Two atoms entangled using microwaves for the first time
This is a composite photo of microwave apparatus used in NIST quantum computing experiments. A pair of ions (electrically charged atoms) are trapped by electric fields and manipulated with microwaves inside a glass chamber at the center of the apparatus. The chamber is illuminated by a green light-emitting diode for visual effect. An ultraviolet laser beam used to cool the ions and detect their quantum state is colorized to appear blue. (Y. Colombe/NIST)
Physicists at the National Institute of Standards and Technology have for the first time linked the quantum properties of two separated ions (electrically charged atoms) by manipulating them with microwaves instead of the usual laser beams, suggesting it may be possible to replace an exotic room-sized quantum computing "laser park" with miniaturized, commercial microwave technology similar to that used in smart phones.
Microwaves, the carrier of wireless communications, have been used in past experiments to manipulate single ions. But the NIST group is the first to position microwaves sources close enough to the ionsjust 30 micrometers awayand create the conditions enabling entanglement, a quantum phenomenon expected to be crucial for transporting information and correcting errors in quantum computers.
Described in the August 11 issue of Nature, the experiments integrate wiring for microwave sources directly on a chip-sized ion trap and use a desktop-scale table of lasers, mirrors, and lenses that is only about one-tenth of the size previously required. Low-power ultraviolet lasers are still needed to cool the ions and observe experimental results but might eventually be made as small as those in portable DVD players. Compared to complex, expensive laser sources, microwave components could be expanded and upgraded more easily to build practical systems of thousands of ions for quantum computing and simulations.
"It's conceivable a modest-sized quantum computer could eventually look like a smart phone combined with a laser pointer-like device, while sophisticated machines might have an overall footprint comparable to a regular desktop PC," says NIST physicist Dietrich Leibfried, a co-author of the new paper.
"Although quantum computers are not thought of as convenience devices that everybody wants to carry around, they could use microwave electronics similar to what is used in smart phones. These components are well developed for a mass market to support innovation and reduce costs. The prospect excites us."
Quantum computers would harness the unusual rules of quantum physics to solve certain problemssuch as breaking today's most widely used data encryption codesthat are currently intractable even with supercomputers. A nearer-term goal is to design quantum simulations of important scientific problems, to explore quantum mysteries such as high-temperature superconductivity, the disappearance of electrical resistance in certain materials when sufficiently chilled.
Ions are a leading candidate for use as quantum bits (qubits) to hold information in a quantum computer. Although other promising candidates for qubitsnotably superconducting circuits, or "artificial atoms"are manipulated on chips with microwaves, ion qubits are at a more advanced stage experimentally in that more ions can be controlled with better accuracy and less loss of information.
The same NIST research group previously used ions and lasers to demonstrate many basic components and processes for a quantum computer. In the latest experiments, the NIST team used microwaves to rotate the "spins" of individual magnesium ions and entangle the spins of a pair of ions. This is a "universal" set of quantum logic operations because rotations and entanglement can be combined in sequence to perform any calculation allowed by quantum mechanics, Leibfried says.
In the experiments, the two ions were held by electromagnetic fields, hovering above an ion trap chip consisting of gold electrodes electroplated onto an aluminum nitride backing. Some of the electrodes were activated to create pulses of oscillating microwave radiation around the ions. Radiation frequencies are in the 1 to 2 gigahertz range. The microwaves produce magnetic fields used to rotate the ions' spins, which can be thought of as tiny bar magnets pointing in different directions. The orientation of these tiny bar magnets is one of the quantum properties used to represent information.
Scientists entangled the ions by adapting a technique they first developed with lasers. If the microwaves' magnetic fields gradually increase across the ions in just the right way, the ions' motion can be excited depending on the spin orientations, and the spins can become entangled in the process. Scientists had to find the right combination of settings in the three electrodes that provided the optimal change in the oscillating magnetic fields across the extent of the ions' motion while minimizing other, unwanted effects. The properties of the entangled ions are linked, such that a measurement of one ion would reveal the state of the other.
The use of microwaves reduces errors introduced by instabilities in laser beam pointing and power as well as laser-induced spontaneous emissions by the ions. However, microwave operations need to be improved to enable practical quantum computations or simulations. The NIST researchers achieved entanglement 76 percent of the time, well above the minimum threshold of 50 percent defining the onset of quantum properties, but not yet competitive with the best laser-controlled operations at 99.3 percent.
In addition to improving microwave operations by reducing unwanted ion motion, the NIST team also plans to study how to suppress cross-talk between different information processing zones on the same chip. Different frequencies could be used for logic operations and control of other nearby qubits, for instance. Smaller traps could enable faster operations if unwanted heating can be suppressed, according to the paper.
More information: C. Ospelkaus, U. Warring, Y. Colombe, K.R. Brown, J.M. Amini, D. Leibfried and D.J. Wineland. 2011. Microwave quantum logic gates for trapped ions. Nature. August 11.
Provided by
National Institute of Standards and Technology
-
From lemons to lemonade: Reaction uses carbon dioxide to make carbon-based semiconductor,
32 comments
-
Thioridazine kills cancer stem cells in human while avoiding toxic side-effects of conventional cancer treatments,
3 comments
-
SpaceX private rocket blasts off for space station (Update),
42 comments
-
Climate scientists say they have solved riddle of rising sea,
31 comments
-
SpaceX capsule has 'new car' smell, astronauts say (Update),
2 comments
-
Question about high electric charge.
4 hours ago
-
eyeglasses with smallest chromatic abberation
7 hours ago
-
Linear momentum converted to angular momentum?!
7 hours ago
-
Physics laboratory project - bumpers/crash tests
8 hours ago
-
How to open a winebottle with a shoe
8 hours ago
-
magnetic field from stream of protons
18 hours ago
- More from Physics Forums - Classical Physics
More news stories
Is a classical electrodynamics law incompatible with special relativity?
(Phys.org) -- The laws of classical electromagnetism that were developed in the 19th century are the same laws that scientists use today. They include Maxwell’s four equations along with the Lorentz la ...
Landmark calculation clears the way to answering how matter is formed
(Phys.org) -- An international collaboration of scientists, including Thomas Blum, associate professor of physics, is reporting in landmark detail the decay process of a subatomic particle called a kaon ...
May 25, 2012 |
4.3 / 5 (22) |
48
|
Lying in wait for WIMPs: Researchers seek to dramatically increase sensitivity of Large Underground Xenon detector
Although it's invisible, dark matter accounts for at least 80 percent of the matter in the universe. No one knows what it is, but most scientists would bet on weakly interacting massive particles, or WIMPs.
May 23, 2012 |
4 / 5 (7) |
15
|
Hawaii lab turns laser-powered bubbles into microrobots
(Phys.org) -- A team of scientists from the University of Hawaii are working on microrobots created from bubbles of air in a saline solution. The bubbles take on their title of robots as a laser ...
Sound increases the efficiency of boiling
Scientists at the Georgia Institute of Technology achieved a 17-percent increase in boiling efficiency by using an acoustic field to enhance heat transfer. The acoustic field does this by efficiently removing vapor bubbles ...
May 24, 2012 |
5 / 5 (2) |
2
Nvidia trumpets Tegra 3 phone design wins for 2012
(Phys.org) -- Nvidias competitive war paint has a name, Tegra 3. On the heels of Nvidia announcements about lowering costs of its Tegra 3 processors and Nvidia-enabled tablets running Android Ice Cream ...
Browser wars flare in mobile space
The browser wars are heating up again, but this time the fight is for dominance of the mobile Internet.
Scientist: Evolution debate will soon be history
(AP) -- Richard Leakey predicts skepticism over evolution will soon be history. Not that the avowed atheist has any doubts himself.
Dell tablet leak: 10.1-inch display, two-battery choice
(Phys.org) -- Headline after headline talks about vendors tablets in the wings as likely number-one contenders for the iPad. Such claims have justifiably been taken with a grain of salt, considering ...
Keep food safety in mind this memorial day weekend
(HealthDay) -- Picnics, parades and cookouts are as much a part of Memorial Day weekend as tributes to the United States' war veterans.
Social welfare cuts ultimately come with heavy price, researchers say
(Phys.org) -- Slashing government funding for Medicaid, food stamps and other programs that serve the poor while politically popular with some lawmakers and many conservatives may do more harm ...
Aug 10, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
http://colossalstorage.net
Aug 10, 2011
Rank: 4.5 / 5 (2)
Aug 10, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
as we delve deeper into the quantum universe, we may find that these interactions are not instantaneous. it may take a vastly superior quantum computer to fully (or even come close to) understand(ing) the phenomena of entanglement. maybe proving extra dimensions or string theory or other, even stranger, future theories only hinted at with today's understandings.
Aug 10, 2011
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (3)
If you think about the fact that all particles come from the same faster than light energy substrate, they are all connected intimately. We cant see the connection normally because our instrumentation is not capable.
We have just started learning how to manipulate the aether(entanglement).
Aug 10, 2011
Rank: 2.6 / 5 (5)
Lot's of plausible hypothesis on this one:
Extra dimensions
Complex dimensions
exotic forces previously undescribed
Exotic geometries
Have you ever played Final Fantasy 6?
"The World is Square".
remember? You go off the right side of the screen and come back on the left. You go off the top and come back on the bottom.
There is no "real world" geometrical interpretation of this, even though it corresponds slightly to a torus, it does not represent circular or toroidal geometry. The airship "teleports" from one side of the map to the other.
Even though this makes no sense in the real world, in the game engine, there is a perfectly logical, mathematical algorithm which causes this, and by design.
Point is, order exists, even if it is "nonsense" from our perspective.
or, my favorite:
Misinterpretation
Aug 10, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Just because two particles are at a distance in 3 dimensions doesn't prove they are at a distance in the 4th dimension. If you imagine space as being "folded" through a 4th dimension, then it's possible for the two "entangled" particles to be in physical contact in the 4th dimension, while still being seperated in the 3 dimensions we are familliar with.
Similarly, if you have a piece of paper in 2d, the ends are seperated in the 2d dimensions, events here are at a distance. However, if you roll it up in the 3rd dimension, then your "ends" become co-located, and events are no longer seperated in space.
Therefore, a geometrical interpretation of entanglement between distance particles is that "space-time" between the particles is folded into another dimension, "invisible", along which the particles are in physical contact.
Aug 10, 2011
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (3)
That is, entangled objects sit at opposite ends of an infinitesmally narrow wormhole which is oriented in the 5th dimenion and connects two locations in ordinary space-time.
Think of this as a "straw" passing through an apple, taking a "shortcut" from one side to the other, as an analogy, albeit imperfect analogy.
Since the wormhole has an infinitesmal width, probably planck number, there is only exactly one entrance and exactly one exit.
It either does not exist in ordinary dimensions, or it is so small it cannot be directly observed, but the EFFECTS can be observed, and we mistakenly refer to this effect as "Entanglement"...
Aug 10, 2011
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (3)
There have only been a few entanglement experiments over long distances, and very few experiments of macroscopic nature. All of them have happened on the surface of the earth, within a tiny, tiny fraction of a light-second of one another...
So the distance is negligible compared to cosmic scales of dimension, and the mass is usually a photon, or at most an atom or molecule.
From a cosmic scale, entangling atoms on opposite sides of the planet is insignificant fraction of the length of the dimensions of the universe both in space and time.
It is essentially a "temporary" space axis which exists ONLY between the entangled particles, and as such, requires an insignificant amount of energy to produce, because the distance along that axis is near-zero.
Tunneling can be explained by the same interpretation
Aug 10, 2011
Rank: 2.7 / 5 (3)
After all, if the distance between the particles in the 5th dimension is zero, then the Proton could move "through" the wormhole and end up "inside" the nucleus of the Nickel atom, creating fusion without paying any "costs" of overcoming the nuclear forces...
While this seems exceptionally convenient, there's no good reason it couldn't happen via simple linear motion in the 5th dimension, if the 5th dimension exists...
Aug 10, 2011
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (3)
Anyway, at the rate classical computers are improving, there might not be much real-world benefits from quantum computers.
Once classical computers get to the molecular or atomic scale, it probably won't matter much about anything else nobody knows how to solve at the moment.
They'll probably be able to simulate it on a trillion-core classical computer and figure it out anyway...
Aug 10, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
You can imagine it like the interaction of pair of solitons occurring at the water surface. These solitons can indeed communicate via surface waves - but the underwater waves are in play, too.
Aug 10, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Aug 10, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Aug 11, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Well, no, I wouldn't say that.
The quantum computer can verifiably, at least in theory, solve certain classes of problems in fewer steps.
The issue is whether there's any real-world benefit to that in ordinary circumstances.
Already, signal delay between servers in different locations in the world is becoming a significant fraction of the total processing time it takes between distant computers.
Even if you had magical computers that solved everything in one operation, you'd still have a 0.1335 second signal propagation to circum-navigate the earth on the shortes possible round-trip around the equator...
Let's say if it takes you 5 seconds to load this web page, then even with fairy tale computers you still couldn't get below 0.1335 seconds, which is only an improvement of a factor of 37.5.
Aug 11, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Doesn't even matter in human terms. My computer has 4 processor cores, and each does 2.88 BILLION clock cycles per second.
My human brain would not even notice the difference between the quantum calculaton and the classical calculation, even when N equals a million, because the brain works with millisecond signal propagation delays...
that doesn't make it totally worthless, but seeing as how humans are usually the ones doing input, there's not much room for improvement, since we only do the same old shit with this stuff anyway.
Admittedly, on the SERVER SIDE, the quantum computer would make a huge difference, but on client side it barely even matters, because the useer is usually sitting there reading or doing something else, continued...
Aug 11, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
The CPU alone could be doing 11 billion clock cycles per second, not counting the several-hundred-stream- processors video card, and sound card, but it doesn't really have any instructions unless I hit a key stroke or click a link. It turns out the computer is only doing a handfull of relevant calculations per second in browsing and posting on a forum...
Now if you find a class of problems that a quantum computer can solve through quantum tricks, but that a classical computer cannot solve, then that would be beneficial. however, most of such problesm would only be useful in astrophysics, theoretical physics, meteorology, or in modelling protein folding, nano-machines, or brain chemistry. Normal people will have no use whatsoever for this sort of calculation on a daily basis.
Aug 11, 2011
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (3)
They'd need to improve the resolution of observations and data inputs in both space and time by like 10 or 11 orders of magnitude before quantum calculations would become beneficial for global computer models...The computers are already able to model the weather to a higher resolution than they have instrumentation for input data, so improving the computers will hardly even matter, until they get more types of measurements, more accurate measurements, taken at more weather stations, radars, and buoys, and taken more often in time.
If you quadruple the resolution of measurements in space, and double the resolution in time, and have a computer 8 times more powerful to run it on, it would require 4 times as many weather stations, buoys, radars, weather satellites, etc, and would only provide a marginal, possibly even un-noticeable, improvement to the accuracy and precision of forecasts of severe weather and hurricanes...
Aug 11, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Aug 11, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Such arrangement would allow us to break light speed limit into account of locality and determinism of such communication (you can be never sure with your partner in discussion and/or time, when the signal transmission succeeds). It's normal aspect of longitudinal wave spreading in air too.
Aug 11, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
http://www.youtub...zMGjXDUc
At the case of supernova we would observe the sudden change of CMBR noise intensity and this change would propagate at least 10E 10 faster than the light through our Universe. Such change would appear from all directions at the same moment, so it wouldn't violate the relativistic speed limit for deterministic communication/observation. Such events were already detected at GEO-600 observatory and interpreted like the "holographic noise"
Aug 11, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
You reminded me of a colleague of mine from work. I was sitting programming, and he (a TV repair guy) came to me and said that he really didn't understand what computers really were for because couple of decades ago everything had been done quite OK without them.
I'm sure that as nowadays computers came into every part of our life that quantum computers one day will too. Even if they don't, if that protein folding or nano-machines lead to a cancer cure, a large part of "normal" people will indirectly benefit from those calculations on a daily basis.
Aug 11, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
Of course that would benefit people. That's why I mentioned it.
But you've got to realize most people don't even understand the technology we are using now, not even at the conceptual level, nevermind technical details and programming.
Some of the newest smartphones are already dual core, and like I said, the vast majority of people do nothing but play games or make a telephone call with them.
They don't even do stuff like what I thought of on the SETI article, nobody does, but there's no good reason such a network couldn't be made, with the funds available.
In about 5 years, photonic processors will be available, and regardless of photonics, the electronic computers will be using 6nm transistors, and they'll be in smart phones, and all people will do with them is make phone calls..
Aug 11, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
I have not a failure of imagination, trust me, I know many uses for this technology and computatonal power: Self-Assembling, Self-Replicating, Self-Repairing Robotics.
Entertainment will always find a way to hog processor time with more and more color depth beyond human perception, more frames per second beyond human perception, 3d modeling, and yes, even holograms like in Star Trek, to the limits of the laws of physics.
However, improvements in entertainment really just fall on the category of "Doing the same old thing" with it. There have always been improvements in entertainment, and to be honest, the "improvements" aren't even improvements.
It took Blizzard Entertainment THIRTEEN YEARS, (ok ten years of actual coding, modeling, and tweaking,) to make the sequel to one of their games, and when you turn down the excessive shading and color depth which your brain cannot even percieve anyway, it runs well on a 4 core, 2.88ghz processor.
Aug 11, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
You can now get a 6 core processor at 3.2ghz for $179, which is an 11% improvement in clock speed and a 50% improvement in core count, and this is "only" using a 45nm transistor process, because this technology is actually already about 3 years old.
This does not use several improvements in logic gate technology which were invented in the past year or so, which would instantly make it about 15% faster clock speed, not to mention minaturization itself always seems to make things faster and use less energy...
So they might make a video game one day to humble a 100 core, 10ghz processor, but it would take decades for the programmers to make the thing...
Aug 11, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Double the size of the game engine, and the number of unique enteractions of characters, and you double the difficulty of making the game again...
Well, let's see, I made just 3 doublings, so that would be 8 times more complicated.
So that would take Blizzard 80 years to make using the same technologies and HUMAN processes they used on Starcraft 2.
Humans are manually doing 99.9% of the design and making of stuff, because it is, after all, the human's ideas.
So unless you have an A.I. making games for humans, there's no way companies are going make games of this complexity.
Aug 11, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Not realy since quantum computers are exceedingly efficient at some types calculations which conventional architecture can't handle efficiently (even if we extrapolate Moore's law for a long time to come). Large prime number factorization (cryptography), parsing, large list sorting, ...
On the other hand quantum computing is pretty bad at some other types of calculations which conventional computers excel at (e.g. basic math operations).
The two types have different applications, and we'll likely see a hybrid architecture rather than one making the other obsolete (i.e. we'll probably have computers which has n conventional and m quantum 'cores').
Aug 11, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Aug 11, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Now compare that with the mechanisms that create superconductivity, which comes to mind because it also involves pairing (of electrons, in Cooper pairs). BCS theory says lattice vibrations are the mechanism. Lattice vibrations are a type of oscillation. The mechanisms for cuprates and pnictides remain unclear, but oscillations seem to be involved in both cases (orbits or spins, or both--both being types of oscillations).
So my heretical thesis is this: synchronized or coherent oscilations create all types of superconductivity, just as they create quantum entanglement. My reference is Art Winfree's theory of coupled oscillators, circa 1965, which I have applied in other Physorg posts.
Skeptics may fire when ready.
Aug 11, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Aug 12, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
I realize that, it's pretty obvious.
In fact, existing computers are already a system of many different types of processors, not just the multi-cored cpu everyone thinks about.
Hopefully, we'll have some quantum chips integrated right into the CPU adjacent to each classical processor core, and queried whenever needed.
And see the diamond article where I talked about this, I know about the sqrt(N) returns in QC computing.
http://www.physor...ory.html
It's pretty clear I'm familliar with the concept.
I'm just saying don't expect QC to magically solve all problems.
Aug 15, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Yes. We are 3-d beings with 3-d brains and 3-d instruments in a universe that may possibly have many more dimensions. Peeking into the affects of quantum mechanics seems strange to us, but only because we don't comprehend the universe fully.
...in my opinion.
Aug 16, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
No. The point being: Even though the two may seem linked you cannot know the state until you measure it. So while there seems to be a faster than light 'snapping into a state' at the other end upon measurement of one end you don't know what you'll measure. So you cannot manipulate the information you want to send.
Information transmission has TWO prerequisites:
1) Convey something from A to B
2) Modulate that something at A in a KNOWN way (i.e. imprint information on it)
For entanglement the second prerequisite does not hold. You cannot *force* the particle at A to behave in a way that would *force* the particle at B to behave in the same way without breaking the entanglement.
Aug 16, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
But I am told no, this would not work but I still dont understand why. Care to take a shot?
Aug 16, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Nope - because you cannot tell if a particle is entangled or not. So measuring some at point A won't give you any different/observable/measurable alteration at point B.
Measurement does not alter the state (it only fixes it). To transmit information this way you would have to be able to *alter* a state at point A which then flips the particle into the same state at point B.
But entanglement just says whatever you *measure* at point A will be the same with the entangled particle at point B.
Flipping e.g. the spin of the particle at point A afterwards will have no effect on the particle at point B.
Aug 17, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Aug 17, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
No. What you do to one particle _after_ it is entangled does not get transmitted (if you do anything to it you just break the entanglement). Forcibly flipping the spin of one after the two are separated has no impact on the spin of the other.
Only the entangled state (i.e. the state that the particles are in at the point/time of entanglement) will cause the particles to exhibit identical properties upon measurement.
But in that case you're simply transmitting particles with known state (which is not FTL because the transmission of the particle itself will be at less than c)
Aug 17, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
"When a measurement is made and it causes one member of such a pair to take on a definite value (e.g., clockwise spin), the other member of this entangled pair WILL at any subsequent time BE FOUND to have taken the complementary value (e.g., counterclockwise spin)."
-However,
"If each of two hypothetical experimenters, Alice and Bob, has one of the particles that form an entangled pair, and Alice measures the spin of her particle, the measurement will be entirely UNPREDICTABLE, with a 50% probability of the spin being up or down. And if Bob subsequently measures the spin of his particle, the measurement will be entirely PREDICTABLE..."
-And this predictability is the info that cannot be transmitted from the transmitter to the receiver FTL.
cont
Aug 17, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
"it is impossible to prepare a simultaneous eigenstate for all observables. For example, we cannot prepare a state such that both the position measurement Q(t) and the momentum measurement P(t) (at the same time t) produce "sharp" results; at least one of them will exhibit random behaviour. This is the content of the Heisenberg uncertainty relation."
-Maybe so maybe so.