'Unhackable' internet breakthrough as scientists develop new quantum teleportation test to prevent 'eavesdropping'

'Unhackable' internet breakthrough as scientists develop new quantum teleportation test to prevent 'eavesdropping'

Study demonstrated how quantum teleportation could be used to test links
Were able to test photon pairs even in conditions that mimicked the real world
Test reveals if particle has made it through or not, to reveal failures at the get go

By Cheyenne Macdonald For Dailymail.com

Published: 23:58 GMT, 5 January 2018 | Updated: 23:58 GMT, 5 January 2018

A new breakthrough in testing Einstein’s ‘spooky action at a distance’ could soon pave the way for ultra-secure quantum communication.

Scientists have been investigating how pairs of photons can be used to form a link across great distances, in a phenomenon known as quantum entanglement.

It could allow for networks that are essentially ‘unhackable’ – but, losing photons through absorption or scattering as they travel could threaten the security of the system.

In new experiments, researchers have demonstrated how quantum teleportation could be used to overcome the problem, to reveal if the light particle has made it through or not, and exclude any failed links at the get go.

A breakthrough in testing Einstein’s ‘spooky action at a distance’ could pave the way for ultra-secure quantum communication. Scientists have been investigating how pairs of photons can be used to form a link across great distances, in quantum entanglement. Artist's impression

The new study from researchers at Griffith University’s Centre for Quantum Dynamics in Australia demonstrates how pairs of photons, or particles of light, can be tested rigorously even in conditions that mimic those outside of the lab.

Entangled photons create what’s known as a quantum link.

In this state, the actions of one affect the behaviour of the other even across great distances.

And, when sent along a communication channel, these could make for secure networks.

In order confirm that photons in different locations demonstrate what’s known as quantum nonlocality, the researchers developed a demanding new test method using quantum teleportation.

‘Failing the test means an eavesdropper might be infiltrating the network,’ said team leader Professor Geoff Pryde.

‘As the length of quantum channel grows, less and less photons successfully pass through the link, because no material is perfectly transparent and absorption and scattering take their toll.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5240641/Scientists-develop-new-quantum-teleportation-test.html

Isn't quantum computing a scam? There are no entangled photons, are there? So how does quantum computing really work?

.
Hi Lloyd, Is quantum computing a scam? We understand photons can be described with spin waves. Given sufficient technology, spin waves should allow many communications schemes. I assume we'll eventually develop a photon based computer.

In Quantum Entanglement and CHSH Bell Tests, Miles shows that the concept of entanglement (or non-locality) is force at a distance and wrong. Quantum computing based on the idea of entanglement is wrong.  

93. Quantum Entanglement. http://milesmathis.com/entang.html A critique of David Z. Albert's new article at Scientific American, and a mechanical explanation of entanglement. 8pp.

94. Quantum Teleportation? http://milesmathis.com/tele.pdf NO. I show that the current interpretation is fudged in at least three major places. 6pp.

95. CHSH Bell Tests. http://milesmathis.com/chsh.pdf Another bold mathematical cheat from the mainstream, done right under your nose. 3pp.
.

Thanks, Airman. I haven't read many of Miles' papers in the QM and Relativity sections. I guess I'll have to check out some of your links there.

I've discussed "quantum computing" with several top-field researchers and technicians, and have concluded that not only is it not quantum-based at all, it's a marketing ploy and nothing more. It doesn't actually computer anything, but rather just mimics existing transistors using electrons just the same. It's basically useless for most tasks and nowhere near "quantum". They invented "qubits" as some zany, fuzzy-logic type of particle and then ran standard calcs against it.

What they should be doing of course is looking at the photon level, not the electron level. That's why our current CPUs and GPUs get so hot - they're slamming tons of photons into the transistors just to get a few electrons moving to "flip" the switches. Those photons of course emerge as infrared heat, and that's why CPUs are basically stuck below 5GHz at room temperatures. Vastly inefficient.

HowStuffWorks wrote:Today's computers, like a Turing machine, work by manipulating bits that exist in one of two states: a 0 or a 1. Quantum computers aren't limited to two states; they encode information as quantum bits, or qubits, which can exist in superposition. Qubits represent atoms, ions, photons or electrons and their respective control devices that are working together to act as computer memory and a processor. Because a quantum computer can contain these multiple states simultaneously, it has the potential to be millions of times more powerful than today's most powerful supercomputers.

https://computer.howstuffworks.com/quantum-computer1.htm

And...

HowStuffWorks wrote:
This superposition of qubits is what gives quantum computers their inherent parallelism. According to physicist David Deutsch, this parallelism allows a quantum computer to work on a million computations at once, while your desktop PC works on one. A 30-qubit quantum computer would equal the processing power of a conventional computer that could run at 10 teraflops (trillions of floating-point operations per second). Today's typical desktop computers run at speeds measured in gigaflops (billions of floating-point operations per second).

Quantum computers also utilize another aspect of quantum mechanics known as entanglement. One problem with the idea of quantum computers is that if you try to look at the subatomic particles, you could bump them, and thereby change their value. If you look at a qubit in superposition to determine its value, the qubit will assume the value of either 0 or 1, but not both (effectively turning your spiffy quantum computer into a mundane digital computer). To make a practical quantum computer, scientists have to devise ways of making measurements indirectly to preserve the system's integrity. Entanglement provides a potential answer. In quantum physics, if you apply an outside force to two atoms, it can cause them to become entangled, and the second atom can take on the properties of the first atom. So if left alone, an atom will spin in all directions. The instant it is disturbed it chooses one spin, or one value; and at the same time, the second entangled atom will choose an opposite spin, or value. This allows scientists to know the value of the qubits without actually looking at them.

There you have it. "Entanglement provides a potential answer." So they don't have an actual answer, and they don't have actual quantum computing here at all. It's just regular computing with a funny name, selected for marketing purposes. Any and every time you see the word "quantum" in the mainstream, you're being hazed. They don't have a quanta to work with. They don't have the charge field, photons, or stacked spins. They're working with the wrong particles and don't even know it, fumbling in the dark like moles.

As further evidence, we read on:

HowStuffWorks wrote:Qubit Control

Computer scientists control the microscopic particles that act as qubits in quantum computers by using control devices.

• 
  Ion traps use optical or magnetic fields (or a combination of both) to trap ions.
  Optical traps use light waves to trap and control particles.
  Quantum dots are made of semiconductor material and are used to contain and manipulate electrons.
  Semiconductor impurities contain electrons by using "unwanted" atoms found in semiconductor material.
  Superconducting circuits allow electrons to flow with almost no resistance at very low temperatures.

The microscopic particles that "act as qubits", huh? No definition of what those particles might be. And all particles in physics are microscopic, by definition. They're the parts of the nucleus or below. Calling any of these particles "microscopic" is just retarded.

They go on to say that for quantum computing to be actually viable, they'd need a machine capable of handling dozens of qubits, not just 12. So IBM has one that handles 50, and another that does 20, yet they still haven't done anything with these devices. Even the news on the topic is bullshit:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/13/technology/quantum-computing-research.html

That article from 2017 claims that Google or IBM are racing to make the first quantum computer, yet D-Wave and IBM and others have already claimed to have done so, for years. It's just a black hole of garbage tech, and still no faster than our current CPUs/GPUs.

What they should be doing of course is looking at the photon level, not the electron level. That's why our current CPUs and GPUs get so hot - they're slamming tons of photons into the transistors just to get a few electrons moving to "flip" the switches. Those photons of course emerge as infrared heat, and that's why CPUs are basically stuck below 5GHz at room temperatures. Vastly inefficient.

Is there any company in the world who has the courage to research new photon based processors?

Oh, and another thing about the OP. Einstein used to say that action at a distance cannot exist and those who think it does are insane. Newton thought the same, too.

Ciaolo wrote:Is there any company in the world who has the courage to research new photon based processors?

There are many that are working on it, actually, but from the Wiki we can see what a complete mess the theory is, and why we don't have optical computers yet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_computing#Misconceptions,_challenges,_and_prospects

A significant challenge to optical computing is that computation is a nonlinear process in which multiple signals must interact. Light, which is an electromagnetic wave, can only interact with another electromagnetic wave in the presence of electrons in a material,[8] and the strength of this interaction is much weaker for electromagnetic waves, such as light, than for the electronic signals in a conventional computer. This may result in the processing elements for an optical computer requiring more power and larger dimensions than those for a conventional electronic computer using transistors.

To them, light is still a mystery. They don't know what it is, and are stuck in the wave "mechanics" leftover from QM's failures since Bohr and Heisenberg.

Here's an article claiming to tell us why we don't have them just yet:

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/223671-heres-why-we-dont-have-light-based-computing-just-yet

The thing about light is that by atomic standards it’s really very large. In general, the smallest useful wavelength of light for computing has been in the infrared range, around 1000 nm in size, while improvements in silicon transistors have seen them reach and even pass the 10 nm threshold.

Sheer idiocy. The photon is millions of times smaller than the electron, and billions of times smaller than the proton. Note that they mention infrared of course, which we know is the average charge photon.

And from PhysicsWorld, back in 2015:

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2015/oct/26/light-based-quantum-computers-will-come-at-a-great-cost

About 100 billion optical components would be needed to create a practical quantum computer that uses light to process information. That is the conclusion of physicists in the UK, who have calculated how many components are required to make a fault-tolerant linear optical computer. Their comprehensive study found that the total number of required components for a photon-based computer would be at least five orders of magnitude larger than for a matter-based processor.

They are correct in a nutshell, since photons are so much smaller than electrons. No mention of how they get their "five orders of magnitude", but it seems like the tech is too complex for current manufacturing processes, so they've shelved it.

However, at least one company is attempting to use photons in optical arrays inside traditional CPUs as the transfer mechanism, which is much faster than the various current mechanisms including AMD's Infinity Fabric (stupid name, cool tech though).

https://www.pcworld.com/article/3018382/hardware/revolutionary-light-based-photonic-processor-could-lead-to-ultra-fast-data-transfers.html

The big benefit of light-based computing is that it’s faster at transferring data within the space it’s given, with the new chip touting a density of 300 gigabits per second per square millimeter. That’s 10 to 50 times better than traditional electrical microprocessors. Light-based processors also promise to be more energy efficient, as they can transfer data over longer distances without using more power.

So someone at least is making sense out there!

Here's another quantum "theory" that is getting a lot of attention  :

-----------
Riz Virk
www.zenentrepreneur.com —  Startups, Sci Fi, Bitcoin, Consciousness, Space, Venture Capital, Play Labs@MIT, Video Game Pioneer, Indie Films
Jan 14
The Simulation Hypothesis — Why Quantum Physics, AI, and Eastern Mystics Agree We Are In A Video Game

   An MIT trained computer scientist and Silicon Valley video game designer gives 10 reasons for the “Simulation Hypothesis”: that our reality is a simulated, pixelated 3d world where we all have individual xp, levels, and quests run by some giant Artificial Intelligence

....

As a computer scientist and video game designer, I have to admit that this idea is not really that crazy. A civilization that implemented an advanced simulation like ours might be many thousands (even millions) of years ahead of us; it’s not that hard to imagine such a civilization creating much more sophisticated games than we are capable of building today.

As I started to study Quantum Physics and its startling revelations about the nature of “objective” vs. “subjective” reality, I started to wonder again about the idea of a giant multi-player video game. Moreover, as I delved more into the Eastern traditions, particularly Yogic and Buddhist philosophy, I found that their ideas about the nature of the world were actually pretty consistent with the idea that we are living in a simulation.

https://hackernoon.com/the-great-simulation-why-quantum-physics-artificial-intelligence-and-eastern-mystics-all-agree-b6c185213a18