Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Quantum teleportation and relativity

special relativity quantum teleportation

  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1    spacecowboy342

spacecowboy342

    Traveler of both time and space

  • Member
  • 4,105 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I shall now proceed to entangle the entire area

Posted 24 August 2013 - 07:07 PM

I have been thinking about a video I saw on quantum mechanics and this is stumping me. Suppose a quantum teleportation device has been invented allowing instantaneous transporting of objects. Imagine a spaceship has been travelling away from earth at a pct of c so that an hour has passed(ship time) while 2 hours have passed(earth time). Let's say the ship q-teleports a message to earth saying their whatsit is broken and they need a new one. The message travels instantly so it arrive at 1 hr after ship left(earth time) which would be 30 min(ship time).Earth instantly sends the new one so it arrive 30 min before the old one broke(ship time).The ship assumes earth just sent them a spare and so 30 min later when the old one breaks they replace it with the new one and no message is ever sent. Does the universe implode or what?


#2    StarMountainKid

StarMountainKid

    Cheese

  • Member
  • 3,909 posts
  • Joined:17 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Star Mountain, Corporate States of America

  • We have problems because we stray from what is innocent and pure.

Posted 25 August 2013 - 12:26 AM

First you say 1 hour has passed ship-time, 2 hours earth-time, then you say the ship's message was sent 30 min ship-time, 1 hour earth-time.  ???

Did the part break/message sent 1 hour ship-time or 30 min ship-time?

Edited by StarMountainKid, 25 August 2013 - 12:28 AM.

The acceptance of authority does not lead to intelligence.
A mind untouched by thought...the end of knowledge.
My credentials: http://www.unexplain...ic=87935&st=225

#3    Insanity

Insanity

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 548 posts
  • Joined:17 Sep 2012
  • Location:Tau Ceti

  • "Men of broader intellect know that there is no sharp distinction betwixt the real and the unreal..." - H.P. Lovecraft, "The Tomb", Published 1922

Posted 25 August 2013 - 12:37 AM

From a non-linear, non-subjective point of view, when the first message is sent, it is simultaneously both an hour of time for those on the ship, and two hours for those on Earth.  Thus when the replacement is sent, it arrives just after an hour for those on the ship and just after two hours on Earth.

"We see things only as we are constructed to see them, and can gain no idea of their absolute nature. With five feeble senses we pretend to comprehend the boundlessly complex cosmos, yet other beings with wider, stronger, or different range of senses might not only see very differently the things we see, but might see and study whole worlds of matter, energy, and life which lie close at hand yet can never be detected with the senses we have." - H.P. Lovecraft, "From Beyond" Published 1934

#4    spacecowboy342

spacecowboy342

    Traveler of both time and space

  • Member
  • 4,105 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I shall now proceed to entangle the entire area

Posted 25 August 2013 - 01:15 AM

View PostStarMountainKid, on 25 August 2013 - 12:26 AM, said:

First you say 1 hour has passed ship-time, 2 hours earth-time, then you say the ship's message was sent 30 min ship-time, 1 hour earth-time.  ???

Did the part break/message sent 1 hour ship-time or 30 min ship-time?
Well I'm not sure I'm saying it right. The ship after an hour of elapsed time sent an instant message to earth. If earth receives it at an hour of elapsed time it would have effectively went backwards in time relative to the ship, unless I'm seeing it wrong


#5    spacecowboy342

spacecowboy342

    Traveler of both time and space

  • Member
  • 4,105 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I shall now proceed to entangle the entire area

Posted 25 August 2013 - 01:21 AM

View PostInsanity, on 25 August 2013 - 12:37 AM, said:

From a non-linear, non-subjective point of view, when the first message is sent, it is simultaneously both an hour of time for those on the ship, and two hours for those on Earth.  Thus when the replacement is sent, it arrives just after an hour for those on the ship and just after two hours on Earth.
I was thinking that might be the case but I'm still not sure. Clearly the ship's time would be going slower relative to the earth's. An instant message from the ship to earth is what is messing with my head. Would the one elapsed hour not still hold in the case of an instant message to earth? No matter what is happening on earth only an hour has passed when the message is sent. Maybe I'm overthinking this


#6    StarMountainKid

StarMountainKid

    Cheese

  • Member
  • 3,909 posts
  • Joined:17 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Star Mountain, Corporate States of America

  • We have problems because we stray from what is innocent and pure.

Posted 25 August 2013 - 01:44 AM

In my view, Insanity's answer is correct. This is the conclusion I reached before I started nit-picking your OP, sorry. :)  The two clocks in this case are synchronized in the sense that one clock is ticking twice as fast as the other clock. If it's 12:00 ship time when the message is sent, it is received on earth at 2:00. Instantly the part is sent at 2:00 earth time and received at12:00 ship time.

I'm trying to think of some way a time paradox could occur in this scenario.

The acceptance of authority does not lead to intelligence.
A mind untouched by thought...the end of knowledge.
My credentials: http://www.unexplain...ic=87935&st=225

#7    spacecowboy342

spacecowboy342

    Traveler of both time and space

  • Member
  • 4,105 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I shall now proceed to entangle the entire area

Posted 25 August 2013 - 01:53 AM

View PostStarMountainKid, on 25 August 2013 - 01:44 AM, said:

In my view, Insanity's answer is correct. This is the conclusion I reached before I started nit-picking your OP, sorry. :)  The two clocks in this case are synchronized in the sense that one clock is ticking twice as fast as the other clock. If it's 12:00 ship time when the message is sent, it is received on earth at 2:00. Instantly the part is sent at 2:00 earth time and received at12:00 ship time.

I'm trying to think of some way a time paradox could occur in this scenario.
Yeah, I think you both have the right of it. I guess I don't get a Nobel for inventing a time machine this year. Still from earth an observer would say the ship's time would be going slower. On the ship however they would feel motionless and it would appear to them the earth was rushing away at whatever velocity so to them would it not appear earth's time was going slower? Obviously both can't be true though relativity says both are equally valid. Sorry if I appear dense but even after all these years of thinking about this I still confuse myself sometimes


#8    taniwha

taniwha

    Hi. If im an idiot, then im an idiot for truth.

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,573 posts
  • Joined:25 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 August 2013 - 02:17 AM

View Postspacecowboy342, on 25 August 2013 - 01:53 AM, said:

Yeah, I think you both have the right of it. I guess I don't get a Nobel for inventing a time machine this year. Still from earth an observer would say the ship's time would be going slower. On the ship however they would feel motionless and it would appear to them the earth was rushing away at whatever velocity so to them would it not appear earth's time was going slower? Obviously both can't be true though relativity says both are equally valid. Sorry if I appear dense but even after all these years of thinking about this I still confuse myself sometimes

Thats a really good question...though I cant answer it .  No doubt someone will.

Your OP has me asking this ...  Is there such a thing as instantaneous light speed?  Or to put it another way does light experience acceleration?


#9    spacecowboy342

spacecowboy342

    Traveler of both time and space

  • Member
  • 4,105 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I shall now proceed to entangle the entire area

Posted 25 August 2013 - 02:25 AM

View Posttaniwha, on 25 August 2013 - 02:17 AM, said:

Thats a really good question...though I cant answer it .  No doubt someone will.

Your OP has me asking this ...  Is there such a thing as instantaneous light speed?  Or to put it another way does light experience acceleration?
Well from the above you can probably tell I'm no physicist, but I have read voraciously on the subject over the years and never have I heard of a photon doing anything but moving at light speed so I would say when a photon is emitted from whatever source it is instantly travelling at light speed


#10    StarMountainKid

StarMountainKid

    Cheese

  • Member
  • 3,909 posts
  • Joined:17 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Star Mountain, Corporate States of America

  • We have problems because we stray from what is innocent and pure.

Posted 25 August 2013 - 03:36 AM

spacecowboy342 said:

Still from earth an observer would say the ship's time would be going slower. On the ship however they would feel motionless and it would appear to them the earth was rushing away at whatever velocity so to them would it not appear earth's time was going slower? Obviously both can't be true though relativity says both are equally valid.

I think the answer to this question is that the space ship had to accelerate to its speed relative to the earth. The earth did not accelerate away from the ship.

The acceptance of authority does not lead to intelligence.
A mind untouched by thought...the end of knowledge.
My credentials: http://www.unexplain...ic=87935&st=225

#11    Kaa-Tzik

Kaa-Tzik

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,021 posts
  • Joined:23 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 August 2013 - 08:12 AM

View Postspacecowboy342, on 25 August 2013 - 02:25 AM, said:

Well from the above you can probably tell I'm no physicist, but I have read voraciously on the subject over the years and never have I heard of a photon doing anything but moving at light speed so I would say when a photon is emitted from whatever source it is instantly travelling at light speed
Which is what we see from lasers, though sometimes it is hard to get your head around the concept of going from a state of nonexistance to light speed in zero time. There might be some clue to the possibility of time travel here, but in these things I am Ralph Wiggum and my head hurts


#12    spacecowboy342

spacecowboy342

    Traveler of both time and space

  • Member
  • 4,105 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I shall now proceed to entangle the entire area

Posted 25 August 2013 - 09:03 AM

View PostKaa-Tzik, on 25 August 2013 - 08:12 AM, said:

Which is what we see from lasers, though sometimes it is hard to get your head around the concept of going from a state of nonexistance to light speed in zero time. There might be some clue to the possibility of time travel here, but in these things I am Ralph Wiggum and my head hurts
Yeah it kinda makes some veins pop in my head too


#13    sepulchrave

sepulchrave

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,767 posts
  • Joined:19 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 25 August 2013 - 01:45 PM

View Postspacecowboy342, on 25 August 2013 - 01:53 AM, said:

Yeah, I think you both have the right of it. I guess I don't get a Nobel for inventing a time machine this year. Still from earth an observer would say the ship's time would be going slower. On the ship however they would feel motionless and it would appear to them the earth was rushing away at whatever velocity so to them would it not appear earth's time was going slower? Obviously both can't be true though relativity says both are equally valid. Sorry if I appear dense but even after all these years of thinking about this I still confuse myself sometimes
Crudely speaking they are both true (technically the Earth isn't in an inertial frame, but if we can replace the Earth with another space ship moving at a constant velocity in the other direction than the comparison is correct). There is can only be a maximum of 1 point of contact between two objects travelling in different directions, so there is no paradox.

View Posttaniwha, on 25 August 2013 - 02:17 AM, said:

Your OP has me asking this ...  Is there such a thing as instantaneous light speed?  Or to put it another way does light experience acceleration?
Light can experience acceleration but only transverse to the direction of travel, i.e. the light path will curve. (Changing direction is a form of acceleration.)

When thinking about light begin ``created'' and instantly travelling at light speed it might help to visualize ripples on a pond. When you throw a rock into a pond the ripples are ``created'' and instantly travel at the appropriate wave propagation speed for the water/air boundary. Of course we can see that the ripples aren't discrete objects in and of themselves, rather they are a propagating disturbance in the surface of the water caused by the initial rock.

Photons can likewise be thought of as disturbances in the electromagnetic field, caused by shaking up charged particles.


#14    Kaa-Tzik

Kaa-Tzik

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,021 posts
  • Joined:23 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 August 2013 - 02:47 PM

View Postsepulchrave, on 25 August 2013 - 01:45 PM, said:

Crudely speaking they are both true (technically the Earth isn't in an inertial frame, but if we can replace the Earth with another space ship moving at a constant velocity in the other direction than the comparison is correct). There is can only be a maximum of 1 point of contact between two objects travelling in different directions, so there is no paradox.


Light can experience acceleration but only transverse to the direction of travel, i.e. the light path will curve. (Changing direction is a form of acceleration.)

When thinking about light begin ``created'' and instantly travelling at light speed it might help to visualize ripples on a pond. When you throw a rock into a pond the ripples are ``created'' and instantly travel at the appropriate wave propagation speed for the water/air boundary. Of course we can see that the ripples aren't discrete objects in and of themselves, rather they are a propagating disturbance in the surface of the water caused by the initial rock.

Photons can likewise be thought of as disturbances in the electromagnetic field, caused by shaking up charged particles.
Which analogy I used as a highly theoretical way of suggesting FTL communications in the thread about SETI. But in your analogy we have photons having no mass?, if so, then were does that put the idea of "light sails" if photons have no force behind them, becalmed?

Edited by Kaa-Tzik, 25 August 2013 - 02:48 PM.


#15    StarMountainKid

StarMountainKid

    Cheese

  • Member
  • 3,909 posts
  • Joined:17 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Star Mountain, Corporate States of America

  • We have problems because we stray from what is innocent and pure.

Posted 25 August 2013 - 04:34 PM

As a photon has energy it has momentum. A photon's energy is defined by its wavelength.



Edited by StarMountainKid, 25 August 2013 - 04:41 PM.

The acceptance of authority does not lead to intelligence.
A mind untouched by thought...the end of knowledge.
My credentials: http://www.unexplain...ic=87935&st=225




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users