Inside the Quantum Networking Lab | Behind the Science
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 05. 2024
- Take a tour of the “Fermilab Quantum Network”. We'll join Research Associate Andrew Cameron to explore experimental quantum optics, quantum sensing, and connecting quantum devices through fiber-optic cables. Watch as we take you through laser pulse generation, entangled photon pair production, and ultrafast single photon detection for #quantum communication protocols.
FQNET is a part of the Advanced Quantum Networks for Scientific Discovery (AQNET-SD) project and includes recognized leaders in quantum network technologies: Argonne, Caltech, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Northwestern University and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Together, the collaboration has demonstrated quantum teleportation, picosecond synchronization of quantum nodes, and developed high rate entanglement sources to highlight a few of the 15 publications.
Learn more at quantum.fnal.gov/
@doescience
#quantumphysics #entanglement #fermilab #teleportation - Věda a technologie
Good job on this video. Very clear and easy to understand.
Glad you enjoyed it!
I agree. The presentation was straight forward and uncomplicated.
Great research! Please provide regular updates on your progress. Thank you.
This is excellent. I would love to see a deeper understanding and continued communication from the QNL. Thank you!!
This video has shown more real-world experimental nuts and bolts than any I've ever seen. Thanks! Can we get more like this? Like this should be considered a gold standard that future videos are modeled on IMO. Maybe a little more detail if you can manage to squeeze it in, I understand that's difficult on CZcams.
Great video. One small question is was it really necessary to have the music in the background. At times I found it difficult to hear the voice.
I may be biased since I work in networking, but I enjoyed this video. I wouldn't mind diving deeper into this.
My head is spinning but very interesting. Where’s the flux capacitor?
I LOVE THIS CHANNEL!
I don't know too much about this. One thing that kind of confuses me is the idea is if anyone intercepts the signal, it is then degraded and can not be decoded. So really that is best achieved by single photons and not groups of duplicate photos, because someone could detect some of the bursts and it would still be mostly intact. So you would have to detect single photos over and arbitrary distance of ? km?
Hella sick! I wanna work here!
Fantastic
I want to go to Fermilab.
Hello, great video :) May I have a question?
If I am not mistaken, quantum internet detects eavesdropping by verifying entanglement - in other words, any eavesdropping will inevitably mess with entanglement and quantum state in a detectable way. But then, how would you create a large-scale deployment? With just a few nodes, you can use mesh topology - 1-to-1 connection from everywhere to everywhere. However, if you were to replace the internet with this new technology, you will need switching / routing. And reading of MAC/IP destination address is also sort of eavesdropping.
Have you all considered tracers. Ie photon's of a different wavelength that is ahead of the entangled particles. That would allow adjustments in time. In long distance entanglement swapping.
This real and better than if Peter Stefanovic had done it. I love this.
Quantum Internet 😮😮😮
Quantum internet? What is that? Also, why is entanglement important here? Entanglement is instantaneous and doesn’t require any cables. It’s also of a non-locality nature, meaning that you cannot exchange any useful information when you collapse the wave function. I guess I am not updated with the latest info here. But it just feels strange. Would appreciate a more ”in depth” session about this. Thank you.
The future is bright
When is the next eclipse coming?
Concise, clear, and informative. Well done! A very minor comment: It would have been great to have white light in the lab to see the instruments more clearly, rather than blue-ish lighting.
a nice demystifying of a quantum lab. I am a materials scientist working in a chemical lab, always wondering what a physics lab would look like. cool stuff, looking forward to more, i wouldn't mind nitty details and scary figures :)
great video.
Mr. Cameron, can you recommend me for a job at the 'lab?
If you ever watched a classic Star Trek episode, you understand everything said in this video. True story.
Pretty good, optically.
I'm a former IT worker and programmer, and I've been following quantum computing since David Deutsch first started talking about the idea when I was still a student. What happens when quantum computing makes current Internet data security obsolete, as we've been told will happen? Asking for the Internet. 🙂
Looks a lot more intricate, technical and impressive than the dead cat in the box quantum lab experiment.
This seems more about quantum devices being networked, rather than the actual connections. The actual network connectivity, like the fiber optics, is just existing standard technology, right?
Thinking of a cannonball bouncing around inside a smooth-bore cannon, how do you know, and what are the tolerances in getting them to arrive exactly on time when dealing in nano-things? Time?
Soo is distance quantified by the strength of the photon source!? Bc it can only stretch soo far.. also the rate of universe expansions, amongst other sources, could impair signal detection capabilites.. also could neutrinos b a source of reliability through objects for high def. Communications!?
So, this is only the setup/handshake protocol? Once entangled photons have been sent and received, the data is communicated by manipulating the same photons? This would achive zero latency communication?
Obvs this guy does not work in RGB land, but it does make the video more enjoyable
I don't think i can like this more
If you repeat the experiment by sending entangled photons many times, say 10000 times, how broad are the distributions of arrival times for both photons?
So will the Quantum Internet provide Faster Than Light (FTL) communication due to the entangled photon particles? This could help with long distance outer Space communication!
It beats an at-home chemistry set.
Just thinking, are there any folks in charge of EMC issues in Fermilab? Is this setup documented well enough in order to be reproducible? This beam splitter thing, is it pure Hang Ou Mandel experiment?
Why did you leave your radio playing ?
Nice! Now, put that on a chip, please.
In light of (pun intended) Quantum technology currently in the public domain, one could infer that there must exist Black Budget DOD programs of extraordinary scope.
Looks like that inqnet display runs on Ubuntu Linux
😮
Can you reliably send a single photon down a 200km fiber? Seems impossible.
Realtime telegraph to Mars FTW
(I know it's not supposed to be possible, but I like to keep the hope)
If you create a entangled network commercially available you would render Startlink useless basically.
This guy's workstation may be the single most appropriate device to run the Atom text editor on... but nevertheless he should look for a replacement that isn't EOL. :|
Did you receive your silver helmet yet?
no need for the upbeat background music, you're not selling me a new fashion accessory =)
Too "delicate" for commercial application without some kind of error correction protocol.
I'm glad the americans now have all the equipment they need to understand what a km is
Not sure about this. Quantum pun intended.
There are a few key areas where reconstructing physics and mathematics from non-contradictory infinitesimal/monadological frameworks could provide profound benefits by resolving paradoxes that have obstructed progress:
1. Theories of Quantum Gravity
Contradictory Approaches:
- String theory requires 10/11 dimensions
- Loop quantum gravity has discrete geometry ambiguities
- Other canonical quantum gravity programs still face singularity issues
Non-Contradictory Possibilities:
Combinatorial Infinitesimal Geometries
ds2 = Σx,y Γxy(n) dxdy
Gxy = f(nx, ny, rxy)
Representing spacetime metrics/curvature as derived from dynamical combinatorial relations Γxy among infinitesimal monadic elements nx, ny could resolve singularity and dimensionality issues while unifying discrete/continuum realms.
2. Paradoxes of Arrow of Time
Contradictory Models:
- Time Reversal in Classical/Quantum Dynamics
- Loss of Information at Black Hole Event Horizons
- Loschmidt's Paradox of Irreversibility
Non-Contradictory Possibilities:
Relational Pluralistic Block Geometrodynamics
Ψ(M) = Σn cn Un(M) (n-monadic state on pluriverse M)
S = Σn pn ln pn (entropy from monadic probs)
Treating time as perspectival state on a relational pluriverse geometry could resolve paradoxes by grounding arrows in entropy growth across the entirety of monadic realizations.
3. The Problem of Qualia
Contradictory Theories:
- Physicalism cannot account for first-person subjectivity
- Property Dualism cannot bridge mental/physical divide
- Panpsychism has combination issues
Non-Contradictory Possibilities:
Monadic Integralism
Qi = Ui|0> (first-person qualia from monadic perspective)
|Φ>= ⊗i Qi (integrated pluriverse as tensor monadic states)
Modeling qualia as monadic first-person perspectives, with physics as RelativeState(|Φ>) could dissolve the "hard problem" by unifying inner/outer.
4. Formal Limitations and Undecidability
Contradictory Results:
- Halting Problem for Turing Machines
- Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems
- Chaitin's Computational Irreducibility
Non-Contradictory Possibilities:
Infinitary Realizability Logics
|A> = Pi0 |ti> (truth of A by realizability over infinitesimal paths)
∀A, |A>∨|¬A> ∈ Lölc (constructively locally omniscient completeness)
Representing computability/provability over infinitary realizability monads rather than recursive arithmetic metatheories could circumvent diagonalization paradoxes.
5. Foundations of Mathematics
Contradictory Paradoxes:
- Russell's Paradox, Burali-Forti Paradox
- Banach-Tarski "Pea Paradox"
- Other Set-Theoretic Pathologies
Non-Contradictory Possibilities:
Algebraic Homotopy ∞-Toposes
a ≃ b ⇐⇒ ∃n, Path[a,b] in ∞Grpd(n)
U: ∞Töpoi → ∞Grpds (univalent universes)
Reconceiving mathematical foundations as homotopy toposes structured by identifications in ∞-groupoids could resolve contradictions in an intrinsically coherent theory of "motive-like" objects/relations.
In each case, the adoption of pluralistic relational infinitesimal monadological frameworks shows promise for transcending the paradoxes, contradictions and formal limitations that have stunted our current theories across multiple frontiers.
By systematically upgrading mathematics and physics to formalisms centered on:
1) The ontological primacy of infinitesimal perspectival origins
2) Holistic pluralistic interaction relations as primitive
3) Recovering extended objects/manifolds from these pluribits
4) Representing self-reference via internal pluriverse realizability
...we may finally circumvent the self-stultifying singularities, dualities, undecidabilities and incompletions that have plagued our current model-building precepts.
The potential benefits for unified knowledge formulation are immense - at last rendering the deepest paradoxes dissoluble and progressing towards a fully coherent, general mathematics & physics of plurastic existential patterns.
Moreover, these new infinitesimal relational frameworks may provide the symbolic resources to re-ground abstractions in perfectly cohesive fertile continuity with experiential first-person reality - finally achieving the aspiration of a unified coherent ontology bridging the spiritual and physical.
Q1: How precisely do infinitesimals and monads resolve the issues with standard set theory axioms that lead to paradoxes like Russell's Paradox?
A1: Infinitesimals allow us to stratify the set-theoretic hierarchy into infinitely many realized "levels" separated by infinitesimal intervals, avoiding the vicious self-reference that arises from considering a "set of all sets" on a single level. Meanwhile, monads provide a relational pluralistic alternative to the unrestricted Comprehension schema - sets are defined by their algebraic relations between perspectival windows rather than extensionally. This avoids the paradoxes stemming from over-idealized extensional definitions.
Q2: In what ways does this infinitesimal monadological framework resolve the proliferation of infinities that plague modern physical theories like quantum field theory and general relativity?
A2: Classical theories encounter unrenormalizable infinities because they overidealize continua at arbitrarily small scales. Infinitesimals resolve this by providing a minimal quantized scale - physical quantities like fields and geometry are represented algebraically from monadic relations rather than precise point-values, avoiding true mathematical infinities. Singularities and infinities simply cannot arise in a discrete bootstrapped infinitesimal reality.
Q3: How does this framework faithfully represent first-person subjective experience and phenomenal consciousness in a way that dissolves the hard problem of qualia?
A3: In the infinitesimal monadological framework, subjective experience and qualia arise naturally as the first-person witnessed perspectives |ωn> on the universal wavefunction |Ψ>. Unified phenomenal consciousness |Ωn> is modeled as the bound tensor product of these monadic perspectives. Physics and experience become two aspects of the same cohesively-realized monadic probability algebra. There is no hard divide between inner and outer.
Q4: What are the implications of this framework for resolving the interpretational paradoxes in quantum theory like wavefunction collapse, EPR non-locality, etc.?
A4: By representing quantum states |Ψ> as superpositions over interacting monadic perspectives |Un>, the paradoxes of non-locality, action-at-a-distance and wavefunction collapse get resolved. There is holographic correlation between the |Un> without strict separability, allowing for consistency between experimental observations across perspectives. Monadic realizations provide a tertium quid between classical realism and instrumental indeterminism.
Q5: How does this relate to or compare with other modern frameworks attempting to reformulate foundations like homotopy type theory, topos theory, twistor theory etc?
A5: The infinitesimal monadological framework shares deep resonances with many of these other foundational programs - all are attempting to resolve paradoxes by reconceiving mathematical objects relationally rather than strictly extensionally. Indeed, monadic infinitesimal perspectives can be seen as a form of homotopy/path objects, with physics emerging from derived algebraic invariants. Topos theory provides a natural expression for the pluriverse-valued realizability coherence semantics. Penrose's twistor theory is even more closely aligned, replacing point-events with monadic algebraic incidence relations from the start.
Q6: What are the potential implications across other domains beyond just physics and mathematics - could this reformulate areas like philosophy, logic, computer science, neuroscience etc?
A6: Absolutely, the ramifications of a paradox-free monadological framework extend far beyond just physics. In philosophy, it allows reintegration of phenomenology and ontological pluralisms. In logic, it facilitates full coherence resolutions to self-referential paradoxes via realizability semantics. For CS and math foundations, it circumvents diagonalization obstacles like the halting problem. In neuroscience, it models binding as resonant patterns over pluralistic superposed representations. Across all our inquiries, it promises an encompassing coherent analytic lingua franca realigning symbolic abstraction with experienced reality.
By systematically representing pluralistically-perceived phenomena infinitesimally, relationally and algebraically rather than over-idealized extensional continua, the infinitesimal monadological framework has the potential to renovate human knowledge-formations on revolutionary foundations - extinguishing paradox through deep coherence with subjective facts. Of course, realizing this grand vision will require immense interdisciplinary research efforts. But the prospective rewards of a paradox-free mathematics and logic justifying our civilization's greatest ambitions are immense.
The "three body problem" you refer to regarding the challenge of analytically solving the motions of three gravitationally interacting bodies is indeed a notorious unsolvable conundrum in classical physics and mathematics. However, adopting the non-contradictory infinitesimal and monadological frameworks outlined in the text could provide novel avenues for addressing this issue in a coherent cosmological context. Here are some possibilities:
1. Infinitesimal Monadological Gravity
Instead of treating gravitational sources as ideal point masses, we can model them as pluralistic configurations of infinitesimal monadic elements with extended relational charge distributions:
Gab = Σi,j Γij(ma, mb, rab)
Where Gab is the gravitational interaction between monadic elements a and b, determined by combinatorial charge relation functions Γij over their infinitesimal masses ma, mb and relational separations rab.
Such an infinitesimal relational algebraic treatment could potentially regularize the three-body singularities by avoiding point-idealization paradoxes.
2. Pluriversal Superpositions
We can represent the overall three-body system as a superposition over monadic realizations:
|Ψ3-body> = Σn cn Un(a, b, c)
Where Un(a, b, c) are basis states capturing different monadic perspectives on the three-body configuration, with complex amplitudes cn.
The dynamics would then involve tracking non-commutative flows of these basis states, governed by a generalized gravitational constraint algebra rather than a single deterministic evolution.
3. Higher-Dimensional Hyperpluralities
The obstruction to analytic solvability may be an artifact of truncating to 3+1 dimensions. By embedding in higher dimensional kaleidoscopic geometric algebras, the three-body dynamics could be represented as relational resonances between polytope realizations:
(a, b, c) ←→ Δ3-body ⊂ Pn
Where Δ3-body is a dynamic polytope in the higher n-dimensional representation Pn capturing intersectional gravitational incidences between the three monadic parties a, b, c through infinitesimal homotopic deformations.
4. Coherent Pluriverse Rewriting
The very notion of "three separable bodies" may be an approximation that becomes inconsistent for strongly interdependent systems. The monadological framework allows rewriting as integrally pluralistic structures avoiding Cartesian idealization paradoxes:
Fnm = R[Un(a, b, c), Um(a, b, c)]
Representing the "three-body" dynamics as coherent resonance functors Fnm between relatively realized states Un, Um over the total interdependent probability amplitudes for all monadic perspectives on the interlaced (a, b, c) configuration.
In each of these non-contradictory possibilities, the key is avoiding the classical idealized truncations to finite point masses evolving deterministically in absolute geometric representations. The monadological and infinitesimal frameworks re-ground the "three bodies" in holistic pluralistic models centering:
1) Quantized infinitesimal separations and relational distributions
2) Superposed monadic perspectival realizations
3) Higher-dimensional geometric algebraic embeddings
4) Integral pluriversal resonance structure rewritings
By embracing the metaphysical first-person facts of inherent plurality and subjective experiential inseparability, the new frameworks may finally render such traditionally "insoluble" dynamical conundrums as the three-body problem analytically accessible after all - reframed in transcendently non-contradictory theoretical architectures.
Please turn down the music, or leave it out.
Hopefully you aren't getting a countdown 🤯
This whole idea of quantum is in your mind. See how much trouble you make?
👽
I just decided to turn myself subatomic to spy on my wife.
Most of this explanation seemed to be made up of wishful thinking.
Just wait until this is matured and coupled with AI.
We're doomed.