Re: (Fwd) Re: PHYS: Quantum Teleportation -Reply

Kathryn Aegis (
Thu, 11 Dec 1997 22:29:45 +0000

I forwarded Erik Reid a few choice bits of the conversation going on
re the teleportation, which he enjoyed reading, and he has the
following bit of reply to Wayne Haye's post (and in keeping with
Wayne's lively writing style):

>It is almost certain that the quantum state of a normal, everyday object
>(like a brick, or a human) is completely irrelevant when it comes to
>true teleportation.

Almost, but no cigar for the gentleman. The state of the particle is the
most crucial part of physical properties. Yes, the raw materials must
exist on the other end in order to do the recreation. If you are going to
transport the state of a gold atom from point A to point B, you must have
a gold atom at point B in order to have the state transferred. That's not
even at issue! This is not a particle beam; this is quantum teleportation,
faster-than-light, which means actual material can by definition not be
transported, only information about the material. The state of the
particles creates the larger object. They believe that they'll be able to
transport molecules within 10 years with this method; in that case, you
won't need the molecule at point B, all you'll need is the raw materials of
the molecule to have it recreated. So the gentleman in question should
be informed that he is incorrect. And no, no one is suggesting that we
will have the ability any time soon to do a complete dissection and
recreation of an object, but the fundamental theory is there.

For myself, I think the most exciting part of this is the communcation
aspect more than the object-moving aspect. If we can communicate
planetary or stellar distances instantaneously, bypassing the light-speed
communication barrier, space travel becomes that much more feasible.
(By the way, that is *not* yet possible with this scheme; while the
transfer is FTL, currently light-speed communication has to take place
around it, so we haven't gotten there yet.)