10
$\begingroup$

As I understand it (from a lay physics perspective), quantum entanglement has been experimentally demonstrated - it is a reality. As I understand it, you can measure something like the spin of an electron and know that its entangled pair will, in that same instant, no matter where in the universe it is, have the opposite spin.

This would not seem to have any utility as the foundation of a superluminal communications device. Is this true, or has it been established that is there some aspect of quantum entanglement that can ultimately lead to the development of such a device.

In other words: is superluminal communication via quantum entanglement an open scientific question, has it been settled as an impossibility, or is it currently more of an engineering problem than a scientific one?

$\endgroup$
10
$\begingroup$

This 'spooky action at a distance' will not and can not lead to communications technologies. The point is that the correlation between the two states cannot be used for information transmission. The two observers can influence each others' observations, but they can never communicate their own observations to the other superluminally, and thus will have no way of checking who influenced who (before waiting for subluminal information transmission devices), rendering the correlation between the states useless for all communications purposes.

$\endgroup$
6
$\begingroup$

To rephrase Danu answer, you can not use the correlation of these entangled particles before you have exchanged some information with another (subluminal) device. The main problem comes from the fact that the outcome of a measurement is random, so there is no way to agree beforehand on how to interpret a measurement done by one of the party involved in this superluminal communication.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ In particular, when you measured some outcome, you cannot tell whether it is caused by you measuring the system, or being determined by the other party measuring the system, thus no way to see there's a correlation in between, and hence the outcome cannot be arranged in a way to form information $\endgroup$ – Secret Apr 7 '16 at 10:03

protected by Qmechanic Apr 29 '14 at 6:48

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.