It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: dragonridr
I'm starting to think I'm debating one person with several accounts because when one account gets stumped here comes one of the other accounts asking the same questions that either have nothing to do with what I'm saying or have been asked and answered. So until I see one of these accounts ask something new or something that actually pertains to what I said, I'll just say.
originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: GetHyped
I can keep going because it's obvious that you or anyone else can't refute what I'm saying. If I heard an answer that just said:
This would be prohibited because of x and it didn't have to do with spin or Alice and Bob communicating faster than light in order to see if there's correlation, then I'm fine with moving on.
For instance, if someone said you can send useful information faster than light on spin, a person would say that's prohibited because Alice or Bob can't control which measurement will occur so they will each just get random, useless information.
Just explain why this would be prohibited when Alice or Bob are not sending useful information on any 1 of the 3 channels.
In my set up, tell me, which one of the 3 channels would be sending useful information? The answer, NONE!!!
On Bob's end, he's seeing 3 channels that are strongly correlated. This has been established by Bob and Alice when they're setting up the FTL network. Now Alice wants to sent Bob 011 and breaks entanglement on her end. What will Bob see?
A random increase of noise in the first channel compared to the other two channels where entanglement wasn't broken and you still have a strong signal.
You're not sending any useful information on any one of the 3 channels. It's only useful information to Bob as he's looking at all 3 channels.
It has nothing to do with what you're saying because natataylor understands how entanglement works and you don't.
originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: nataylor
Again, this has NOTHING to do with what I'm saying. This is why I keep asking you to explain how this will prohibit my set up....
You don't know how the multi-channel system is behaving unless you transmit comparison data at the speed of light. That's what the authors of the paper you reference are doing, and that's why your idea isn't faster than light communication.
The useful information comes from the knowledge of Bob and Alice and how the multi channel system behaves relative to each other.
Instead of using quantum illumination to enhance a measurement, Zhang et al. [1] apply the method to making a secure transmission channel, based on an idea from group leader Jeffrey Shapiro [3]. Suppose Bob controls if the object is present, while Alice has to use her entangled photons to detect it. Upon receiving one photon, Bob encodes a “1” if the object is present and a “0” if it is not. Using the quantum illumination technique, Alice’s measurement of whether Bob sent a “0” or “1” has a high signal to noise. She can therefore determine the presence or absence of the object with confidence, even with low levels of light.
originally posted by: nataylor
a reply to: neoholographic
So your system requires the three channels to be entangled to each other (plus at least one more channel Alice retains in order to be able to break entanglement)?