Can someone explain to me how Quantum teleportation works ?

>>8274869
It doesn't

I believe you mean Quantum Entanglement, and yeah, I'm also kinda stuck. So, bumping for interest.

The possible locations that matter can occupy are a factor of the amount of matter and Planck length. Matter can exist as a possibly cloud that condenses when observed. The cloud is smaller for larger and more massive quantities of matter. For something very small, the cloud is large enough to allow it to extend beyond a container that would normally keep larger particles within it. Sometimes the cloud condenses outside the container. That is quantum tunneling.

you tape two coins together, shake them around then blindly separate them and give to two people.
if you look at your coin and its heads, then you know the other guy has heads too (or tails, depending on how they were initially taped together)
if you perform the same operation on both the correlation of results is preserved ("i count to 3 and then we turn our coins 90° on the x-axis" will end up in both on the edge)

but they arent connected by an invisible magical rod that preserves their orientation, if you flip your coin, the other one is not gonna bulge and the correlation is broken, unless you call the other guy (limited by the speed of light) and tell him to flip his over too

>>8274876
it totally does my man

>>8274876
https://www.fas.org/sgp/eprint/teleport.pdf

http://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/view_group.php?id=2862

http://www.cnet.com/news/scientists-achieve-reliable-quantum-teleportation-for-the-first-time/

http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~schmuel/papers/Aetal98.pdf

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v429/n6993/full/nature02570.html
Also:
teleportation =/= entanglement

>>8274869
nothing gets teleported, in the sense that the"something" you are thinking of is probably matter.

what gets exchanged is information about the state of the matter involved.

a simple analogy is I take you and your sister and put them in a box. Then I shake the box so you get real acquainted, and then put a divider inside splitting you two. Then I move each half of the box to different rooms. At this point, I remove all of your clothes and rape you.

If I then go into the other room and open your sisters box, I will see that she has also been fucked.

Its a win win, OP.

>>8275064
see
>>8275055
>teleportation =/= entanglement

Although the name is inspired by the teleportation commonly used in fiction, there is no relationship outside the name, because quantum teleportation concerns only the transfer of information. Quantum teleportation is not a form of transportation, but of communication; it provides a way of transporting a qubit from one location to another, without having to move a physical particle along with it. However, quantum teleportation of particles has been theorized to also be possible, and to perhaps be an explanation for the teleportation-like effects seen in superconductivity and superfluidity.

>>8275100
> Quantum teleportation is not a form of transportation, but of communication
how do you communicate without transporting the information from one place to another dummy ?

>>8275126
see
>>8275055

File: drawing[1].png (123KB, 1500x820px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1500x820px

>>8275126
You are aware of the double slit experiment? Where you put light through a double slit and it miraculously creates either an interference pattern or just two slits of light, depending on whether you try to observe which slit the light goes through? It appears that the light goes through both slits as a wave, so long as you don't rig the slits with gear to detect which slit the light goes though.

If you do rig the slits, the light wave collapses into a single particle, a photon, and only goes through one slit at a time. Scientists have tried to rig this experiment to trick the universe into revealing which slit the light goes through AFTER the light has gone through the slits. They do this by diffracting the light through a crystal, which slits photons into entangled pairs that are each half as energised as the original photon. On photon is sent to the board to create a pattern, while the other is set to hit a detector BEHIND the board, via the use of mirrors. It turns out that even when doing this, the universe knows that you are observing the photons, and seems to retroactively change the pattern on the board to fit this.

In other words, quantum entangled particles have the power to rewrite the past.

>>8275183
Is there any video evidence of the observer effect of the double slit experiment
>In other words, quantum entangled particles have the power to rewrite the past.
0/10 Try harder next time.

>>8275188
I don't know about video evidence, but I do have a journal publication that was made about the phenomenon.

http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9903047v1

And here's a pop science video that explains quantum time traveling for dummies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ORLN_KwAgs

>>8275194
There is zero evidence of any conscious observer effect. This is /x/ tier at best

>>8274876
I came here to post this.
First post best post.

I think a lot of confusion comes from the term "observer", which is admittedly a misleading term.

>>8275198
You are the only one ignoring evidence, here.

>>8275217
>ignoring evidence
There is no evidence retard
Show me the evidence for observer effect. Where is it ?

>>8275252
Resorting to name calling suggests that you are becoming defensive. You don't even know what you want to see. Proof of god? Some kind of "conscious observer"? That was never what anyone wanted to show you. Don't try to make everything about your preconceived notions. What you have been shown is that the universe will react to observation even if the observation hasn't happened yet, but is going to happen.

>>8275276
Thats not an argument, nor evidence for any of your stupid claims.
>>>/x/

>>8275291
It is an argument. You're just ignoring it because you think I'm trying to prove something to you that I'm not. You've been shown a journal publication and a video for dummies. It would have taken you an hour to examine both. Instead you're wasting your time talking to me. I for one hope I'm not wasting my own time trying to explain this to you.

>>8275306
I said I want to see evidence for the 5000th time, with accountable citations from actual academic sources and cross-checkable charts and with video evidence, not a block of text that eventually says "this happened lol"

Don't come back from >>>/x/

>>8275318
Derailing the thread with fake autist comments for the 5000th time tonight? I still don't get what is fun about doing the same troll thing over and over again when it is way more fun to come up with new ones? At least for me anyway.

File: screenshot.png (86KB, 1017x621px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1017x621px

>>8275318
I never came from /x/, and the journal article I gave DOES provide charts, if you'd actually care to read it. It's a pretty famous article that kicked off a lot of follow up research, actually. If you'd read it, you'd understand that a video of the experiment is unnecessary, as that isn't what publications from 1999 tended to do in any case.

>>8275338
>troll thing
I just wanted you to show the evidence of your claims. And you proceeded to spam all kinds of shitposts except for a shred of evidence.

You seem incapable of backing up your paranormal claims with scientific evidence. If you had any evidence, you'd show it by now and there would be a scientific discussion already, but there isn't.
And because of that, you belong to >>>/x/

>>8275343
No you dont want evidence. You already have ignored everything and you will keep doing this. You just want to spam your >>>/x/ posts, because thats your idea of "epic trolling".

>>8275354
Point me to that evidence with academic sources, cross-referenced charts and video evidence. Since you claim to have posted your evidence, I must have missed that. Let's see it.

>>8275369
You are being ignorant and you know it. That makes you a troll.

>>8275369
>>8275194

>>8275377
>show me your evidence
>y-you are being ignorant
typical /x/tard backpedalling when asked for evidence
>>>/x/

>>8275379
For the 5000000000000000th time, I want video evidence of the observer effect experiment, cross-checkable charts and academic citations. Your "evidence" has none of them. Youtube videos with slideshows are NOT evidence for fucks sake.

>>>/x/

>>8274869
I don't know anon. Maybe you should go ask >>>/x/.

>>8275394
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9903047v1

Also, litarally every textbook on quantum mechanics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

>>8275405
Link me to the video evidence of the observer experiment you fucking retard. Can you read the words of my posts ? We all know the wikipedia page on double slit, thats not what I asked.

Show. The. Video. Evidence. Of. The. Observer. Effect.

Fucking /x/tards are dumber than usual lately. Fuck knows what they're smoking.

>>8275410
What video evidence? Footage of what exactly? If scientific studies, a well established theory and decades of scientific experiments dont convince you, I cant help you

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_(physics)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_(quantum_physics)

>>8275423
>I have evidence
>You don't want evidence
>You are being ignorant
and now
>What video evidence ?
There it is. You sure clinged on to your shitposting hard enough.

>posting wiki links again.
Yeah we all know these links. Reposting something else doesn't make you look like a smart ass. You've failed to provide any evidence of your bullshit even though it was so "well established".

Now remain in your cesspool and don't visit any science board again until you learn what evidence means.

>>>/x/

>>8275431
Read these links man. They have your answer and contain lots of evidence, when you follow the references. You got your evidence. You wont get a video.

And again, what video evidence anyway? Since when is video evidence the only valid form of evidence in quantum mechanics? What is it exctly you want footage of? Subatomic particles?

>>8275443
I simultaniously want to see both the recording of the double slit diffraction pattern and the conscious observer recording their observations so I can check those recordings and see if the hypothetical observer effect is real. Ofcourse this would be just one sample so I want to see this experiment repeatedly, all with video evidence.
If this was so well established like earth being round, gravity or electromagnetism, there would be atleast one video evidence. But there isn't.

>>8275489
You know, you bashed and ignoed the wiki links. But you should honestly read them. You seem to be one of those people desribed by this anon:
>>8275209

So please check
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_(physics)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_(quantum_physics)

>>8275502
How many times do you need to hear this ? We're all aware of the links. We know what observer effect stands for. But we can't see any evidence of it for some reason.

Right nwo your claim is on par with the miracles of Jesus. There are tons of papers about it, just not any evidence.

>>8275519
You arent aware of those links apparently, since you keep talking gibberish. Open the links and actually read it