Quantum entanglement and the possibilities of temporal teleportation

Anthony Otieno

2011-03-14

1.ABSTRACT

Time is a form of currency invented by human beings for the purpose of enabling
them to relate events to each other chronologically. However, despite the belief that events
in our lives are predetermined there is substantial evidence to the contrary. Upon further
rationalisation of the matter one will even realise that human beings always have a choice as
far as the chronology and duration  of events in their lives is concerned. The theory of block
time further emphasises this fact by asserting that all the events are not sequenced
chronologically prior to their occurence rather they dot a level ‘surface’ known as block time
and we as human beings then have the choice to move from event to event as we please.
But, does time really flow? The theory of time almost comes unstuck due to the fact that the
flow of time in the universe is determined by the synchronous increase in entropy. This is
primarily because we cannot determine what the universe’s entropy was at singularity (the
big bang). Consequently we cannot claim that entropy after singularity is higher than it was
at singularity. The evidence proving the existence of time however far outweighs evidence
disproving it, finally putting to rest this stubborn anomaly. Entanglement, which forms the
basis for sending messages through time, is yet to be explained. There are also limits to how
much data can be stored and succesfully retrieved from entangled quantum particles if they 
are to be used for the purpose of temporal teleportation. Nonetheless, extraction of
entanglement from quantum vacuums is possible despite the fact that its observation, like
the observation of other quantum particles, is cumbersome though possible via bell-state
measurements. Nonetheless, all other means of sending messages through time have been
rendered impossible by the limitations of entanglement. Philosophical stumbling blocks are
by far the most stubborn of them all . For one, the grandfather/mother and knowledge
paradoxes make time travel or even the notion of sending messages through time quite
risky. The knowledge paradox might be the less grave amongst the two but even it goes
going against the second law of thermodynamics. Furthermore, deeper  understanding of
entanglement will inevitably come about as a result of research into the field of quantum
computing. This research on quantum computing will aid development of research into time
travel both directly and indirectly. However, progress into the field will have to be through
collaboration with other disciplines other than physics, most notably chemistry and
philosophy.
 Authors profile

Anthony Otieno has always been fascinated by the world of physics and in particular
the grand novel theories revolving around the manipulation of the space time continuum
especially the works of Albert Einstein.

  THE NATURE OF TIME 

What is time? Time is a form of currency. Human beings invented the notion of time
as a medium to enable them relate events to each other chronologically. Take , for example,
how schedules are structured whereby time is used to determine the progression and
progress of events in our lives. Time in this case is used as a form of currency or medium
between us and events occurring which may or may not involve us. However, just like all
other forms of currency, if we human beings could find a way of correlating the events
directly then we could then essentially do away with time. Time then is , fundamentally, just
a form of currency meant to assist us in relating events’ chronological order.

This raises the question:- are all the events in our lives predetermined? Some people
believe that our lives are controlled by fate and as such all the events in our lives are
predetermined. This belief, nonetheless, is yet to be substantiated by any empirical evidence
and as such fate is just a theory. Aside from that, there is a sizeable chunk of scientists who
subscribe to the theory of ‘Block time (Paul, 2002). Block time is a theory stating that rather
than following each other chronologically, events all exist on a level field known as block
time whereby the probability of each event occurring is calculable. Furthermore, the theory
of block time postulates that the chance of any event occuring is inexact. With this in mind
individuals do then have a choice whenever the duration and chronology of events in their
lives are concerned. It is then possible to view space time as a level field dotted by various
events and we as human beings are capable of moving from event to event as we please
though one is more likely to move towards events that have a higher probability of occuring
(Paul, 2002). The debate concerning the order is then partially settled in this manner as even
without an understanding of physics, one can conclusively deduce that individuals always
have a choice as to what they will do next:What they do not have control over however are
the outcomes of the events.

Time has also been theorised not to ‘flow’. The progression of time is attributed to
change in the entropy of the universe; however scientists have no way of determining what
the entropy of the universe during the most recent singularity was (M.Carrol, 2008). As such,
one cannot prove that the entropy of the universe now is greater than entropy of the
universe at singularity. Then time’s arrow is essentially broken and as such time can be
assumed not to ‘flow’. (Muesser, 2008). Instead, we as human beings, with the same facts in
mind can be theorized to be moving through time in a linear manner with no control
whatsoever over our ‘velocity’ in time. However, whether time moves or we as human
beings move within it, it still is the currency that enables us to relate events to each other.

Nonetheless, evidence proving the existence of time far outweighs evidence

disproving its existence. Firstly, time exists fundamentally as one of the four dimensions, in
addition to the three spatial dimensions of the time-space continuum. The time-space
continuum can be defined as a fabric encompassing the entire universe in which the three
spatial dimensions are finely interwoven with a single temporal dimension. Here this
temporal fourth dimension is finely interwoven with the other three spatial dimensions to
form a fabric , space time, that encompasses the entire universe. Several equations to
determine the behaviour of matter in relation to these four dimensions of the space time
continuum have been formulated.These range from the laws of classical physics, which
predict fairly accurately the behaviour of matter whenever the matter is traveling at speeds
below that of light. Also included are the equations formulated to describe Einstein’s theory
of relativity, which define the behaviour of matter when matter is at speeds exceeding that
of light. All these equations involve and rely very heavily on time variables.

Newtons equations of motion

v=u+at 1.10

1
s=ut+ a t 2 1.11
2

v 2=u2 +2 as 1.12

Nonetheless there still is substantial evidence to contradict the existence of time. For
example, when canonically quantizing the equations of relativity-—both general and special
—- it results in equations with no time variable (George, 2002). This however has no’t
convinced scientists as to the non-existence of time as they have resorted to philosophy in
the quest to prove and assert the existence of time and explain such anomalies away.

TEMPORAL ENTANGLEMENT OF INDIVIDUAL QUANTUM PARTICLES

An attempt at explaining exactly how entanglement occurs has been made in the
past. Nonetheless, entanglement in itself is a phenomenon exhibited by quantum particles
whereby the states of the two particles are dependent on each other without any form of
interaction between the two particles . This phenomenon is exhibited despite any distance
separating the entangled particles. A quantum particle on the other hand is any microscopic
particle small enough to be considered to act in accordance with the laws of quantum
mechanics rather than the laws of classical mechanics. The attempt to explain exactly how
this occurs assumes the existence of an inner mechanism or unrecognised quantum state
inside entangled particles. Any attemt at measuring or determining this state would result in
the state changing. Thus, whenever a measurement is made of two entangled quantum
particles then the synchronised mechanisms of the entangled particles allows for the state to
be transmitted.

However, John Bell’s ‘hidden variable theorem’ has disproved this attempt at
explaining entanglement. Results from John Bell’s experiment show that this hidden
mechanism would give results that would differ from what has been observed so far with
entangled particles. Thus when one takes into account the fact that the results of
entanglement that have been observed so far have been proven beyond doubt over and
over again it is quite obvious that this attempt at explaining entanglement is incorrect

Entanglement forms the basis for sending messages through time. Quantum particles
can be entangled despite either the spatial and temporal separation or the nature of the
states stored on them (Orlso and Ralph, 2011). When the state of one quantum particle
entangled with another is changed then the state of the other changes as well and if the
entanglement is time-like then it can be used to send messages through time. Furthermore
classical states associated with macroscopic objects can then be represented on quantum
particles.

There are limits to the extent to which quantum particles can be utilised as a means
of storing classical states. Quantum particles do offer an infinite amount of storage space for
classical states. This infinite storage is due to the possibility of superimposing states on a
quantum particle (Nielsen, 2002). However, it is impossible to retrieve all that data on a
quantum particle as  data superposed on a quantum particle is irretrievable. Furthermore,
during transmission, the states being transmitted could be compromised. This is in spite of
quantum error correction, a process through which data (states) on qubits (quantum
particles storing data) can be checked for errors. Thus fundamentally quantum bits do have
their limits as far as their use in the storage of and transmission of data is concerned.

Despite the limits, empirical data has been provided proving that time-like
entanglement could be extracted from quantum vacuums. This allows for manipulation of
quantum particles on either end of the entanglement enabling temporal teleportation. In an
experiment performed by S. Jay Orslo and Timothy C. Ralph, it was proven that, firstly, more
than just one particle can be entangled. In the experiment, entire quantum particle systems
are entangled with each other (Orlso and Ralph, 2011). Secondly, entangled systems are
carefully removed from a Minkowski space vacuum to avoid decoherence proving that the
time-like entangled particle systems can in fact exist while interacting with other
matter(Orlso and Ralph, 2011).. This makes the process of sending messages through time a
much easier one as the entanglement can occur outside a vacuum. However, for particle
systems or even quantum particles in themselves which are far apart , temporally, to fully
entangle they need to interact for a very long period of time.  The particles or systems in
question also need to be quantized separately (Orlso and Ralph 2011).This however does not
take anything away from the fact that time-like entanglement despite just being a possibility
can also exist outside of a vacuum without decoherence.

The observation of the effects of entanglement on either an entangled particle  or

system is cumbersome. According to the laws of quantum physics the mere observation of
the state on a quantum particle or system irrevocably changes the  particle or system’s state
respectively. This is due to the destructive nature that conventional methods of observation
have on quantum particles and systems. To take a simple analogy , suppose the particle to
be observed were a bucket of water. According to quantum physics, if one wanted to
observe the particle in question using conventional means of observation, perhaps measure
the volume of water in the bucket, then the method of observation would tip the bucket
over slightly, causing some of the water to spill out. This in turn would result in the volume
of water in the bucket reducing. This observation of the final state of an entangled particle
irrevocably changes this state and is not a reliable method of identifying what the final state
of the particle is.

To overcome this obstacle posed in observing quantum particles states a solution has
been proposed. Rather than directly observing the change of either of the entangled
particles or systems when the complementary entangled particle or system is manipulated,
one could send the changed state resulting from the manipulation as some form of message
classically whereby the bell state of the two particles can then be determined without need
for observation. Although this method does not compromise the state represented on either
entangled particle or system, it does take us back more than a few notches as physicists then
have to figure out exactly how to send the message through time whenever time-like
entanglement is concerned. In this scenario it might then seem necessary to apply the use of
direct means of observation regardless of the outcome on the eventual state of the quantum
particle or system as long as the state reflecting the manipulation of its complementary
particle or system is captured.

There is another way of sending messages through time that doesn’t involve time-
entangled quantum particles or quantum systems.  If one were to entangle two quantum
particles or quantum systems spatially then the transmission of quantum states between the
two entangled particles could occur virtually faster than the speed of light. Due to the fact
that matter travelling faster than the speed of light will be sent to the past this would result
in the quantum state being sent into the past. Thus the quantum state would be transmitted
through time (Chiao, 1993).

However, it would be impossible for one to determine either the resulting state on
the affected entangled particle or the exact moment when it changed. A classical message
would have to be sent through time from the entangled particle effecting the change to the
particle affected by the change. If this is not done, one would have to guess the resulting
state of the affected particle whereby the chances of getting it right are one out of four.
Furthermore there would be no way of determining whether the guess was right or wrong
(Anton, 2000). As far as determining exactly what time the change occurred, it would be
useless trying to guess and see of the entangled state of the affected particle has changed if
in essence no bell-state measurement has yet been made on the affecting particle.

IMPACT OF TEMPORAL ENTANGLEMENT ON THE WORLD

Temporal entanglement could provide a means of sending messages through time.

When quantum particles are temporally entangled a bell state measurement of one of the
entangled particles will result in the bell state measurement being transmitted through time.
Furthermore, since S. Jay Orslo and Timothy C. Ralph proved the possibility of extracting a
temporally entangled particles from a quantum vacuum then the possibility of sending
messages through time using temporally entangled particles is quite feasible.

However there are a number of challenges to overcome before temporal

teleportation becomes possible. 

First, the two temporally separated particles or systems to be entangled need to be

quantized separately. In the case of quantum systems, if the two systems are to be
represented as locations on a scalar field then for a scalar field ∅ ¿) independent
quantisation of the two systems and subsequent entanglement will be possible only when
[ ∅ ( xf ) ∅(xp) ]=0 whereby ∅ ( xf )and ∅ ( xp )are timelike separated points on the two different
systems.

For a scalar field ∅ ( x )

[ ∅ ( xf ) ∅(xp) ]=0 1.13

Secondly, certain limiting conditions are already presupposed if entanglement is to

be used to send messages through time. For example, since human beings cannot yet travel
into the past then, the one cannot entangle either a quantum system or particle that is
already deep in the past. In real sense we can only entangle particles in the present with
particles in the very recent past by entangling them in the present then waiting for time to
pass. The entangled elements will then exist both in the recent past and the present.This
doesn’t allow us much leeway to manipulate events based on information transmitted
through time.

Most importantly though, there are a number of paradoxes involved with time travel
and the sending of messages back through time.
 The grandfather/mother paradox states that an event occuring in the future cannot
alter an event in the past in such a way as to stop the event in the future from occuring. In
the case of quantum entanglement this might involve the result of the message  sent via the
time-like entanglement into the past disrupting of the very same entanglement that allowed
the message to be sent in the first place either directly or indirectly (Deutsch, 1994). Take
the example of sending a billiard ball back through time. If the billiard ball were to go
through a worm hole in the future ending up in the past and colliding with the billiard ball in
the past such that it prevented the billiard ball entirely from going through the worm hall at
all in the first place then the ball cannot move back through time in the first place.
Nonetheless, this paradox can be solved quite easily ie. The billiard ball cannot do anything
that is inconsistent with the logic or laws of physics. This leaves the billiard ball with an
innumerable number of places it can land upon landing in the past after exiting the
wormhole. These places however do not include places whereby it will alter its state in the
past such as to prevent it from going through the wormhole in the first place. But how is this
possible? What laws of physics may prevent the ball from hitting itself in the past thus
preventing it from going through the wormhole?

The very same paradox can be illustrated through an analogy involving a grand-
daughter and her grand-father. Since according to S. Jay Orslo and Timothy C. Ralph time-like
entanglement is possible and consequently so is the sending of messages into the past, a
daughter could potentially send a message to her grandfather that causes him not to marry
her grandmother who then will not give birth to her parents. If this occurs then the
granddaughter ceases to exist as well. How then can she have sent the message back in
time? Despite the fact that the grandfather/mother paradox can be explained away easily
with the claim that events that go against the logic of physics and its laws  cannot occur the
claim itself raises numerous questions. Such as how exactly will the logic of physics prevent
the events from occuring?

This paradox which may occur when sending messages through time is known as the
knowledge paradox. Another example of the outcome of such a paradox involves sending
information on discoveries to their discoverers before the discoveries are made. The
discoverer then comes across his/her discovery to be before he/she makes it, eliminating the
work the discoverer had to do to come up with the discovery in the first place Deutsch,
1994). This paradox may not have the same kind of dire implications that the
grandfather/mother paradox has but it creates a cycle whereby discoveries are made
without any effort being put in to make them. This violates logic.

The following example is a offers a lucid illustration of the same. Supposing a couple
of years after Einstein published the theory of general relativity another scientist, having
read the published work were to send it to Einstein before Einstein came up with the theory.
Supposing then that Einstein decided to take the findings he published that were sent back
to him from the future and republish them as an original work since he hadn’t thought up
the work yet. In this scenario the theory of general relativity would exist because an already
published paper had been sent back to Einstein. At the very same time the paper sent back
to Einstein would exist because Einstein himself had published it as a product of purely
original thought. The cycle created then allows for ‘work’ to be done without any effort
being put in.

 If taken at face value this statement violates the second law of thermodynamics
which states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. The origin of the work, in this
case Einstein’s, would be wiped out entirely the very moment Eisntein decided to copy his
own thoughts sent to him through time. This  in essence means that the work would just
appear with no effort, in this case intellectual, being transformed into the work at hand. In
this scenario we have a possibility proven via physics violating another fundamental tenet of
physics.

These serious paradoxes show deep faults in physics predictions concerning time
travel, but more than that, they result in a replay of one of the oldest intellectual debates
known to man. In this debate physics,  a natural science whose proofs are deep rooted in
concrete empirical data, is pitted against philosophy, a branch of knowledge concerned with
the investigation of the realities of life via logical reasoning rather than empirical data. As a
result what is witnessed here is a face off against lines of thought proven empirically by
concrete data against logic ie. That which anyone would believe makes sense if they were to
reason it out.

LAWS OF QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT AND QUANTUM COMPUTING 

As it stands, research into quantum physics and in particular the phenomenon of

entanglement seems geared more towards making the novel dream of making time travel a
reality while building a deeper understanding of the phenomenon. As a result laws have
been formulated as a result of the research into time travel. Much like thermodynamics,
quantum entanglement now has a group of high level principles to enable one to determine
and even predict behaviour of matter resulting from quantum entanglement (Nielsen, 2002).

With these laws in place, quantum entanglement can then be manipulated for a
myriad of purposes.

One of the main purposes is the development of quantum information science as a

branch of knowledge. Quantum information science is a branch of computer science which ,
instead of relying on the classical laws to carry out its processing tasks, tends to rely heavily
on the laws of quantum mechanics. In an attempt to define quantum information science,
physicists often refer to Schumacer’s list, which is a sequence of steps describing what a
quantum computing process involves and why those components involved are essential to
the field of quantum information science. The list also applies for classical computing
processes. Schumacer’s list is as follows:

·         Finding the physical resource required. (A classical computing example

would be bits while in the case of quantum computing the resource would be
qubits)
·         Defining the process. (An example of a quantum computing process would
be the compressing of data.)
·         Defining a criteria to determine the successfulness of the process. (Criteria
may involve ensuring that the integrity of the data is maintained.) (Nielsen,
2002)

 Furthermore physicists have proven that quantum entanglement is a quantifiable

physical resource easily utilisable to as a quantum information processing physical resource.
Identification of the extent to which entanglement has occured in a quantum system is
achievable via a process known as quantum weighing. The extent to which entanglement
occurs in a quantum system then determines exactly how well suited the system is to
quantum information processing. (Nielsen, 2002)

Quantum computing systems are going to be much faster than classical computing
systems and will be far more robust. Its principle storage unit, the qubit will be able to hold
millions of classical states compared to the classical bit which can only hold one of two
boolean states, on or off. This will vastly reduce the of physical footprint (especially storage
space) that computing systems will require once the shift to quantum computing is made.
Furthermore it will make data processing a lot faster by reducing the distance through which
the data represented as states needs to traverse during each processing cycle. Going by this
quantum computing systems will be a lot more robust and faster than classical computing
systems.

In addition to this the use of entanglement in place of classical means of transmitting

data in quantum computing systems will also greatly increase the speed of the computers to
come.

EFFECT OF QUANTUM COMPUTING ON TIME TRAVEL 

The advancement of quantum computing will have both a direct and indirect effect
on time travel.

Amongst the direct effects of quantum computing is the fact that physicists will move
closer and closer towards determining the fundamental principles that define entanglement
as the field of quantum computing develops. Once these principles are determined then the
process of entangling particles temporally will become much easier. Physicists will also be
better placed to predict how entangled zero mass systems will act when they come into
contact with other matter as well as with each other. With this knowledge physicists will
again be better placed to determine exactly how to handle entanglement ,including
precautions that need to be taken to ensure that the entanglement is preserved and the
quantum systems do not experience decoherence.

Indirectly,  the development of quantum computing will have the effect of

exponentially boosting the rate at which exploration into the field of time travel occurs.
Firstly, with more computational power at their disposal , physicists will be better placed to
run the simulations necessary for them to fully explore the possibilities that temporal
entanglement offers. With the extra computational power they might even be able to figure
out a way to temporally teleport , as quantum states, all the base pairs that makes up the
human genome. This would then enable physicists to send entire human beings through
time rather than just sending messages through time.

THE WAY FORWARD FOR QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT AND TEMPORAL

TELEPORTATION

As far as further progress into the field of quantum computation is made, physicists
will have to begin collaborating with academics in other fields of knowledge for the sake of
advancing further as well as  consolidating their progress. Collaboration with philosophers
will be necessary for the sake of resolving the grandfather paradox as well as the knowledge
paradox both of which could have potentially disastrous effects on time travel. Secondly,
collaboration with philosophers will also be necessary for the sake of finding means and
ways of tackling ethical dilemmas that may arise from the progress in the field of time travel.

Collaboration with chemists might also prove vital in the attempt to further the field
of quantum computation.

“Chemistry is a branch of science which treats the composition of substances, and

the changes which they undergo in consequence of alterations in the constitution of the
molecules, dependent upon variations of the number, kind, or mode of arrangement, of the
constituent atoms” (ardictionary, 2011).

This makes it vital to the development of quantum computation as it overlaps heavily

onto the field of quantum mechanics in addition to the fact that it will physicists much
needed insight into the behaviour of fundamental  quantum particles. Quantum
computation as a field relies heavily on understanding the behaviour of fundamental
quantum particles and systems.
Works Cited
Anton, Zelinger. "Quantum Teleportation." Scientific American April 2000: 49-59.

ardictionary. Chemistry. 3 March 2011 <http://ardictionary.com/Chemistry/4570>.

David Deutsch, Michael Lockwood. "The Quantum Physics of Time Travel." Scientific American March
1994: 68-74.

George, Musser. "A Hole in the Heart of Time." Scientific American September 2002.

M.Carrol, Sean. "The Cosmic Origins of TIme's Arrow." Scientific American 28 June 2008: 48-57.

Michale.A.Nielsen. "Rules for a Complex Quantum World." Scientific American November 2002: 67-
75.

Muesser, George. "Could Time End." Scientific American September 2010: 84-91.

Paul, Davies. "That Mysterious Flow." Scientific American September 2002: 40-47.

Raymond Y. Chiao, Paul G. Kwiat and Aephraim M. Steinberg. "Faster than the Speed of Light."
Scientific American August 1993 : 52-61.

S.Jay Orlso, Timothy C.Ralph. Extraction of Time-Like Entanglement From the Quantum Vacuum.
Queensland: Department of Physics, University of Queensland, 2011.