arXiv blog

New Type Of Entanglement Allows 'Teleportation in Time,' Say Physicists

Conventional entanglement links particles across space. Now physicists say a similar effect links particles through time.

kfc 01/17/2011

  • 29 Comments

Entanglement is the strange quantum phenomenon in which two or more particles become so deeply linked that they share the same existence.

That leads to some counterintuitive effects, in particular, when two entangled particles become widely separated. When that happens, a measurement on one immediately influences the other, regardless of the distance between them. This "spooky-action-at-a-distance" has profound implications about the nature of reality but a clear understanding of it still eludes physicists.

Today, they have something else to puzzle over. Jay Olson and Timothy Ralph at the University of Queensland in Australia say they've discovered a new type of entanglement that extends, not through space, but through time.

They begin by thinking about a simplified universe consisting of one dimension of space and one of time.

It's easy to plot this universe on a plane with the x-axis corresponding to a spatial dimension and the y-axis corresponding to time.

If you imagine the present as the origin of this graph, then the future (ie the space you can reach at subluminal speeds) forms a wedge that is symmetric about the y-axis. Your past (ie the space you could have arrived from at subluminal speeds) is a mirror image of this wedge reflected in the x-axis.

When two particles are present, both sitting on the x-axis, their wedges will overlap in the future and in the past. This has a simple meaning: these particles could have interacted in the past and could do so again in the future, but only in the areas of overlap.

Conventional entanglement cuts across this world, quite literally. It acts along the the x-axis, linking particles instantly in time and in defiance of the boundaries to these wedges.

What Olson and Ralph show is that entanglement can just as easily work along the y-axis too. In other words, entanglement is so deeply enmeshed in the universe that a measurement in the past has an automatic influence on the future.

That may sound like a truism. Isn't this is how the universe works, I hear you say. But this isn't ordinary cause and effect; there are some interesting subtleties to this phenomenon.

To see how, imagine an experiment that Ralph and Olson describe in which a qubit is sent into the future. The idea is that a detector acts on a qubit and then generates a classical message describing how this particle can be detected. Then, at some point in the future, another detector at the same position in space, receives this message and carries out the required measurement, thereby reconstructing the qubit.

But there's a twist. Olson and Ralph show that the detection of the qubit in the future must be symmetric in time with its creation in the past. "If the past detector was active at a quarter to 12:00, then the future detector must wait to become active at precisely a quarter past 12:00 in order to achieve entanglement," they say. For that reason, they call this process "teleportation in time".

But how is this different from ordinary existence? After all, we're all time travellers, moving into the future at the same rate. What's special about Olson and Ralph's route?

The answer is that Olson and Ralph's teleportation provides a shortcut into the future. What they're saying is that it's possible to travel into the future without being present during the time in between.

That's a fascinating scenario that immediately raises many questions. One of the first that springs to mind is what advantage might we get from this process. Might it be possible, for example, to make short-lived particles live longer by teleporting them into the future?

That isn't clear. Neither is it clear exactly how such an experiment might be done although. Presumably, it wouldn't be very different to the type of teleportation that is done in labs all over the world today, as a matter of routine (in fact Olson and Ralph say that timelike entangelment is interchangeable with the spacelike version).

That means it's only a matter of time before somebody tries it. We'll be watching!

Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1101.2565: Extraction Of Timelike Entanglement From The Quantum Vacuum



Close Comments

To comment, please sign in or register

Forgot my password

mogmich

2 Comments

  • 8 Days Ago
  • 01/17/2011

Joke?

This must clearly be a joke!

"If the past detector was active at a quarter to 12:00, then the future detector must wait to become active at precisely a quarter past 12:00 in order to achieve entanglement,"

So it depends on the accidental symmetry of the clocks we use? (except digital clocks).

Ha, ha!

Reply

rsanchez1

211 Comments

  • 8 Days Ago
  • 01/17/2011

Re: Joke?

Yeah that line made me seriously doubt their claims. So if you create the particle at 11:37AM, you can only measure it at 12:23PM? How do they handle leap years or even leap seconds? IF that is how it works, it must be a result of their particular setup, not a fundamental property of nature.

Reply

diamond_dave

1 Comment

  • 8 Days Ago
  • 01/17/2011

Re: Joke?

If you RTFA, you'll see those times are just an example, assuming the measured particles interact at exactly midnight. The requirement is for the measurements to be symmetrical in time around the time of interaction.

Reply

mogmich

2 Comments

  • 7 Days Ago
  • 01/17/2011

Re: Joke?

You might be right, but this is not clear in this article. I admit that I have only read the original paper quickly, in order to check the quoted passage.

I think I will read the paper again...

If you are right, I think the article here is missing the central point.

Reply

stout

2 Comments

  • 7 Days Ago
  • 01/18/2011

I think so;

I think the whole thing was made up purely so they could get such an awesome looking graph printed in a scholarly journal.

Seriosuly, compare that graph to the money shot in any uh, "unscholarly journal".

Reply

stout

2 Comments

  • 7 Days Ago
  • 01/18/2011

haha

X marks the spot!

And that's the point where they say the two particles interact too.

I'll say they do!

Reply

insane_ai

1 Comment

  • 8 Days Ago
  • 01/17/2011

Another Time Travel Farse

Time is an invention of man measured by mechanical means, period.  You cannot travel through an imaginary thing. 
" What they're saying is that it's possible to travel into the future without being present during the time in between."  Really?  You suppose to take matter out of existence then put it back into existence by sending it through a theoretical thing called time.  Go read the first law of thermodynamics again.  You need to start over.


Or you could just go have another glass of kool-aid with the global warming liars. 

Reply

Advertisement

he11fighter

1 Comment

  • 8 Days Ago
  • 01/17/2011

Re: Another Time Travel Farse

Dude, you're retarded.  Yes, time is invented, but only time as in seconds, minutes and hours or other forms of measurement.

Past, present and future clearly exist.

If you want to play the game of time not existing, I can tell you that a Dog is not a Dog.  It is only a Dog because man called it a dog, therefor it doesn't exist.

Come on pessimists... get a life.

Reply

sanman

17 Comments

  • 8 Days Ago
  • 01/17/2011

Entropy vs Past/Present/Future

Well, our brains experience a "past, present and future" but how do you know that these perceptions aren't just an artifact or consequence of how our brains work?

Heh, I remember watching an episode of Star Trek where the aliens sneer at the humans for being "linear" (ie. experiencing time linearly)

Our brains work electrochemically, according to the arrow of entropy, which increases with the progress of these electrochemical reactions. So don't these reactions then create limitations or presumptions upon which our perspectives and reasoning are based?

Reply

nfordtchrvw

4 Comments

  • 7 Days Ago
  • 01/18/2011

Re: Another Time Travel Farse

"Past, present, and future clearly exist." Not according to dictionary definitions of those terms. The past has changed into the present and the future is what the present WILL change into.

If a puppy changes into an adult dog, we do not say that the puppy still exists. We may have memories and recordings of the dog as a puppy, but the dog's past as a puppy no longer exists nor can we say that the "future" dog exists yet.

Also, "dog" is a name we have given to an entity which demonstrably exists indepedently of anything else, while "time" is a name given NOT to an independent entity, but to a system of measuring and keeping track of the change in *actual* entities.

Reply

kenright

1 Comment

  • 7 Days Ago
  • 01/18/2011

Re: Another Time Travel Farse

"Time" in Physics is not "Time" as non-scientists think of it. Time is the progression of entropy. Scientifically, you cannot reduce the number of available states in a system without increasing the number of available states in a different system by a larger amount.

Translated into human speak: You can't make order out of chaos without increasing the chaos by a larger amount elsewhere. Why is Maxwell's demon not a problem? Because the demon is a part of the system and must expend energy to reorder the system.

Entropy is universal and constantly advancing. It is not "linear" it is the fate of the Universe. A fundamental concept of nature, as everything approaches a heat equilibrium.

Time, is physics, is a measurement of this advance of entropy. As humans, we interpret the world about 30 times a second, on adrenaline, that number increases, and time "slows down." This isn't because time actually slows down, its because our perception of events is increased.

Perception has no place in Physics, so leave it out of this discussion.

Reply

nfordtchrvw

4 Comments

  • 6 Days Ago
  • 01/18/2011

Re: Another Time Travel Farse

"Time, is physics, is a measurement of this advance of entropy."

I think that's what I said -- time is not an entity, it is a (system of) measurement of change (of entropy or whatever) of actual entities.

Reply

FlyingSnake

1 Comment

  • 8 Days Ago
  • 01/17/2011

Special scientist

Teleporting through time commonly occurs on an island between Australia and Fiji.

There's this wheel at the bottom of a cave that makes it happen.

KFC is late.

Reply

ZephirX

128 Comments

  • 8 Days Ago
  • 01/17/2011

Re: Time entanglement

Actually it's not so new and abstract stuff: at the moment, when you're able to predict something, you're getting entangled with future automatically. The time travel has been quite popular before some time as a manifestation of LHC crash, which should prohibit the quantum suicide of the human civilization.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/13/science/space/13lhc.html?_r=3&pagewanted=all

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2010/04/-we-couldnt-make-this-up-man-from-the-future-arrested-at-the-lhc-to-prevent-it-from-destroying-the-w.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_suicide_and_immortality

Reply

Advertisement

UncleAl

179 Comments

  • 8 Days Ago
  • 01/17/2011

Utility

Consider a warp drive that goes forward in space while going backward in time.  It is thus possible to go anywhere in the universe essentially instantly while traveling at 3 mph.

A professor brings to lecture his new little time machine.  He breaks a cigar at two points to make a little sitting man, puts it into the open timebox, and sets a dial.  Poof! No homunculus.

"Class, I have sent the cigar five minutes into the future."

Five minutes later, Poof!  It's back.  The professor removes the broken cigar.  Poof!  A second identical broken cigar appears.  The lecture hall gasps.

"In five minutes I will send this cigar back into the past five minutes, and here it is!"

A cute little redhead with freckles and bows (the Devil) raises her hand,

"But Professor, why send it back in time?  Here it is!  Where will it go if you do nothing?"

"Hmmmm... What an interesting test!"

Five minutes passed and the Professor did not send his broken cigar back in time.  The universe does not tolerate contradiction.  It disappeared instead.

Reply

intuition

17 Comments

  • 8 Days Ago
  • 01/17/2011

Allows or Necessitates: Predictive Gravimeter?

How do you suggest we counter the wait between the pivot of our current understanding and the load of work it will take to accept this purported entanglement? And, does this work suggest time is relative? If so, to what, Chronos?

Reply

Fabricnews

1 Comment

  • 7 Days Ago
  • 01/17/2011

You guys are stoners

I think they were saying the scientists needed to use their watch to see when it came back was symetrical to the time it went in.  So a half hour later each time for the stuff they shoti in. 

I'm wondering if you could shoot something into the future that has a half life shorter than the period that it takes to come back?  If it changes the half-life schedule and it dies differently then it really did gomforward in time.  Or would that just prove it changed it in some way we don't know? (making me the stoner).

Reply

romanmel

1 Comment

  • 7 Days Ago
  • 01/17/2011

Time travel dream...

My time travel dream would be to accumulate $10,000 in Federal Reserve Notes issued prior to 1965.  Taking those with me on my trip back to 1964, I would go to the nearest bank and buy $10,000 in dimes, quarters and halves.  Upon my return, I could trade these silver coins for a tidy sum of $200,000, at today's silver market value.  An enjoyable trip in time. for sure!

Reply

Consilient

1 Comment

  • 7 Days Ago
  • 01/18/2011

Re: Time travel dream...

If it's money you're after, why not just take pound of pepper, clove, nutmeg, or cinnamon back to the 15th century?

Reply

tripkebab

1 Comment

  • 7 Days Ago
  • 01/18/2011

Travel back in time.

So using the same theory couldnt you effectivly travel back in time also.

For example at 11:40 plan to do the experiment at 12:15. Then at ll:45 check the results from the experiment you will perform at 12:15. You should see the same link.

Reply

Elcrapocrew

1 Comment

  • 7 Days Ago
  • 01/18/2011

Re: Travel back in time.

I find it interesting that the position of the detector in space should be important.

Space-time is evolving, it is stretching and growing.  Therefore if the particle in question truly does travel into the future without passing through the adjoining time then the detector would be in the wrong location to see the particle, would it not?

It stands to reason the time traveling particle would not be located at the exact same point at which it left on its journey, if it is not present for the expanding universe to push along then it should not appear in the spot we are looking.  Even accounting for it position and giving it a velocity based upon the current expansion force we could not expect the particle to appear in the "same" position because the whole universe has moved and the particle has not been present to be moved also.

I may be misunderstanding this article, but I simply don't see how it could work otherwise.

Reply

Advertisement

t849230lotto

2 Comments

  • 5 Days Ago
  • 01/20/2011

Re: Travel back in time.

I'm doing that as we speak...
My goal or plan is to read the local lotto winnings every week. Sometime in the future pick some numbers and play 1 set each week. Since i've already read the numbers every week and will do the same each week in the future, at some point i will pick the right numbers. Call it deja-vu or entanglement achieved.

Reply

paullwolborsky

1 Comment

  • 6 Days Ago
  • 01/18/2011

Pan-dimensional shortcuts

It can make sense when you're describing what's happening in Spacetime between 2 particles that exist in dimensions above and below the one spacetime exists in.  The shortest distance between two points may be a line, but that line may only intersect our dimension at the 2 points.

If 2 particles have such deep linkage they're sharing the same existence, they may be one particle occurring at 2 places at the same time, or 2 times at the same place and what we are seeing is the end (and beginning) product of a pan-dimensional transaction.

Of course we can be wrong.

Reply

The Doctor

1 Comment

  • 6 Days Ago
  • 01/18/2011

Quantum Entanglement

Time, you will find, is complicated. Very complicated. People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but *actually* from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly, time-y wimey, ahem - stuff.

I wish I could tell you more, but have to dash. Things happening. Well four things. Well four things and a lizard.

Reply

mitchellporter

3 Comments

  • 6 Days Ago
  • 01/19/2011

conceptual implications

This is a new idea and it hasn't been examined from all angles yet.

My predictions:

1) It will be possible to explain this effect solely in terms of standard, spacelike-entangled states which evolve in time.

2) It will therefore become possible to explain "timelike quantum teleportation" in terms of spacelike quantum teleportation.

Reply

tarwin

1 Comment

  • 5 Days Ago
  • 01/19/2011

What Axis?

What's this supposed axis of symmetry between 11:45 and 12:15 ? Can you please either explain or simply remove this ridiculous article!

Reply

t849230lotto

2 Comments

  • 5 Days Ago
  • 01/20/2011

Re: What Axis?

that 30 min has nothing to do with it.
The axis of symmetry depends on the rate at with the universe is in unison. which seems to be the magic number of 60. 60 cycles, 60hz, 60 sec, 60 min etc...
take the number that our brain interprets the world about 30 cycle times a second which is about double the rate of frequencies that at which most living things cycles.
30 cycles X 60 seconds =1800 cycles per min.
Divided by the natural frequency of 60 hz = 30 cycle/per hz and divide that by 7 day which will give you 4.28571 28571 28571 28571 28571
Which is precisely the number of days per week that the mayan calendar is based on.. The same number of days that quantum symmetry takes place or a (deja-vu).

Reply

Gyno

1 Comment

  • 5 Days Ago
  • 01/20/2011

Inflammation

Please lay back and place your feet in the stirrups...

Oh my! That *is* swollen!

Reply

rp2323

1 Comment

  • 2 Days Ago
  • 01/23/2011

Re: Inflammation

I might be ugly, but at least I aint got no money! (At least not until 12:15 and its only 11:45)

Reply

Bio

The Physics arXiv Blog produces daily coverage of the best new ideas from an online forum called the Physics arXiv on which scientists post early versions of their latest ideas. Contact me at KentuckyFC @ arxivblog.com

Subscribe to the arXiv blog RSS Feed

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement