Scientists achieve reliable quantum teleportation for first time

Aren't the terms "teleporting" and "traveling faster than the speed of light" improper and misleading.

My understanding of entanglement is that there is no transporting of anything.  The entangled particles are a single entity separated by space.  It is only our perspective - seeing them as two separate particles - that makes it look like something is "traveling" between them.

Um, firstly no data transmission is taking place - not useably - merely correlation is occuring.

And if this is just EPR they're talking about, entanglement.... it's already been done up to a distance of 150 km by using satellites a few years ago.

So.. I'm confused what this article is actually About?

Thank you for reporting this in a way that my groggy pre-coffee non-science brain could understand.

Faster-than-light Internet could definitely be a very viable future application of this... Oh, yeah, and quantum logic gates, and thus, faster-than-light CPUs.

Now the only component needed before the possibility of a quantum computer could become reality: QuRAM... and, by extension, an SSD made out of a formatted form of it, to make sure processed qubits are also stored as qubits.

    Without the Data channel, This is still great news in it's own right.  Superposition with data even better but be true to the data.  The spin is really the best clock/timer.    New GPS with accuracy of +/- from sets of superposition diamonds in the sky.  The data lines are the hard part.  So they time out the same, the only data could be Irrational rationalized buy Quanta. So the irrational is rationalized.  True proportional math can be used , with larger accuracy.  The memresitor circuit could be the state between 0 and 1, and eventually 0-9 states between etc..I believe there are different Data sets that will work.

Why would the universe alter itself in any way if a human observed or measured it's particles? Seems a bit odd that our eyes, tools, or perception should matter in the grand scale of things.

So, does this allow them to manipulate one of the qubits and have that new state reflected in the other qubit, or does it only allow them to measure the state of qubit and find that the state of the other qubit is determined at the same time? Once the state of the near qubit is determined once, can it be changed and if so is that new state reflected in the other qubit?

Yes, this is a poorly researched article for several other reasons. Here is another example of its inaccuracies.  "Heisenberg's uncertainty principal" <sic>?  And to make matters worse, he uses the word "accurately"?  Why are we focused only on the spelling, when Heisenberg's uncertainty principle has nothing to do with this?  Heisenberg describes that the more we know about a particle's position, the less we know about its momentum, and vice versa.  For this particular issue in quantum mechanics, we should be reading about the work of Erwin Schroedinger instead. Nick Statt and the editing and fact checking departments  - wow!

This is a ridiculous article. As a physicist, it should be noted that entanglement does not work as described. It is instantaneous but is completely random. That is its quantum nature. It must be decoded by a separate data stream that travels no faster than light. It should be noted that Einstein is one of the original creators of quantum mechanics and the originator of the concept of entanglement. Yes, he rejected his creation, but was key to it. Perhaps he will be proven wrong but I would not bet a lot of money on it. Prove it in extensive peer review. That so far has not happened (latest the Italian team proven wrong about neutrino transmission faster than light).

This would more likely see use in communications far before computers. This has the potential provide instant point to point communications over great distances with no equipment to set up in between. If this concept seems familiar to you it may be because quantum pairs are how instantaneous long distance communication is achieved in Mass Effect. The big problem with this method though is that each point would have one of the pair, restricting communication to only between two points. For instance you can't setup the pairs in New York and London and expect to communicate with Beijing, you would have to create another pair.

http://xkcd.com/465/

oh you will love this

Its principle, not principal!  

Well, it's not teleportation; it's illusion--it's a controlled (aka biased) experiment. It's simply that two "tangled" particles will behave the same regardless of where they are in relation to each other ("space" is irrelevant [and "time" isn't real anyway]). Meh.

It isn't FTL commo or teleportation per se, but the applicability is there..  The entangled particles are in the same space-time.  It only LOOKS like they're separated. It's the application of the twin experiment (but both twins leave), or  another dimension to the analogy of two people in a train car going directly away from an observer.  If one passenger throws a ball to the other, the observer sees the combined speed of the ball plus the speed of the train.  To the passengers they only perceive the speed of the ball between them.  Direction is irrelevant when two particles travel at c, because space warps around them.

Good, let's build on this. We need quantum computing badly. We need Artificial Intelligence to make global decisions if humanity is to survive.  Global Warming is bad enough per se but what we humans will do when resources get tight and economies stall is bad, bad, bad. 

Will I be able to play Wow with no lag? That's what I want to know...... hahahah jk

this isn't teleporting, 

but I guess you knew that when you put "teleporting" in quotes,

congratulations on the misleading article, but you got the page hits you needed.

more proof that all journalism is Yellow journalism

waiting for a correction were they say sorry our calculations are off...we forget to carry a decimal place. I heard this before.

Or not?

Apparently only a minority of math and physics academics[1] acknowledge believing in Eisenstein's explanation where nothing very interesting at all is happening (no faster than light communication and no teleportation).

In Einstein's and colleague's view, if two particles are synchronized (by passing through a polarizing filter or using lasers or other method to polarize the particles), then the particles will have the same properties such as spin, and if you measure the spin of one of the synchronized particles then you will also know the spin of the other synchronized particle.

Unlike Einstein's explanation, Quantum Mechanics calls these particles "entangled" instead of synchronized and teaches that properties such as spin do not truly exist until measured, and if entangled particles return the same spin values when measured then they must have somehow communicated this information with each other.  Bell's inequalities experiment famously supports the "entanglement" theory, though the math behind Bell's experiment is challenged[1]).

[1] http://arxiv.org/abs/0904.4259 28 Apr 2009, Oxford University Math Department, Disproofs of Bell, GHZ, and Hardy Type Theorems and the Illusion of Entanglement, 

if it's faster than the speed of light, we still have to wait to see it.

Holy macaroons.. imagine that, no more wires.. terabit internet with zero latency!

If this result means Alice can set 1bn states per second at point A starting at an agreed time, while Bob starts reading 1bn states per second at point B from an entangled particle at the same time it's exactly what my physicist friends say is impossible, FTL data transfer using quantum entanglement. I hope this is legit because it would be the biggest step forward since the invention of radio comms.

I think they're both right. At least in a virtual reality teleportation is possible but don't forget that it is data being manipulated. Knowing what you have on hand and what to manipulate in order to record it on the other end is nothing out of the ordinary. It is my opinion that they are creating a forced telefragging on purpose to observe such teleportation concept... since what is there to lose? Until you create new science that advances beyond "quantum-mechanics," then you have to agree that Einstein had a point. Perhaps in the Netherlands a new science is being created? Very interesting.

Please explain how checking the "entangled" particle after measuring the first one does not involve the passage of time.  It DOES involve the passage of time, and thus the entangling is not instantaneous as claimed.  What has been constructed is an elaborate experiment that attempts to find something the experiments set out to find.  This is directly contrary to the scientific method, which starts with a premise that the scientist then tries to disprove. Each time he fails to do so, the theory gains in strength.  What this "experiment" did was gather questionable circumstantial evidence then the researchers broke the speed to light in rushing the "results" to the press. 

"The news was reported first by The New York Times on Thursday, following the publication of a paper in the journal Science."

But thanks to this new discovery, the New York Times was able to ensure their publication was able to be viewed before the journal Science article by creating a wormhole in the space-time continuum... ;-)

  remember the fly.

http://venturebeat.com/2012/11/15/world-first-chinese-scientists-teleport-data-laying-the-groundwork-for-quantum-computing-or-interplanetary-internet/

"Heisinberg's uncertainty principal" must be entangled into "Heisenberg's uncertainty principle" at faster than the speed of light!