back to article Quantum internet within grasp as scientists show off entanglement demo

Researchers in the Netherlands have shown they can transmit quantum information via an intermediary node, a feature necessary to make the so-called quantum internet possible. In recent years, scientists have argued that the quantum internet presents a more desirable network for transferring secure data, in addition to being …

  1. steelpillow Silver badge

    Faster than light, not

    Quantum teleportation via entanglement is notorious for taking place instantly, with the information travelling faster than light. Before getting all het up about breaking the laws of physics, it is worth recalling somebody-or-other's theorem that the quantum information cannot be read and interpreted classically until some reference information is received. This reference information is obliged to travel no faster than light - in the present case, the setting-up of the entanglement between Bob and Charlie. In everyday terms, what with the various delays while everybody fiddles around, the connection still works at sublight speed. Still cool, though.

    1. Dimmer

      Re: Faster than light, not

      Quick question.

      Do you still have entanglement when one is located in an object accelerating to the speed of light?

      1. steelpillow Silver badge

        Re: Faster than light, not

        No objects accelerate to the speed of light. Massless bosons (photons) travel at the speed of light, all other particles have rest mass and therefore are doomed to be subluminal ( though some, such as neutrinos, tend to travel so close to lightspeed that we are unable to measure the difference).

        Another way of looking at the inconsistency is to note that for massive particles, velocity is always relative to the observer, whereas entanglement is an absolute property. They are not related in any way.

        1. JimboSmith Silver badge

          Re: Faster than light, not

          Quantum makes my brain hurt!

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Can you split photons into 3?

    You can split photons into 2 lower energy photons, but can you split them into 3? If you can, I can show you why Entanglement is really a bogus filtering effect (your "filter for photons that are successfully entangled", as you put it in that Delft "loophole free proof of entanglement").

    Split a photon into 3, P1,P2,P3. By definition they are entangled, but you always add an extra filtering step before your Bells test... you filter for photons with one or two identical properties ("CheckProperties") as proof of successful entanglement, then you measure the other properties ("ProofProperties") and "hey presto" those are the same, so the act of measuring the properties must have set them, you claim.

    So, we have 3 "successful" entangled photons, filter for the photons such that CheckProperties(P1) == CheckProperties(P2), ok, so now we have the triplet of entangled photons. If entanglement worked as claimed, then P3 is also entangled, and there is no need to filter for CheckProperties(P3) == CheckProperties(P1) or CheckProperties(P3) == CheckProperties(P2), ProofProperties(P3) will equal ProofProperties(P1) and ProofProperties(P2).

    BUT IT WOULD NOT WORK. You would indeed have to filter also for the subset of photons P3 whose CheckProperties(P3) also match CheckProperties(P1) or CheckProperties(P2)....

    You do not set the state of photon (or matter), simply by measuring it, and as if by magic the interactions it had in the past, which now are defined, fix themselves up to work with the newly known state, and in turn, the photons/matter that *those* secondary photons/matter interacted with are also partly know, so they change too, and so on propagating throughout the universe, faster than light, backwards in time.... just because you took a measurement, the universe changed to fix itself such that your result would now be correct. When I put it that way doesn't it sound ridiculous?

    So what's happening?

    You are not measuring the properties of P1, you are measuring the properties of the net effect between detector D1 and the photon P1, between D2 and its photon P2, and between D3 and its photon P3.

    It honestly should be obvious to you, that two oscillatory components form a spin, and 3 form a translational 'waddle' ('velocity'), and that you're ignoring the motions in the detector when assuming those properties are solely properties of the 'entangled' photons. You already know from red shift the detector and photons are some sort of net effect, you are ignore that.

    It is true that P1, P2 and P3 are in a defined connected state, because you split them from 1 photon. But the detectors are *not* in a unified state. When you filter for CheckProperties(p1) == CheckProperties(p2), you are actually filtering for CheckProperties(net(p1,d1)) == CheckProperties(net(p2,d2)), ensuring that the detector's relationship to the photon is the same for P1 and P2.

    The unknown remaining for P3 is D3, or rather net(P3,D3).

    That is why you still need to filter for P3 (as measured by detected D3).


    If you cannot split photons into 3, split them into 2 and 2 again to get P1, P2, P3, and P4. Filter to ensure entanglement for P1 to P2 and P2 to P3, then run your ProofProperties against P4 vs the rest.... it won't work. It's just a bit more complicated, and gives you more room to self-delude.


    You can deduce a lot, if you stop simply parroting the falsehood you learned to parrot. Electric must be an oscillating force, all forces must be oscillating because they take time to propagate, time = oscillations of the underlying field. The universe cannot be uniform, and particles, if you could ever see one, (and not just the net effect between them), would be close to specific orientations in that field. Think of a half spin, the F2 flip of that is from the electric field, not the particle. There cannot be 3 independant dimensions, because the 3 dimensions we preceive are 3 net effects. The underlying single force must propagate infinitely fast (H0), and 'mass' must be a repeating pattern that moves net zero in a field relative to an observer.

    See those particles apparently spinning backwards in time, as observed in a cloud chamber? Merely shutter effects. The net interaction between the oscillating field and particle. Well seriously, did you never question why those go back in time?

    So much is there right in front of you, but first, set aside Schroedinger.

    1. Def Silver badge

      Re: Can you split photons into 3?

      Nurse? I'll have what he's having.

    2. steelpillow Silver badge

      Re: Can you split photons into 3?

      Yes indeed. I assume you mean, can a photon be split into three entangled photons? Based on that, you ask, "So what's happening?"

      For that you must turn to the combined Hamiltonian of the three photons and what happens to it when one of them is measured. And for that you need to understand what a Hamiltonian is and how to manipulate the maths. No. I'm not going to help you there.

      Often, rather than split a quantum, it can be easier to entangle two pre-existing quanta. So you would end up say splitting one photon into Alice and Bob's pair, and then entangling Charlie's with Bob's. That's even if photons are the quanta used to create and store the entangled states, as opposed to just transferring them.

      The key takeaway here is that you are way out of your depth and talking bollocks.

      1. TeeCee Gold badge

        Re: Can you split photons into 3?

        Yes, but it's quantum bollocks, so it's still eligible to have sackfulls of cash chucked at it.

        1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: Can you split photons into 3?

          Especially if you add blockchain, AI and use it for autonomous flying cars.

    3. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: Can you split photons into 3?

      "You can split photons into 2 lower energy photons, but can you split them into 3? If you can..."

      You could have stopped there until you found that answer.

    4. A Non e-mouse Silver badge

      Re: Can you split photons into 3?

      You can split photons into 2...

      The photon is a fundamental particle. That means it can't be split or decomposed.

      1. steelpillow Silver badge

        Re: Can you split photons into 3?

        "The photon is a fundamental particle. That means it can't be split or decomposed."

        Actually, it can. A rare example of our AC getting it right. It only happens spontaneously with very high-energy gamma rays, but a gamma-ray photon can split into two lower-energy photons.

        With the help of some unusual materials it can also go the other way; shine a beam of a certain frequency in, and you get a beam of twice the frequency out.

        In all cases, energy is conserved.

        More generally any fundamental particle can, with sufficient mucking about, be persuaded to become one or more different ones. What else could the LHC create Higgs bosons from, if not from the detritus of the other fundamental particles being fed into it?

      2. dajames Silver badge

        Re: Can you split photons into 3?

        The photon is a fundamental particle. That means it can't be split or decomposed.

        ... except into even-more-fundamental particles, quarks and the like.

        But, no, you can't "split" a photon into two photons, each identical to the first.

        1. This post has been deleted by its author

    5. Pascal Monett Silver badge

      Re: Can you split photons into 3?

      So, where is your PhD-level award-winning paper on this subject ?

  3. HildyJ Silver badge

    Within our grasp

    Quantum, like fusion or AI, always seems to be within our grasp and they have been for years.

    The human mind, let's call it Real Intelligence (RI), is a marvelous thing for generating ideas. But implementing those ideas always seems to be a bit beyond our grasp.

    I am not a scientist, so I can't comment on the significance of these developments (like today's other announcement - using the quantum technique Stimulated Raman Adiabatic Passage in very-long baseline interferometry). But as an observer through the years, I don't expect we will be grasping anything any time soon.

    Still, a pint for the boffins who continue to try and understand what's what.

    1. Richard Boyce

      Re: Within our grasp

      "The human mind, let's call it Real Intelligence (RI), is a marvelous thing for generating ideas. But implementing those ideas always seems to be a bit beyond our grasp."

      If that were true, you wouldn't be using a computer.

      1. nintendoeats Silver badge

        Re: Within our grasp

        I think OP wants people to somehow implement ideas *before* they are well-understood enough to be boring.

      2. HildyJ Silver badge

        Re: Within our grasp - the OP's explanation

        My point was that the phrase 'within our grasp' almost always over promises.

        Computers are a good example. Semiconductors were discovered in the mid 19th century, decades before the electron was discovered. Decades later the transistor was proposed but it would be more decades before one was produced. Integrated circuits followed about a decade later and a decade after that we got the first microprocessor - the Intel 4004 in 1971. Five years later we got Woz's Apple 1 circuit board and in 1977 we got the first real personal computers: the Apple II, the PET 2001 from Commodore Business Machines, and the TRS-80 Model I from Tandy Corporation).

        Implementation of ideas takes time. And, as they say, "There's many a slip 'twixt the cup and the lip."

        But I remain hopeful of eventual success.

    2. Roj Blake

      Re: Within our grasp

      "But as an observer"

      Observers are pretty darn important in QM.

  4. LateAgain

    Over cables?

    Cue the image of trying to untangle the patch panel :-)

    1. Kez

      Re: Over cables?

      Patch panels exhibit many quantum phenomena. My favourite is quantum superposition, whereby a cable can be traced to either of two distinct places each time it is traced (observed).

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Quantum FOMO-dynamics

    "Nonetheless, the promise of moving quantum data around a network securely has such power the US government is determined not to be left out."

    There it is - Quantum FOMOdynamics will keep the funding flowing.

  6. sreynolds Silver badge

    Where do I put my order in for this kit....

    I am guessing that if this makes it way into some kit, I should be looking at around the 2050 mark at least?

  7. Pascal Monett Silver badge

    "the quantum internet 'could become a secure communications network' "

    One question : what does the NSA have to say about that ?

    1. localzuk Silver badge

      Re: "the quantum internet 'could become a secure communications network' "

      Was thinking the same thing. What happens with govt interception and the like? Current governments don't even like normal E2E encryption, let alone a quantum system which would impossible to intercept.

      1. nintendoeats Silver badge

        Re: "the quantum internet 'could become a secure communications network' "

        As I see it, if this technology matures it will be used to build an even more centralized internet than the one we already have. If I understand correctly, this is all physical layer stuff and not inherently secure. Maybe I have not followed the idea.

  8. Big_Boomer

    QNLAICFPAFV, or Skynet for short.

    Quantum Network Linked Artificially Intelligent Cold Fusion Powered Autonomous Flying Vehicles. "You iz Terminated Bruv!" <LOL>

  9. The Oncoming Scorn Silver badge

    Quantum Internet.

    Rapidly utilized for Schrödinger's Cat Videos.

  10. EBG

    can someone who knows about this help ?

    OK - I understand quantum entanglement. In fact I understood it before it started getting called quantum entanglement. (It was the EPR paradox when I were a lad). So the result of observing one half of the entangled subsystem is that it then forces the other half into a known state

    What I've not got my head around, and never seems to be explained, is how you use this for useful information transmission ? Thing is that the outcome of the first observation is random (quantum acausality). You can't decide what state you're forcing the remote half of the system into - you're stuck with whatever you're given.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like

  • Businesses brace for quantum computing disruption by end of decade
    As one expert warns overhype will lead to QC winter. Plus: Mystery Huawei quantum patent surfaces

    While business leaders expect quantum computing to play a significant role in industry by 2030, some experts don't believe the tech is going to be ready for production deployment in the near future.

    The findings, from a survey titled "2022 Quantum Readiness" commissioned by consultancy EY, refer to UK businesses, although it is likely that the conclusions are equally applicable to global organizations.

    According to EY, 81 percent of senior UK executives expect quantum computing to have a significant impact in their industry within seven and a half years, with almost half (48 percent) believing that quantum technology will begin to transform industries as soon as 2025.

    Continue reading
  • This startup says it can glue all your networks together in the cloud
    Or some approximation of that

    Multi-cloud networking startup Alkira has decided it wants to be a network-as-a-service (NaaS) provider with the launch of its cloud area networking platform this week.

    The upstart, founded in 2018, claims this platform lets customers automatically stitch together multiple on-prem datacenters, branches, and cloud workloads at the press of a button.

    The subscription is the latest evolution of Alkira’s multi-cloud platform introduced back in 2020. The service integrates with all major public cloud providers – Amazon Web Services, Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure, and Oracle Cloud – and automates the provisioning and management of their network services.

    Continue reading
  • McKinsey thinks quantum computing could create $80b in revenue ... eventually
    Figure is 'value at stake' but 'not the actual value' which itself is a quantum statement

    In the hype-tastic world of quantum computing, consulting giant McKinsey & Company claims that the still-nascent field has the potential to create $80 billion in new revenue for businesses across industries.

    It's a claim McKinsey has repeated nearly two dozen times on Twitter since March to promote its growing collection of research diving into various aspects of quantum computing, from startup and government funding to use cases and its potential impact on a range of industries.

    The consulting giant believes this $80 billion figure represents the "value at stake" for quantum computing players but not the actual value that use cases could create [PDF]. This includes companies working in all aspects of quantum computing, from component makers to service providers.

    Continue reading
  • AWS buys before it tries with quantum networking center
    Fundamental problems of qubit physics aside, the cloud giant thinks it can help

    Nothing in the quantum hardware world is fully cooked yet, but quantum computing is quite a bit further along than quantum networking – an esoteric but potentially significant technology area, particularly for ultra-secure transactions. Amazon Web Services is among those working to bring quantum connectivity from the lab to the real world. 

    Short of developing its own quantum processors, AWS has created an ecosystem around existing quantum devices and tools via its Braket (no, that's not a typo) service. While these bits and pieces focus on compute, the tech giant has turned its gaze to quantum networking.

    Alongside its Center for Quantum Computing, which it launched in late 2021, AWS has announced the launch of its Center for Quantum Networking. The latter is grandly working to solve "fundamental scientific and engineering challenges and to develop new hardware, software, and applications for quantum networks," the internet souk declared.

    Continue reading
  • Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise adds Wi-Fi 6E to 'premium' access points
    Company claims standard will improve performance in dense environments

    Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise is the latest networking outfit to add Wi-Fi 6E capability to its hardware, opening up access to the less congested 6GHz spectrum for business users.

    The France-based company just revealed the OmniAccess Stellar 14xx series of wireless access points, which are set for availability from this September. Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise said its first Wi-Fi 6E device will be a high-end "premium" Access Point and will be followed by a mid-range product by the end of the year.

    Wi-Fi 6E is compatible with the Wi-Fi 6 standard, but adds the ability to use channels in the 6GHz portion of the spectrum, a feature that will be built into the upcoming Wi-Fi 7 standard from the start. This enables users to reduce network contention, or so the argument goes, as the 6GHz portion of the spectrum is less congested with other traffic than the existing 2.4GHz and 5GHz frequencies used for Wi-Fi access.

    Continue reading
  • Cloudflare explains how it managed to break the internet
    'Network engineers walked over each other's changes'

    A large chunk of the web (including your own Vulture Central) fell off the internet this morning as content delivery network Cloudflare suffered a self-inflicted outage.

    The incident began at 0627 UTC (2327 Pacific Time) and it took until 0742 UTC (0042 Pacific) before the company managed to bring all its datacenters back online and verify they were working correctly. During this time a variety of sites and services relying on Cloudflare went dark while engineers frantically worked to undo the damage they had wrought short hours previously.

    "The outage," explained Cloudflare, "was caused by a change that was part of a long-running project to increase resilience in our busiest locations."

    Continue reading
  • Cisco execs pledge simpler, more integrated networks
    Is this the end of Switchzilla's dashboard creep?

    Cisco Live In his first in-person Cisco Live keynote in two years, CEO Chuck Robbins didn't make any lofty claims about how AI is taking over the network or how the company's latest products would turn networking on its head. Instead, the presentation was all about working with customers to make their lives easier.

    "We need to simplify the things that we do with you. If I think back to eight or ten years ago, I think we've made progress, but we still have more to do," he said, promising to address customers' biggest complaints with the networking giant's various platforms.

    "Everything we find that is inhibiting your experience from being the best that it can be, we're going to tackle," he declared, appealing to customers to share their pain points at the show.

    Continue reading
  • D-Wave opens up access to small-scale Advantage2 quantum computer
    Via a cloud subscription, natch – this is the 2020s

    D-Wave Systems has put its next-generation Advantage2 quantum computer into the cloud, or at least some form of it.

    This experimental machine will be accessible from D-Wave's Leap online service, we're told. We first learned of the experimental system last year when the biz revealed its Clarity Roadmap, which includes plans for a gate-model quantum system. Advantage2 sports D-Wave's latest topology and qubit design that apparently increases connectivity and aims to deliver greater performance by reducing noise.

    "By making the Advantage2 prototype available in the Leap quantum cloud service today, the company is providing an early snapshot for exploration and learning by developers and researchers," D-Wave said in a canned statement.

    Continue reading
  • PCIe 7.0 pegged to arrive in 2025 with speeds of 512 GBps
    Although PCIe 5.0 is just coming to market, here's what we can expect in the years ahead

    Early details of the specifications for PCIe 7.0 are out, and it's expected to deliver data rates of up to 512 GBps bi-directionally for data-intensive applications such as 800G Ethernet.

    The announcement from the The Peripheral Component Interconnect Special Interest Group (PCI SIG) was made to coincide with its Developers Conference 2022, held at the Santa Clara Convention Center in California this week. It also marks the 30th anniversary of the PCI-SIG itself.

    While the completed specifications for PCIe 6.0 were only released this January, PCIe 7.0 looks to double the bandwidth of the high-speed interconnect yet again from a raw bit rate of 64 GTps to 128 GTps, and bi-directional speeds of up to 512 GBps in a x16 configuration.

    Continue reading
  • Wireless kit hit by supply chain woes in Q1, China lockdowns blamed
    Backlogs reportedly 10 to 15 times greater than they were pre-pandemic

    The Wireless LAN market was battered by a choppy supply chain in the first quarter of 2022 and lockdowns in China are compounding the problem, according to analysis by Dell'Oro Group.

    Many organizations have scheduled network upgrades, but supply is not able to keep pace with demand and backlogs are reportedly 10 to 15 times greater than they were pre-pandemic.

    Several manufacturers have cited components from second and third-tier suppliers as the cause of the bottleneck, Dell'Oro said, which means that the problem may not be a shortage of Wi-Fi silicon, but rather of secondary components that are nevertheless necessary to make a complete product.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022