However this is not the full picture:
To read more about those experiments see my comments about the book: Quantum (Un)speakable
For more questions and photon pairs See: Experiments with Entangled photons
The easiest way to prove Teleportation is as follows:
However you can also demonstrate Teleportation using two filters. See: Experiment 3 with Entangled photons
The assumption is that both photons in each pair are polarised in the same plane. That means the angle between each photon pair is zero.
Now let us go back and perform the experiment as it should be without the extra assumption. That means each pair is polarised in the same plane.
The demonstration is very easy.
I expect that the reaction of the reader is: you will not see teleportation. I agree.
One other problem what is the behaviour at the receiver beam splitter in the two cases: (a) no teleportation versus (b) teleportation. Neither document discusses that nor explains it.
Non Locality means that the cause of change is non local but happened at far distance. In fact non-locality implies that a change here can have an instantaneous impact in a change overthere at far distance.
Albert Einstein was a proponent of the Local concept. Niels Bohr a proponent of Non Locality
Back to my home page Contents of This Document
Answer question 5: How do you prove Teleportation
When you want to demonstrate Teleportation you have to be carefull about different issues:
The sending site changes the state (of photon A). The receiving site should detect this state change (of photon B).
Such an experiment consists of a source, two counters (a certain equal distance away) and a coincidence monitor. There are no filters involved.
You perform this test for a certain duration and the result should be that the counts of each counter should be almost identical
The coincidence monitor should give the same result. For more detail See: Experiment 1 with Entangled photons
The same you should also see on the results of the Coincidence Monitor.
But also let us make an extra assumption: That the polarisation plane of each photon is zero.
The result should be that counter 1 and 2 (+ direction) should be close to 100% of the total number of events.
The result for Counter 3 and 4 (- direction) should be each close to 0%
The idea behind this change is to make the experiment asymetrical and "to measure" the left stream first.
The results should be the same.
Teleportation comes from the fact that the two photons are physical connected even at large distances. This implies if you change one the other one should also change.
The result should be that counter 1 and 2 (+ direction) should be close to 50% of the total number of events.
The result for Counter 3 and 4 (- direction) should be the same and also 50%
It is very important to compare the results of C1 and C2 with the Coincidence Monitor and observe that they are simultaneous. The same with C3 and C4. Comparing C1 with C3 than ofcourse they are not simultaneous.
The results are identical as before: each counter get incremented in 50% of all events.
It is very important if you compare the results of C1 and C2 with the Coincidence Monitorto observe that they are not simultaneous. The same with C3 and C4. In this case c3 is simultaneous with C2 and C1 with C4.
The idea behind this change is to make the experiment asymetrical and "to measure" the left stream first.
The result should be that counter 1 and 2 (+ direction) should be close to 50% of the total number of events.
With the CM you should also see no difference. C1 and C2 are simultaneous and C5 and C4 are simultaneous.
Experiment
0 degrees 0 degrees X 0 degrees
Counter 1<---Filter1<---Filter3<----Source--------------->Filter2--->Counter 2
^ (+) | | X | ^ (+)
| V V V |
| Counter 3 Counter 5 Counter 4 |
| ^ (-) ^ (-) ^ (-) |
| | | | |
-------------------------Coincidence Monitor-----------------------
However there should be an effect on C1 and C3. During the period that analyser 3 is 90 degrees C1 should not increase, instead C3 should increase. The total number of counts of C1 and C3 should stay constant and be 50%.
The left one is changed near analyser 3, half way between Filter 1 and the source, that means the right one should also change half way between Filter 2 and the source and that is at the locations identified with the two "X X".
Answer Question 6: Teleportation in slow motion.
In order to demonstrate Teleportation in Slow motion we use Domino Pieces.
The following sketch shows the layout of the pieces
Teleportation with domino pieces.
Finish 1 Finish 2
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 S 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
O1 1 2 O2
1 2
3
^ 3
| 3
| 3
| start
Now there are two possibilities:
The last case is called: Teleportation. Observe that this is a symetric behaviour.
However this experiment is not so strange as it seems. Compare it with the experiments in the documents 4 and 5 in the Literature.
In those documents
One of the biggest problems is how do you take care that the two moments, one that message (i.e. the third photon) and two that the entangled photon reaches the left beam splitter (the sender), are simultaneous?
IMO this is very difficult.
That is also the same moment that the other photon pair reaches the right beam splitter (the receiver)
Answer question 7: What means "Spooky action at a distance"
"Spooky action at a distance" is related to Teleportation. In the above paragraph you can read that if you change the state of photon A of a photon pair than photon B should also change, even if A and B are miles apart
This effect is nicknamed "Spooky action at a distance" and takes place instantaneous. In effect much faster than the speed of light.
As such it is in conflict with Special Relativity.
Answer question 8: What means Locality versus Non Locality
Local means that the cause of any change is something that happened in the neighbourhood of that change. This change is propagated through space. The maximum speed is the speed of light.
The concept of neighbourhood is flexible. In fact the further away (the larger the neighbourhood) the longer ago something happened.
The speed of propagation involved is much larger than the speed of light. As such is in conflict with Special Relativity.
Literature about teleportation of photons
In this document we read:
Reflection part 1
IMO none of the two experiments will actual demonstrate teleportation i.e. will demonstrate that, if you make a change at the end of left beam, without any change at the source, that the behaviour at the end of the right beam will also change
What is important to remark that both experiments are asymetrical while if they demonstrate teleportation that the results are symetrical.
The experiment with the domino pieces has that same characteristic.
Reflection part 2
The following is an interesting document:
Einstein's Spooks and Bell's Theorem
This document explains both the outcome of an EPR experiment using the Bell's theorem (the Bell inequalities) and Quantum Mechanics
Next you can read:
and:
The question is: is that conclusion correct.
IMO the only thing what the experiments demonstrate is that two photons are correlated i.e. are entangled.
The most logical explanation is that this correlation is established at the source. The experiments do not show the opposite.
The fact that this correlation is non lineair does not prove that Einstein is wrong. IMO it also would not have changed his opinion.
Feedback
Created: 29 May 2009