I have insisted quantum entanglement could not be used for communication since the same state of two particles, being just the same particle in two places at once cannot one send and the other receive as if the information stream were being sent via a tunnel or wire.
It didn't occur to me to use the particle itself in two places at once as a binary base2 switch 0|1 [on | off] switch for something like Morse Code. It has been illustrated with "Alice" and "Bob" that when Alice changed the state of her particle A, Bob's same state of the same particle A would change state instantaneously with her having changed states even if the particle (singular) were separated by the width of the universe itself. That is communication . . . secure communication! Alice keeps doing it (changing the state of particle A), dot - dot - dot- dash - dot, (whatever, I don't know Morse code) she is communicating with Bob. When done, Bob changes the state of particle A (the same particle) on his end, dot - dash - dash, dot (whatever), and Alice has received communication from Bob.
Now the only problem would be making sure that same particle A in two different places in the universe were (plural) always being kept in an identical environment unaffected by differing outside influences, forcing particle A into states B and C respectively (no longer the same particle in two places at once but now two distinct particles in two places), annihilating Alice and Bob's ability to use it for communication.
Now what if Alice and Bob had a host of the same particles A, particles B, particles C.... to communicate with. They have a computer now, exactly the single same computer, in two or more places separated universe wide at once.
Get enough quantum entangled particles working in the system, you'd have a networked system of quantum entangled computers instantaneously communicating with others around the universe . . . just as long as the same one didn't try to communicate with itself at the same time from two places at once. Or two of them with a third, whatever . . . they would have to get in line, one at a time communicating by [0 | 1] or [on | off], whatever, switching (and only with themselves in two or more places at once . . . meaning two or more computers, or fractal setups, in every shop).
It didn't occur to me to use the particle itself in two places at once as a binary base2 switch 0|1 [on | off] switch for something like Morse Code. It has been illustrated with "Alice" and "Bob" that when Alice changed the state of her particle A, Bob's same state of the same particle A would change state instantaneously with her having changed states even if the particle (singular) were separated by the width of the universe itself. That is communication . . . secure communication! Alice keeps doing it (changing the state of particle A), dot - dot - dot- dash - dot, (whatever, I don't know Morse code) she is communicating with Bob. When done, Bob changes the state of particle A (the same particle) on his end, dot - dash - dash, dot (whatever), and Alice has received communication from Bob.
Now the only problem would be making sure that same particle A in two different places in the universe were (plural) always being kept in an identical environment unaffected by differing outside influences, forcing particle A into states B and C respectively (no longer the same particle in two places at once but now two distinct particles in two places), annihilating Alice and Bob's ability to use it for communication.
Now what if Alice and Bob had a host of the same particles A, particles B, particles C.... to communicate with. They have a computer now, exactly the single same computer, in two or more places separated universe wide at once.
Get enough quantum entangled particles working in the system, you'd have a networked system of quantum entangled computers instantaneously communicating with others around the universe . . . just as long as the same one didn't try to communicate with itself at the same time from two places at once. Or two of them with a third, whatever . . . they would have to get in line, one at a time communicating by [0 | 1] or [on | off], whatever, switching (and only with themselves in two or more places at once . . . meaning two or more computers, or fractal setups, in every shop).
Last edited:
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram