q = Ne = 1.60x10^9 C
    Wp = precession frequency in angular units
    = yB (approximately)
    y = e/m = 1.76x10^11 C/kg
    B = 1.00 Tesla
    Wp = 1.76x10^11 radians/s = r/s

    Fc = (1.60x10^9 C) (1.76x10^11 r/s) (1.00 m) (1.00 Tesla)

    Fc = 2.82x10^20 N

    It is not the cylinder that rotates. The tip of the magnetization
    vector describes a circle, the radius being that of the
    cylinder. There are two precession cones within the
    cylinder. They are joined like the two halves of an hourglass.
    One precession cone is described by the magnetization
    vector, the other by its complement, the angular momentum
    vector.These precession cones open a passage through the

    For (Wp r) > c, H. Reichenbach, The Philosophy of Space &
    Time, 1957, p238, writes:

    "In the special theory [of relativity] we can maintain the
    velocity 3x10^10 cm/s as the limiting value because we allow
    only [inertial] coordinate systems. If we admit arbitrary
    coordinate systems, c can be exceeded...A light signal sent
    from Neptune along a tangent to the planet's orbit...has an
    even greater velocity...[The value of c] has therefore no
    significance if completely arbitrary space-time measurements
    are admitted."

    The following equation is for comparative purposes, but is
    probably not appropriate.

    M of 15 solar masses = 3x10^31 kg (spherical body)
    m (test body) = 1 kg
    R = the separation between M and m = 1m

    F = GMm/R^2 = 2.01x10^21 N

    Fc may be sufficient to create a Kerr-like magnetic wormhole.

    Summary: I am speculating on how to make a wormhole
    using the principles of FMR and a couple of simple equations.
    This is a guess on my part. A more appropriate description
    awaits future development.

  14. Sep 29, 2004 #13
    Explanatory Notes


    1) FMR of large objects has been suggested by J. Corum.
    A cylinder is wrapped with coils. Low frequency dc pulses
    are applied. The B field in the cylinder is proportional to the
    magnitude of the current. The product of the magnetogyric
    ratio and B determines the precession frequency. No cavity
    is necessary. No externally applied radiation is necessary.

    2) The precession cones open a passage through the
    cylinder. Iron expands in a magnetic field. Where the two
    cones join, the iron expands outward from the center. The
    high density of electrons and their rapid precession add to
    the expansion of the passage.

    3) The speed of light can exceed 3x10^10 cm/s in arbitrary
    coordinate systems. The speed of light does not appear in
    any of Einstein's equations of 1915. Riechenbach states
    that GR assumes a limiting value for the speed of light, that
    it is "formulated" into the theory.

    4) The gravitational force of 15 solar masses. This is used
    to compare with the equally large centripetal force. If the
    separation between M and m (1m) is from the center of one
    body to the center of the other, then the density of M is
    enormous. In another formulation, this density would predict
    a significantly greater gravitational force.

    If M has a signifcant radius, then the distance from the
    center of M to the center of m is very large and the
    gravitational force will be reduced.

    Last edited: Sep 30, 2004
  15. Sep 30, 2004 #14
    Final Post


    Thank you for being courteous. These are the relevant questions. Since I can not answer them, I agree that my thread is highly speculative. For this reason, I ask to have my thread locked.

    May I post again to the speculation and debunking forum? My goal is to be more down-to-earth. What I have to say will not challenge scientific orthodoxy, but will point to new ideas within the traditional framework. Is this not the intention for this forum?

  16. Oct 2, 2004 #15

    Tom Mattson

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Thank you for your straightforwardness. I appreciate it.

    Anything you can back up, you can post.

    Enjoy the Forums. :smile:
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook