Jump to content

What is impossible???


SkepticLance
 Share

Recommended Posts

1) quantum teleportation has been done.

 

2) I'm just going to say wormholes are really rather speculartive atm, I wouldn't like to go eitehr way on them...

 

3) The earth does in no way move perpetually, our orbit is constantly changing, perpetual motion is not possible. In teleportation methods which have been used up to this point the original object has ALWAYS been completely "destroyed".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

To farsight

 

Believe it or not, teleportation is not only possible, but has been achieved. It is a consequence of the quantum physics property of entanglement. So far, the only teleportation that has occurred has been a photon or two, or an atom or two. However, with advancing technology, there is no reason in theory why larger objects cannot be teleported.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2049048.stm

 

The Earth's movement through space is not a perpetual motion machine. It continues because no energy is being removed from its movement. A machine, by definition, does work. This means that energy is extracted. If the Earth's movement was used as a machine (meaning that energy is removed), the movement would slow down, and eventually the Earth would spiral into the sun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Swanson.

 

Believe it or not, teleportation is not only possible, but has been achieved. It is a consequence of the quantum physics property of entanglement. So far, the only teleportation that has occurred has been a photon or two, or an atom or two. However, with advancing technology, there is no reason in theory why larger objects cannot be teleported.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2049048.stm

I'm sorry Skeptic, but quantum teleportation is just a fancy name for what is in essence is a fax machine. It doesn't really send an atom from A to B.

 

The Earth's movement through space is not a perpetual motion machine. It continues because no energy is being removed from its movement. A machine, by definition, does work. This means that energy is extracted. If the Earth's movement was used as a machine (meaning that energy is removed), the movement would slow down, and eventually the Earth would spiral into the sun.
Sure, that's why I said there is no free lunch. But think about tidal power. The moon causes tides. We can extract energy from those tides. And the moon's orbit is increasing anyway. OK, it isn't a conventional "over unity" perpetual motion machine, but this simple example is enough to make me say a perpetual motion machine is a darn sight less impossible than teleportation. I reiterate that the energy has to come from somewhere, even if that somewhere is not obvious.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To swansont and farsight

 

Quantum teleportantion is NOT about simply transmitting information. I can do that with mirrors and morse code. Teleportation involves dematerialising something and rematerialising it at another point. It can be done. It has been done.

 

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/08/0818_040818_teleportation.html

 

Sure, at this stage, it is simply photons or an atom. However, the theory admits the probability of using exactly the same process to teleport larger objects. This is exceedingly difficult, and we are unlikely to be able to teleport anything larger than a virus for at least 100 years. But there is no theoretical reason why objects larger than photons or atoms cannot be teleported.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

 

I'm sorry Skeptic, but quantum teleportation is just a fancy name for what is in essence is a fax machine. It doesn't really send an atom from A to B.

 

Sure, that's why I said there is no free lunch. But think about tidal power. The moon causes tides. We can extract energy from those tides. And the moon's orbit is increasing anyway. OK, it isn't a conventional "over unity" perpetual motion machine, but this simple example is enough to make me say a perpetual motion machine is a darn sight less impossible than teleportation. I reiterate that the energy has to come from somewhere, even if that somewhere is not obvious.

 

Farsight, are you saying that at this very moment I am teleporting my hands across this keyboard?

 

Teleportation evidently has more than one meaning, and your perception-if probably closer to the original concept than anything else here-seems essentialy to be the common travel we undertake at every moment of our lives, in some form or another, though the subject is dismantled for the sake of speed(please correct me if I am wrong).

 

This manner of doing so would be utterly illogical, as one would have to transmitt the matter, and the information to assemble it. And there is the fact you would lose matter whilst it was journeying (at sub-light speeds). Simply sending the data to recreate an object using matter at the destination would be far more efficient. And it would have the same effect, allowing subjects to 'travel' across vast distances at speed, whilst being in such a state as would allow immense speed. So, again, more than one meaning, more than one perception.

 

Perpetual motion-Are you simply refering to renewable energy? Perpetual motion is impossible, as for anything to do work it must come into contact with something else, which will cause it to lose E.

Perhaps you could totally isolate a single body from any other, and their gravatational effects in order to preserve a constant E level, but it would be of no use , and would still radiate E.

 

Feel free to point out anywhere I may have been a bit hazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To swansont and farsight

 

Quantum teleportantion is NOT about simply transmitting information. I can do that with mirrors and morse code. Teleportation involves dematerialising something and rematerialising it at another point. It can be done. It has been done.

 

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/08/0818_040818_teleportation.html

 

Sure, at this stage, it is simply photons or an atom. However, the theory admits the probability of using exactly the same process to teleport larger objects. This is exceedingly difficult, and we are unlikely to be able to teleport anything larger than a virus for at least 100 years. But there is no theoretical reason why objects larger than photons or atoms cannot be teleported.

 

No. Mirrors and Morse code don't involve involve information about quantum states. You detect a photon or not, but you don't send information about its polarization.

 

From your article —

"Teleportation involves dematerializing an object at one point and transferring the precise details of its configuration to another location, where the object is then reconstructed."

 

That's the journalist interpretation, so it's simplified. It's the information that is sent — that's what is meant by the "precise details of its configuration" means. If you have something on the other end, you can put it in the same state. If it's photons, you can create them, but if it's atoms, you have to have them there, at the ready, and the "teleportation" puts them in the same state. It's really unfortunate that Star Trek gets mentioned in most of the popular science articles.

 

The trick here is that classical transmission of quantum information is limited to 50% fidelity for atoms and 67% for photons. If you don't know the state ahead of time, you don't know what measurement basis to use, and you can't recreate the state. Over the long haul, you'll get the numbers already mentioned. Quantum teleportation means you can, in principle, get the information with 100% fidelity.

 

But it's all information. No matter is transported. Don't rely on journalists writing popular science articles to tell you what's going on.

 

In this blog post I link to an interview with Jeff Kimble, who does this kind of atomic physics.

 

Scientific American: What's the biggest misconception about teleportation?

Jeff Kimble: That the object itself is being sent. We're not sending around material stuff. If I wanted to send you a Boeing 757, I could send you all the parts, or I could send you a blueprint showing all the parts, and it's much easier to send a blueprint. Teleportation is a protocol about how to send a quantum state—a wave function—from one place to another.

 

(emphasis added)

 

Sure, that's why I said there is no free lunch. But think about tidal power. The moon causes tides. We can extract energy from those tides. And the moon's orbit is increasing anyway. OK, it isn't a conventional "over unity" perpetual motion machine, but this simple example is enough to make me say a perpetual motion machine is a darn sight less impossible than teleportation. I reiterate that the energy has to come from somewhere, even if that somewhere is not obvious.

 

If the energy comes from somewhere it's not a perpetual motion machine. That doesn't violate the first law of thermodynamics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Farsight, are you saying that at this very moment I am teleporting my hands across this keyboard?
No. You're just moving them.

 

Teleportation evidently has more than one meaning, and your perception - if probably closer to the original concept than anything else here - seems essentialy to be the common travel we undertake at every moment of our lives, in some form or another, though the subject is dismantled for the sake of speed (please correct me if I am wrong).
No, teleportation is where you go from A to C without having to go through B. Here, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleportation where it says Teleportation is the movement of objects from one place to another, more or less instantaneously, without traveling through space. The concept has been widely used in science fiction. It should not be confused with quantum teleportation. Follow the link on quantum teleportation and it says Quantum teleportation or entanglement-assisted teleportation is a quantum protocol by which quantum information can be transmitted utilizing a classical communication channel... Hence my "fax machine" remark.

 

This manner of doing so would be utterly illogical, as one would have to transmitt the matter, and the information to assemble it. And there is the fact you would lose matter whilst it was journeying (at sub-light speeds). Simply sending the data to recreate an object using matter at the destination would be far more efficient. And it would have the same effect, allowing subjects to 'travel' across vast distances at speed, whilst being in such a state as would allow immense speed. So, again, more than one meaning, more than one perception.
The teleportation you're talking about isn't actually teleportation. The original object hasn't been sent anywhere at all. It hasn't travelled an inch. I could send the data to three destinations and make multiple copies. Then I could make more multiple copies. Limiting myself to one copy along with the destruction of the original doesn't mean it's been "teleported" to the destination.

 

Perpetual motion - are you simply referring to renewable energy? Perpetual motion is impossible, as for anything to do work it must come into contact with something else, which will cause it to lose E. Perhaps you could totally isolate a single body from any other, and their gravatational effects in order to preserve a constant E level, but it would be of no use , and would still radiate E.
Yes, I suppose so. You could call it "free" energy. It comes from somewhere, but it isn't immediately obvious. For example think of a car that doesn't need fuel. I'm not saying that this is actually doable. Instead I'm saying it' a whole lot more feasible than teleportation. And it's a lot closer to the spirit of a perpetual motion machine, than quantum teleportation is to the spirit of the teleportation of science fiction.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, teleportation is where you go from A to C without having to go through B. Here, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleportation where it says Teleportation is the movement of objects from one place to another, more or less instantaneously, without traveling through space. The concept has been widely used in science fiction. It should not be confused with quantum teleportation. Follow the link on quantum teleportation and it says Quantum teleportation or entanglement-assisted teleportation is a quantum protocol by which quantum information can be transmitted utilizing a classical communication channel... Hence my "fax machine" remark.

 

The fax machine analogy, while not a bad start, still falls short (one issue being what the analogy was intended to address. It's a good analogy for the "not sending the original" aspect of the situation). The subtle point about quantum teleportation is that it transmits quantum-mechanical information, which you can't do classically any better than 50-50 (for atoms). It would be as if you were faxing but putting the paper in facing a random direction (i.e. face-up or face-down), because you aren't allowed to look at the paper — half the time the writing doesn't get transmitted. Quantum teleportation is a way of sending the information no matter which way the paper is facing. (and even this addition to the analogy still doesn't explain the whole issue, which is the trouble with analogies. One has to know when they stop being analogies.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To swansont and farsight

 

I see now that we are arguing semantics. You use a different definition of teleportation to the one I use. You assume that teleportation involves sending the actual object. That is not so. However, the end result is the exact equivalent of sending the object.

 

If a molecule is teleported (not yet achieved, but it will be), then the end result is a molecule in a new location that is absolutely identical in every way to the original. This is exactly the same as if we had teleported the molecule, which makes your distinction somewhat meaningless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arthur Clarke once wrote what I think is the definitive essay on this subject. He listed the things that were logically impossible from those that were technologically difficult.

 

I think ‘time travel’ was the most contentious.

 

But I think that what is technologically possible is limited mostly by the time humans have to achieve it. That is, I agree, pretty much anything is possible, if ‘we’ ‘live’ long enough.

 

If we can ‘smoothly’ continue for 200 years… I think we’ll, well, be in another world. Fusion. Quantum mechanics, zero-point energy, bio-you-name it….

 

But will we.

 

 

 

(YT2095, I'll just assume there's an infraction in there somewhere. You don't have to bother issuing me a private, secret "don't say what I don't like" notice. Again.

 

(Oh, but wait, me, saying this, is an infraction (which of course it is)).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

..Quantum teleportation is a way of sending the information no matter which way the paper is facing. (and even this addition to the analogy still doesn't explain the whole issue, which is the trouble with analogies. One has to know when they stop being analogies.)
I haven't told you the details swanson, but I've broken quantum mechanics. It's all classical after all. There's no multiverse. Things don't pop into existence just because you look at them. There is zero chance that a baseball can materialise on the other side of a brick wall. Strong stuff I know, hard to believe, but I'm not fooling.

 

If a molecule is teleported (not yet achieved, but it will be), then the end result is a molecule in a new location that is absolutely identical in every way to the original. This is exactly the same as if we had teleported the molecule, which makes your distinction somewhat meaningless.
And then when we also "teleport" it to another new location? And another? And another? And that molecule is one of a billion that is me? I'm sorry Skeptic, I think we'll just have to agree to differ on this one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To swansont and farsight

 

I see now that we are arguing semantics. You use a different definition of teleportation to the one I use. You assume that teleportation involves sending the actual object. That is not so. However, the end result is the exact equivalent of sending the object.

 

The opposite, actually. At no point did I claim that any material object was moved. It's all information.

 

If a molecule is teleported (not yet achieved, but it will be), then the end result is a molecule in a new location that is absolutely identical in every way to the original. This is exactly the same as if we had teleported the molecule, which makes your distinction somewhat meaningless.

 

Not really. If you want to teleport a water molecule, you need to have a water molecule at the far end, into/onto which you can imprint the information. The molecule isn't created out of thin air, and the original molecule isn't destroyed. Nothing materializes, nothing dematerializes in this instance.

 

 

————

 

 

Mod note:

Discussion on QM has been moved http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=32884

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the statement "nothing is impossible" is a paradox.

 

if nothing is impossible, then it is in fact impossible to have anything which is impossible, which makes something impossible, therefore the original statement breaks down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. You're just moving them.

 

No, teleportation is where you go from A to C without having to go through B. Here, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleportation where it says Teleportation is the movement of objects from one place to another, more or less instantaneously, without traveling through space. The concept has been widely used in science fiction. It should not be confused with quantum teleportation. Follow the link on quantum teleportation and it says Quantum teleportation or entanglement-assisted teleportation is a quantum protocol by which quantum information can be transmitted utilizing a classical communication channel... Hence my "fax machine" remark.

 

I just realized that in my previous response I omitted a bit: we're discussing quantum teleportation. It has a specific definition, which is not the one where you're moving bits of matter around (that's the Star Trek definition). I thought that point had been made clear several posts earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much everything is impossible, if you throw a ball, it will follow a specific trajectory. There's nearly an infinite number of possible trajectories, but it will always follow the same path given the exact same conditions (...and ignoring quantum physics). Human mothers give birth to human, not insects or solar systems, T. Rex won't fly, the moon can't talk, et cetera...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.