The impossibility of FTL information

  • Thread starter Thread starter Duplex
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ftl Information
Duplex
Gold Member
Messages
28
Reaction score
18
I want to make an index over all things against FTL transmission of classical information. All theories, hypotheses, theorems, axioms and rules... you name it.

I'm not looking for explanations or references, only the headlines such as Eberhard's theorem, Special Relativity, and Shanon's information theory.

Of course you can say that it is sufficient to know that to extract the encoded information in entanglement, you need a classical channel to access the correlation between Alice's and Bob's measurements. That's one broken link in the chain, but I want to know all the other links.

I'm not a physicist, but I want to increase my knowledge of quantum mechanics to test the "hidden" hypothesis in my signature.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Relativity is the only reason we believe information can propagate no faster than light. Anything else is just a statement that this or that theory is consistent with relativity. For instance, you can't derive an upper bound to information's speed of propagation in quantum mechanics. However, you can show, as you noted, that entanglement doesn't allow the transmission of quantum information without exchanging signals (which, as we know from SR, can only propagate at or slower than the speed of light) and so quantum mechanics is consistent with relativity. If relativity were falsified, there would be no other independent reasons to believe the speed of light is the maximum speed of information. Of course, relativity theory is the foundation for all of modern physics and one of the most well-established experimental facts in scientific history—so when I say it's the "only" reason for disbelieving FTL communication, that is rather understating the situation a little.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes ShayanJ, bhobba and Nugatory
It should be noted that Maxwell's laws of electromagnetism predict a VERY specific velocity for electromagnetic radiation (light). More specifically the "speed of light" is really the "speed of massless particles". To my knowledge (and please correct me if I am wrong - anyone), ALL massless particles travel at 'c'.
 
snatchingthepi said:
To my knowledge (and please correct me if I am wrong - anyone), ALL massless particles travel at 'c'.

You're correct.
 
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top