Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Sounds neat, but I'm confused... (Score 1) 220

If you have two entangled qubits separated by a large distance, and you make a measurement on one qubit, the state of the other qubit will change instantaneously. That is to say, the quantum information associated with both of the qubits will change instantaneously over a large distance. You're right in saying that "no actual information is conveyed by that change," if by information you mean classical information-- you certainly couldn't send a message faster than the speed of light. But quantum information is a very different concept.

Comment Re:Sounds neat, but I'm confused... (Score 1) 220

It depends on what kind of information you're talking about, classical information or quantum information. You most certainly cannot sent classical information faster than the speed of light. As for the logic behind this thought experiment, you may want to check out:'s_theorem

Comment Re:Why Are Quantum Interactions Probalistic? (Score 1) 110

Why is subatomic decay probalistic?

The probabilities can derived in MWI using work done by Everett and DeWitt in the '50s and by Deutsch and Wallace in 2007.

quantum computing is based on wishful thinking and ignorance.

Actually, proof of concept experiments have already been done for both Shor's algorithm as well as Grover's algorithm.

Slashdot Top Deals

"We shall reach greater and greater platitudes of achievement." -- Richard J. Daley