quote:LONDON, England (Reuters) -- Beaming people in "Star Trek" fashion is still in the realms of science fiction, but physicists in Denmark have teleported information from light to matter bringing quantum communication and computing closer to reality.
Until now scientists have teleported similar objects such as light or single atoms over short distances from one spot to another in a split second.
But Professor Eugene Polzik and his team at the Niels Bohr Institute at Copenhagen University in Denmark have made a breakthrough by using both light and matter.
Posted by Rake (Member # 9195) on :
I can't say I understand much of it, but it certainly sounds interesting
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
quote:Can you say "Ansible"?
ansibbbible.
antsibib
aunt sybbyl
Well I guess the answer is no.
PS on track #$#@$#@$@# News Filters. I'll read it later.
Posted by starLisa (Member # 8384) on :
"The transmission of quantum information can be made unconditionally secure."
Heh. I love the naive. They're so cute.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
Tight. Tight like a tiger.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
respectobibble
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: "The transmission of quantum information can be made unconditionally secure."
Heh. I love the naive. They're so cute.
Yes, aren't they? I would suggest that people who do not even understand basic biology should not try to comment on quantum physics.
Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
I remember hearing about the first tests and was very surprised they were even able to transort small stuff like atoms. Very close to not having to drive anywhere anymore. It'll make traffic a thing of the past, also very dangerous in hands of wrong people.
Posted by Anshi (Member # 9643) on :
quote:Originally posted by B34N: It'll make traffic a thing of the past, also very dangerous in hands of wrong people.
The latter part of your statement, because it inevitably rings true with any innovation harnessed (and especially one on this magnitude of scale), saddens me. And at the same time, the news of this is so very cool. I can't imagine all that went into it: the calculations, the countless man hours, the experiments...wow, just...wow.
Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
yeah, it's really nuts to think that soon, well not soon, but someday in the nearer future we'll be "beaming up scotty" it really cool. But I mention the "wrong hands thing" cause you are right anything that is good, someone will find something bad in it.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
Maybe It'll be just like that scene from Spaceballs. That part was hilarious, where the guys head was on backwards and everything. Wow, lol. I think that this is most important in the sense that we could perhaps have an even faster internet, or not even need an internet connection to transfer info from place to place. I doubt we'll ever be teleporting people but, at the same time I can see us using these things as like high-tech spy tools where information would be hidden in atoms. That would be tight. Tight like a tiger.
Posted by Anshi (Member # 9643) on :
quote:Originally posted by B34N: yeah, it's really nuts to think that soon, well not soon, but someday in the nearer future we'll be "beaming up scotty" it really cool. But I mention the "wrong hands thing" cause you are right anything that is good, someone will find something bad in it.
You mention someday in the nearer future, but before or after we get a grand unified theory of physics?
I hold the opinion that in the eyes of those who would use it, an innovation is "good," even if they would wield it to accomplish goals that others may consider bad. It's all relative, right?
Posted by Jay (Member # 5786) on :
quote:Originally posted by King of Men:
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: "The transmission of quantum information can be made unconditionally secure."
Heh. I love the naive. They're so cute.
Yes, aren't they? I would suggest that people who do not even understand basic biology should not try to comment on quantum physics.
So KoM, I would think this would be very secure since there is nothing to tap into in between the sender and receiver. Is this correct?
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Even in the quantum encryption scheme there is something to tap into, it just won't do the person tapping in any good.
We already have an unbreakable cypher -- its called a one-time pad. Unbreakable means its quite easy to make the expected time to solve greater than any arbitrary constant -- such as several billion years. The problem is, shuffling all those pads (the keys) around is hard to do without some being intercepted.
However, all we need to know is that a key has been intercepted; then just don't send the encrypted message. Well, quantum communication makes it impossible to intercept a message without interfering with it (in a detectable way). That is, we will always know when our keys have been intercepted.
Since we always know when our keys have been intercepted, we always know when it is safe to send the encrypted information, and the encryption is unbreakable without the key, so the transmission is completely secure.
The transmission being secure does not, of course, mean the endpoints are secure. That's always a problem. But nobody's claiming it does, either.
edit: transmitting the encrypted information over the same quantum method is possible, and means you can send the stuff in either order -- just don't send the key if the message is intercepted -- but there's no reason the message needs to be sent by quantum means. It could be broadcast to everybody in the world and the transmission would still be secure.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jay:
quote:Originally posted by King of Men:
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: "The transmission of quantum information can be made unconditionally secure."
Heh. I love the naive. They're so cute.
Yes, aren't they? I would suggest that people who do not even understand basic biology should not try to comment on quantum physics.
So KoM, I would think this would be very secure since there is nothing to tap into in between the sender and receiver. Is this correct?
Yes, plus the information would be destroyed by any attempt to read it off except by the intended detector. Weird entanglements and whatnot.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)