Home

Strips

Comments

Sort By:
Jun 6, 2011
"Wireless" internet, with "fiber-optic cables" being wires, it IS possible.
 
 
Dec 22, 2010
I heard a theory of Roger Penrose lately: that consciousness arises from the quantum entanglement of the cytoskeletons of our cells. Would be cool if some supporting experimental evidence would arise for this theory.
 
 
Dec 22, 2010
I heard a theory of Roger Penrose lately: that consciousness arises from the quantum entanglement of the cytoskeletons of our cells. Would be cool if some supporting experimental evidence would arise for this theory.
 
 
Jul 11, 2010
To repeat what I said:

"You can't communicate at speeds faster than light. That's true and that's what you seem to be saying....... Quantum cryptography has other promising features, such as information-theoretic security, for which it is pursued."

I didn't say you could communicate superluminally, and your comment was confusing because Dilbert didn't claim his device enabled that either. He just used entanglement in some way, to achieve something. What the specific advantage was over existing technology isn't mentioned. And if you believe that quantum correlations afford NO advantage over classical communication, even ones other than "instantaneous" communication, you are mistaken. Dilbert could indeed have invented something better than classical communication devices. Doesn't have to be something that violates no-signalling.
 
 
Jul 10, 2010
"Unfortunately, it's been shown than you can't transfer useful information this way."

Define "useful" and "this way".

You can't communicate at speeds faster than light. That's true and that's what you seem to be saying. But "unfortunately, it's been shown than you can't transfer useful information this way" is a hopelessly vague, and probably false, statement. Quantum cryptography has other promising features, such as information-theoretic security, for which it is pursued.

About the balls, what you deem unimpressive is probably the effect of classical correlation: you can make a classical ensemble of such BR and RB pairs, randomly choose one pair, and still get the result you've described. The experiment you have described does not compare very accurately to CHSH-like experiments, where, for instance, you could identify quantum correlations by studying the statistics of measurements in different bases. This differs from classical correlation in that it is coherent correlation.

I am a quantum cryptographer myself, so I know it's not been "shown" that useful things can't be done with entanglement.
 
 
 
Get the new Dilbert app!