Would teleportation of digital information ever be possible?

[Sidhe]

Bah even in your quote it says 'quantum teleportation'. Like it's really teleportation. I get fed up of explaining this to people. Whenever someone explains it, it sounds like the unobserved elecron magically changes state to be the opposite spin, when it was just the opposite all along. Probably

Say 'Copenhagen interpretation'. Go on, really make me mad.

Quantum teleportation is just a misnomer that's been incorporated into the scientifc media and conciousness.

If I put up links about what is thought to be happening(which is the subject of much debate anyway) It is probably going to make peoples ears bleed.

Copenhagen interpritation? What's wrong with that? Are you a many worlds interpritation nut or something?

 

[brennan]

Yep. And so are a growing number of people.

 

[Sidhe]

Yep. And so are a growing number of people.

It's as dead end as String Theory. It can probably never be prooved. And besides it sounds like something out of A sci fi novel. I think Copenhagen is much more likely to remain the standard, and MWI like String theory is just a passing fad.

Copenhagen interpritation is not a swear word, it happens to be the most cosistent and verifiable theory of the moment.

 

[brennan]

Many Worlds is a logical conclusion. Copenhagen stinks of mysticism. Accepting the existence of what is effectively only more dimensions (which is all Many Worlds is really and is something supported by String and Brane theories) is better than just wishing the evidence wasn't mind boggling and making up mumbo jumbo about observers collapsing quatum states.

Booga Booga.

 

[Sidhe]

Many Worlds is a logical conclusion. Copenhagen stinks of mysticism. Accepting the existence of what is effectively only more dimensions (which is all Many Worlds is really and is something supported by String and Brane theories) is better than just wishing the evidence wasn't mind boggling and making up mumbo jumbo about observers collapsing quatum states.

Booga Booga.

It may be gaining followers, but neither MWI or string theory is likely to get anywhere if it doesn't actually come up with anything that can be experimented on.

Having extra dimensions we can't percieve means it is unproovable, in other words MWI is merely a hypothesis as is string theory. I can point out many experiments which appear to support the Copenhagen interpritation. The two slit experiment being a classic example. How many experiments can you point out with MWI? Oh yeah none, it's a lousy theory, it's unfalsifiable. And string theory is what happens when mathemeticians are given too much time between experiments. Conveniently inventing extra dimensions and infinitessimal sized objects that we will never likely be able to detect. MWI smacks to me of the same cop out as string theory, if you can't explain something then introduce imperceptible dimensions and variables, it's just mathematical mast******, and likely to remain so.

 

[Perfection]

I'll have to lend support for Copenhagen as well, it explains things the most efficiently without adding all kinds of crazy stuff. MWI is okay (it's just another perspective in my view), but Copenhagen is simpler and involves less crud.

 

[brennan]

It's simpler in the same way as saying 'goddidit'.

 

[Stylesrj]

So what you're saying is that teleportaion is impossible? Well make it possible! Don't sit there saying how impossible it is! They said man would never build a machine that could fly, having a machine that could fly was impossible, but the Wright Brothers proved them wrong!

So yeah, we could prove Einstein wrong by making faster than light travel possible! It's people like you who don't want to invent science. We'd all be in the future now, with hover cars and the like if people were not so lazy to invent science!

As you know, I'm already working on a faster than light travel device at home right now. However, due to lack of government funding and support, it's been postponed indefinately. Why can't we make the impossible possible huh? Too lazy to? Well don't complain about how impossible it is and use physics jumbo mumbo to cover it up, DO IT!

Ahem, anyway, so in seriousness, just because science says it's impossible does not mean it is. We'll be eating our words if some alien species came along with FTL travel and we were stuck saying how impossible it was and then we'd be enslaved

 

[warpus]

I don't like the Copenhagen or the Many Worlds interpretation. They both contain things which are kinda crazy.. Having said that, I favour the CI.

And as for quantum teleporation, are you guys saying that it's impossible? What's up with all the hoopla surrounding it then? I've read sooo many articles about teleportation using quantum entanglement principles.. but if it's impossible to send data FTL, then why is anybody even talking about this?

 

[brennan]

I've read sooo many articles about teleportation using quantum entanglement principles.. but if it's impossible to send data FTL, then why is anybody even talking about this?

People get the wrong end of the stick sometimes.

 

[Sidhe]

People get the wrong end of the stick sometimes.

It may be possible to bend space though, this is within the realms of possibility although out of reach of current technology. Gravity bends space time, if you bend the space time in front of a space craft even a small amount you can in theory reduce the travel time, sort of akin to bringing the two objects closer together. Some more whacky scientists believe if you bend it so much that it breaks you end up in some sort of h space. but that's a bit contraversial.

It's worth discussing, but it's really a hypothetical discussion for the time being.

 

[Mise]

Well until someone actually proves it, the Copenhagen Interpretation is just as (in)valid as the Many Worlds Interpretation.

 

[mdwh]

Having extra dimensions we can't percieve means it is unproovable, in other words MWI is merely a hypothesis as is string theory. I can point out many experiments which appear to support the Copenhagen interpritation. The two slit experiment being a classic example. How many experiments can you point out with MWI?

Doesn't the two-slit experiment support MWI just as much as copenhagen? My understanding was that they are both interpretations of of quantum mechanics, and experiments can't show one to be correct and the others incorrect? (Although I agree that copenhagen interpretation seems to be a much simpler explanation, and there is no point believing extra things unnecessarily.)

 

[Ayatollah So]

Quantum entanglement does not allow FTL information transfer.

So I've heard, but is there a standard proof of this? What are the assumptions of the proof? Does it hold up also for leading alternatives to standard QM such as David Bohm's theory?

What about trying to use large numbers of particles and disturbing the statistical averages of results?