I just wanted to address a very common (and natural) misunderstanding some people are having! Lots of people think that what was creates was just a simulation of a black hole's singularity, but this is so much more than that. It's a bit of a read so buckle up! Disclaimer: I have spent a lot of time trying to understand this, but my own field of study only brushes up against quantum mechanics, so someone who is academically active in the field may be able to point out some inaccuracies in my explanations. There's two very natural misconceptions that lead to the idea that what they produced was not an "actual" wormhole, but just a simulation. The first misconception is that a wormhole only refers to the Einstein-Rosen bridge from the ER paper, which describes a theoretical wormhole created by the extreme curvature of spacetime in a black hole. The second misconception is from the fact that nobody does a very good job at explaining what a quantum computer actually is, and the fact that they are called 'computers' lends itself to the incorrect but understandable assumption that they are just simulating something. I'll tackle these misconceptions in order: ===WHAT'S THE DEAL WITH THE EINSTEIN ROSEN BRIDGE=== General relativity is probably the single most successful theory in all of physics. It describes space and time not as two separate things, but as a unified four-dimensional spacetime - and most importantly for this discussion, this spacetime has a bad habit of bending and skewing in the presence of concentrated, non-moving energy - or as we call it, mass. After they were mathematically proven to exist, black holes caused some issues, because the math that proves that the *must* exist, also completely stops working once you get to the singularity. The ER paper mentioned in this video proposed a very mathematically beautiful solution to this problem: Based on the foundation that spacetime can curve and distort, instead of concentrating energy to an infinitely small, infinitely dense point that messes everything up, a singularity must instead connect with another point in distant spacetime. This is what we usually think of as a wormhole, and one might mistakenly call an "actual" wormhole. However, I think we can all agree that *anything* that connects two points of distant spacetime would be a wormhole, so if you could create one through some OTHER mechanism, it would still be a wormhole - would it not? Up until recently, there was no reason to believe that there was another method through which an ER-bridge could be created through which something could move, so it would seem pointless to make the semantic point I just made above. In the EPR paper referenced in the video, Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen, not content with the seeming violations of causality that quantum entanglement caused, proposed wormholes as a possible explanation for this supposed faster-than-light transmission of information - but as this bridge would not be able to move macroscopic systems across space and time, so it seems like a different idea, so it seems open and shut that you cannot have a real wormhole without gravitation. This is why the discovery of Dr. Maldacena in 1997 (4:56) and subsequent discoveries - that is, the theory of ER=EPR is so huge. It's incredibly complicated, and even if I was capable of explaining it all, this is all brand new physics that hasn't been fully fleshed out - but what it comes down to is that not only can entangled systems on a very small scale display properties *similar* to the wormholes in a black hole, they are exactly the same phenomenon. That means that wormholes are not just a phenomenon of gravity, but in fact a phenomenon of quantum mechanics, and that it should be possible to create a wormhole by entangling quantum particles on a smaller scale. So now we know that (if ER=EPR) we can create a wormhole by using entangled quantum particles in the right way... That sounds hard. Now what? Enter Dr. Spiropulu and her team. ===WHAT'S THE DEAL WITH QUANTUM COMPUTERS=== Quantum mechanics is complicated to say the least, so I'm going to assume you've made yourself familiar with some of the basics of it - at the very least, the idea of quantum superposition, i.e. that quantum particles can only be described in terms of where they might be according to a probability function, until "measured" - aka, until they become entangled with you, the observer. This is important. What quantum computing does is that it weaponizes these properties. It's extremely easily to accidentally interfere with a quantum particle and thus collapse its waveform, eliminating its quantum mechanical properties - but if you can avoid that by minimizing any direct or indirect interaction with it, by removing any air and supercooling the system down to superconductive temperatures, you can send an electron or photon through a hell of an obstacle course, basically a "circuit", and only collapse its waveform at the end, producing a quantum interference pattern that tells you every single way it could get through that circuit. In a way the famous double slit experiment is the first ever quantum computer, which asked the simple question "what different ways can a photon get through two slits" - and if you measured ahead of time which slit it passed through, you are zeroing in on a different, but related question: Of the ways a photon can pass through two slits, what subset of them involves passing through this one particular slit? It's not a particularly helpful question to ask if you're trying to compute something, but it IS a very helpful question if you're trying to understand the fundamental nature of quantum mechanics. See, that's what a quantum computer does: It is not a simulation of quantum systems, it is a system to *build* a more complex quantum system without collapsing the waveform, and then to observe the probability space that emerges. ===IN CONCLUSION === So what does all this mean for this video? To summarize, when they say they built a wormhole in a quantum computer, they don't mean they simulated a black hole. They mean they worked with Google Quantum to physically build a quantum system which was theorized to produce a wormhole and send an electron or photon (In this case an electron) through the system in such a way that it would create one interference pattern (probability space) if it traveled through a wormhole, and a different one if it didn't - and when the dust settled and they got the quantum system stable and looked at the interference pattern, it showed that they had in fact *physically created a quantum system wherein an electron passed through a wormhole*. So, in conclusion, I hope this convinces you that they did, in fact, create a quantum wormhole right here on earth :) P.S. There's a lot of other things going on here. For example, this whole thing about De Sitter space. I can't get into it now, but this is all consistent with expectations, and unfortunately does mean that we're probably not going to be zooping across spacetime through wormholes anytime soon. Still though, it's very cool.
@Zren the problem is not that there is a misunderstanding of what a wormhole is, but that it was a extremely siplified "simulation" in an "computer" with a computational power that rivals a pocket calculator of the 80s. They had to massively simplify the simulation, like doing brain surgery with a rubber on a drawn stick man. It if you don´t get the expected results, you tweak your simulation for many months till it does? Is that a valid scientific method in other areas? I don´t think so. Do F1 teams simulate their cars by playing mario cart? No, they don´t! Read your own "conclusion". You can´t write it without using words like "thoerized" and "probaility" - this means in conclusion that what they were doing is nothing more than THEORETICAL physics. No proof for irl!
@@gshaindrich Everything about this is theoretical physics. The existence of Black Holes is technically still only theoretical, even if we have a huge amount of evidence at this point! And the existence of wormholes in them is DEFINITELY theoretical. Theories are powerful things, and all of what we accept to basically be factual in modern physics is classified as a theory, because it is difficult to prove anything outright, but evidence points strongly to it being correct. The same is true here. They cleverly used neural network approaches because of the physical limits of the quantum systems that can be built right now, but the premise was to follow theory to create a quantum system that opened a bridge in spacetime - if the theories had no basis in reality, no amount of "tweaking the settings" would have produced the result they got. This is because, as I said in my original post, they did not SIMULATE a wormhole, they CREATED one on a quantum scale.
Time is perspective based. Universe sees you hit 0 aging, while you see universe not hit any limit, and can continue seeing the universe aging into infinity. 5th dimension wee. Then you return to universe time, the universe hasn’t seen you age at all, and you repeat events now in universe time, and change them. Deja vu… Time slip wee.
@@curiodyssey3867 I did, and the conclusion I came to is that a model (a "virtual reality" construct) was calculated in which, mathematically, a qubit of information managed to traverse a "model" of a wormhole. Please explain what is wrong with this interpretation. In my mind, a "real", physical particle, would be able to traverse a real, physical wormhole, which this was not. I am not a mathematician nor a physicist, but this interpretation is the only one that seems to make sense to me.
this is just sensationalism. This experiment is no more than a delayed choice experiment, where we have already observed that information propagated faster than speed of light. This is not new physics or science. This is just new engineering... No, a wormhole wasn't created. It's just entanglement has properties that keeps unitarity intact.
@Sergio Reyes the entire last section addressed that so top reply could be saying, "oh yeah, thanks for repeating the argument in the video like a gotcha" It wasn't inviting a re explanation of the last section of the video.
@@InTrancedState it is, naming a german physicist doesnt change the experiments results lmfao not to mention she sits and says how Cannabis is a placebo for pain. When no, no its not lol so idk what your point is
Yes and no, the wormholes are still not achievable to be used as the black holes would destroy the matter before it transfers its information through a black hole.
They run a simulation on a quantum computer (which only makes computations). It is not even an "experiment", just computations. No actual "wormhole" at all.
I wonder how fast the pulse traveled though as I would imagine that it would shed light on whether or not this is a higher dimensional wormhole or a pseudo wormhole in which the pulse at best is still traveling through 3d space at the speed of light.
He made no indication that the wormhole didn't occupy actual space. In which case, all they did was move a qubit through a tube such as toothpaste in a toothpaste tube. Very unremarkable and essentially useless.
A higher dimensional wormhole? Yeah, if we could detect different dimensions in any way, shape or form I think you'd know about it. No, it's not what a wormhole is and that's not how a wormhole works as far as "our" understanding of physics go. There's no concrete evidence of other dimensions, only very incomplete speculations. We generally can't even agree on what model "time" fits into.
Thank you for the video. So, Dr. Ben in your conclusion / summary, you claim that it isn't anything we can look at or see. But, your entire video shows that this was an experiment, with "actual results". So, was this a real world experiment or just a simulation? And why isn't this something "seeable"?
@@marcfruchtman9473 it was a real world experiment, hard to see because it’s using single particles produced on a QC with the results shown as a spike. His visuals here sum it up well
It's a great video but it would be more better if you can add mentioned papers in descriptions and add more pillars to your contents. Thanks for the detailed video.
@@MrLethalShots didn't pretend that they did. They simulated a wormhole with a quantum algorithm. You can simulate pac man, it doesn't make pac man real. Experiment didn't bring any news on quantum mechanics, nor on wormholes, nor on quantum computers.
It’s virtual reality They didn’t create a wormhole Cause not. It’s not possible with our knowledge end technical knowledge to create wormhole It’s a dream from scientists
Nope, it was not `inside` a computer. They've used a quantum computer because it's a useful device to entangle real-world particles (this is what a quantum computer does, after all). That's what the video says, anyway.
@@plunntic no, a quantum computer makes complex calculations due to their ability to not just operate on a binary system but a system that can be any number between 1 and 0. This can absolutely not determine how space time and wormholes would behave in real life so this video is absolutely moronic
This goes towards 'explaining' the Bell paradox. There can be no local variable theory of quantum mechanics because the variable involved in an entangled pair is not in this universe. It exists in the wormhole with essentially zero separation between the two. (At least initially)
Hello Dr. Miles! First off, thank you for this amazing video. Found it in my reccomended and I don't regret watching it! I only have one problem: can you put a link to the sources in the description? I would really like to read the papers myself. Best of luck, -A curious viewer.
100% Lie. It isn't possible. The reason why they are stating that is for the research money and the knowledge that nobody else can replicate it without spending millions of dollars on equipment that does nothing in the first place. Which means if someone else did try to replicate it, they would say that their equipment to replicate it is wrong and refuse to specify correct equipment as trade secrets. It happens all the time.
Every single day new articles, videos, and news headlines come out highlighting some new discovery or experiment that's going to change the world.... but nothing ever happens.
@@MonkeSle that’s a weak response, imo. How many times do we have to hear about research in medicine, space exploration, climate change, etc that claim extravagant, life-altering discoveries of which after reading the headline disappears from our lives completely? Sure, there may be more articles and a few UA-cam videos made about it, but none of this stuff ever impacts our lives in a meaningful way. Here’s my example, some people will claim that my life is impacted by quantum computing every single day for the better, supposedly. But my life pre quantum computing is no different then than it is now. Now take this and apply it to some new cancer treatment, yet cancer rates and deaths only continue to rise each year. Apply it to anything supposedly happening in space.
@@heaz32 This is a weak argument in my opinion, because your argument is purely anecdotal in nature, and generally relies on "if I hear about this or that, why don't I see this affecting my life?" It's again because adoption is slower than research. You don't just discover something and immediately commercialize it, and even if it is able to be commercialized, politicians may get in the way, and funding is a whole separate issue. These are important discoveries, and things are happening, but to expect things to happen so fast is an impatient mindset that is reliant on everything just happening soon after a discovery, which only happens in a dream world.
Bruh our world has been wildly changed by general relativity and other scientific advancements. Look at two hundred year increments and see how much the world has changed from breakthroughs. Things don't change much in your day to day life until you look back through the years.
Whenever "quantum" is attached to something, I take it to mean "not really". Quantum teleportation? Not really teleportation. Quantum wormhole? Not going to the Gamma Quadrant.
The fact that it has to be done through quantum computers makes it a bit silly, since transferring the state change would require transferring data from one end to the other through normal space, but it's good to see action on developing useful manifolds. If gross field topology manipulation ever becomes a thing then these kinds of experiments could give a jump start on useful applications.
There's no new physics here, no one's doing anything with quantum gravity here or physical wormholes in spacetime, this experiment is well within the realm of non-relativistic quantum mechanics, and at best is an analogue system for a toy model of wormholes, and in fact the number of qubits involved was so small as to be able to be simulated on a laptop
It's so strange because I know this idea wasn't new I was watching documentaries way back in 2008 or before. They spoke about wormholes and quantum entanglement when they were talking about TELEPORTATION. They were trying to talk about the many ways one can transfer data/people through space and the pros and cons. I don't think they ever said they were equal though. I always thought I could just open the wormhole, throw the entangled particles through and then we wouldn't have to worry about how long it stayed opened...because the particles are entangled already. However since it's duality I don't think that's going to be possible now.
This stuff makes me feel super stupid. If you teleported something through their wormhole, would the original be destroyed or would a perfect copy appear at the other end?
@@jasonrhodes9683 I wish I knew the name of that documentary it had all the answers to your questions. That was years ago so my memory may be off but I know they talked about both scenarios. The best I can tell you is to type into YT "teleportation documentary" You'll either find it or not. Just know the science isn't defined yet. THEY decide to destroy your body as protocol. They may say that "doing the measurement will destroy the original copy" however that may not be true. As I also thought, what if I take the original state and save it. Then send it to multiple entangled teleporters? Then we have cloning and not teleportation. This is why by protocol, they must destroy the original. To preserve originality. If this teleportation technology exists I ask a second question. Take the persons state, save it for 100,000 years and then recreate it. What happens? We just made time travel. it's a very muddy topic not even the smartest people have it down. So don't feel stupid.
The importance of this experiment, assuming it's repeatable, is unfathomable. This will truly change everything in physics, technology, chemistry, basically everything will be directly impacted. But ONLY if this experiment is proven repeatable and I truly hope it does as this is the most exciting potential discovery in physics ever (in my humble, and less than educated opinion).
In terms of change it would allow us much more detailed manipulation of entanglement as it deepens or understanding of the fundamental forces at play. Forces which are influencing the rest of physics. In a nut shell, it is a step closer, possibly a large step, towards a truly unified field theory. In terms of application, I can't say. Kinda like the early days in the discovery of radiation, or electricity. Being able to accurately and predictably manipulate and force/phenomena has always eventually led to unpredictable innovation and further discovery, starting with the use of the first tool (likely a stick or rock) and leading to today's tech. Any discovery or experiment has this same potential, some much more than others. We are still very early in the application of entanglement, but as with all technologies, the growth is likely to be exponential. Hopefully this will be a significant step towards more widespread adoption and innovation because for quantum computing to reach even a portion of its potential, we need as much use in as many different settings as possible. All that said, I am a biologist, not a physicist, and this experiment could prove to be complete b.s. and I'm getting excited because of hype not actual results. I hope this isn't the case.
Just a small tip... Schwarzschild is split into Schwarz (black) and Schild (shield). Same as Rothschild. Roth and Schild. German-speaking viewers will appreciate this small detail :P
Little help: It's "Schwarzschild", not "SchwarTzschild". Also, pronounciation follows "Schwarz-schild". The "schild" is a distinct part. It would translate to something like "black-shield". It's not "schwarzs-child". A child has nothing to do with it ;) that's just a pattern english native speakers see.
You mentioned some information gets transfered between quantum entangled particles, what information are you referring to? To my understanding, once particles are entangled the information has been shared at that point. Why does observation of those particles need to transfers information from one particle to the other?
@@mr_clean575 thanks for the info! The confusion came in around the wave function collapse. My understanding is that the collapse does not need to transfer info. If the first observed particle is spin up we know the other one is spin down but only way to know the other one is spin down is by collapsing it. So say 2 entangled particles are taken to each side of the visible universe, we collapse 1 and its spin down. We at one side of the universe know that but the other side does not know and won't know until they collapse their wave which we knownwill be spin down but they have no idea.
What does the elapsed time for information to get from one side to the other signify? Is it somehow correlated to the physical distance between the two ends of the worm-hole? Has it been observed to be super-luminal? One would think that information transfer being super-luminal would be the proof that a worm-hole has been successfully created. If the information transfer speed is sub-luminal there must be other indications as proof that are probably not very approachable by us layman.
They didn't say but there's no reason to believe the speed was super luminal. The wormhole would just connect the two very distant points but the traveling entity doesn't have to go fast through it.
Don't think the point was that it took a certain amount of time to go through, but rather... The fact that they could reliable predict the time it would take. Though I'm no big brain so meh.
i think they cant confirm the speed unless they build a much bigger quantum computer i remember listening to the youngest of the their team saying their first calculation showed they needed a QC at least 10 times stronger than the existing one in google to collect all needed information this expirement is incomplete but it gave them the most important result that warmholes does exist
Even if the information transfer speed is sub-luminal it shows that we have a definitve tool to have lossless communication over distance when we always condsider the speed and distance between two sources.
Basically, I see this as most helpful as to bring alive the concept of sub space communication in Star Trek that is essentially instantaneous comms across light years
@@tonymc9102 i have. Many episodes lol. The point being, it’s much faster than regular travel, my God. And it’s obviously quantum in nature. Just try to enjoy life a lil damn, ha
I wonder if it could be wireless. This wormhole effect seems to only take place in one machine from one point to another point within. It seems to me like this more useful to transport physical cargo at speeds of electricity (or the electro magnetic field needed to stabilize the wormhole through the journey). I don’t think this team found out your to make two openings to the worm hole and separate and stabilize them wirelessly. So I think this could turn out more like a wormhole version of those pneumatic mail delivery tubes and land lines. Ie requiring infrastructure between the two destinations like a wire or physical tunnel.
@@wastelesslearning1245 you're correct. qubits require a superconducting media to travel through or they collapse, you can't just send the m through space.
@@none-ro9dz still potentially awesome technology especially if you can leverage this precision to fabricate or medically operate. Hope the quantum relationship wave information are never deconstructed/disconnected even if De-corporealized during the relay process to keep up with speed. If so this could be just as good as portals “teleportation”; avoiding the kill and clone paradox.
This I hear here first, and sorta meshes with my personal headcannon of what is what. Which is that matter is concentrated space. However there is time and causality. So so far my only idea is that concentrated space fluctuates between being concentrated and smoothen out states. The speed at which they do this is basically the speed of causality clocked at light speed. The motion that gravity creates comes off as the inetrtia that remains after each cycle because as each concentration enters its concentrated state, it pulls the entirety of this space towards itself as its contracts into its peak concentrated form governed by the level of energy exist in that spot. When we speak about energy cannot be destroyed is a fact in this theory that the concentration amount space does in each cycle will remain the same across every cycle. I also got some ideas to test this relieing on the idea that the inertia part relies on a transition phase, i don't think it could happen if its instantenous between fully concentrated and smoothen out space fluctuation and different concentration levels effects each other before a the cycle reach its peak amplitude.
I'm 100% confident that a lot of black holes that exist happened where there was intelligent life that like us, shortly after becoming sentient, cause ourselves.
The 'De Sitter'/'Anti De Sitter' Holographic Space problem can be resolved if we assume cosmos is a black hole - with gravity emerging from its Event Horizon inwards, accelerating the expanding universe outwards (also the explanation for Dark Energy).
I think dark energy is the anti gravity/ massive energy pulse keeping this wormhole(our universe) open as matter passes through it , that’s what they looking for
What crap, building a computer is engineering not science, and putting the parameters you need to get the answer you looking for is not a discovery, it is a computer game.
If macro and micro theories cannot act together, doesn't that mean that they are wrong? Scientists should stop basing their works on incomplete theories and make a new one from scratch. I know, that's a shitload of work, but a theory of everything that doesn't explain everything is obviously incomplete. That's like saying "this specific collision conservates energy, so all ones do so" and basing other papers on the fact that all collisions conservate energy - it doesn't work, something false leads to something false.
Time is an illusion, space also is, thinking is real. Within not so much time we will include consciousness as part of the quantum mechanics and so physics. Thanks for the very good speach.
It pains me that so many people, even professionals, still don't actually understand what entanglement is all about. There is no transmission of information. Just a statistical ensemble of macrostates that don't include any outcomes where both electrons are spin up or both down, for example. Those outcomes cannot happen. But physics doesn't care which electron is actually up and which is down, that part is left to chance, but the coin flip determines the state of both particles not just one. It determines which universe you're living in, that's all. No information.
It isn't. Around new fiscal year, Fermi labs always has a half-assed experiment to show new engineering because they have yet to show new physics or new science...but their budget never shrinks...and the scientists get fatter exponentially...🤪
Because they allowed a particle--separate from the group of entangled particles creating the wormhole--to **pass through** the worm hole and come out on the other side. Simply demonstrating entanglement would be to change the spin of the particle and observe that its entangled partner also changed to remain opposite.
There was a time where physics meant things would eventually be observable. Theoretical models and Quantum Computer simulations and applications are not physics. Time crystals and quantum warmholes....they are projections of thought at this moment.
Given time to develop, this will mean that we can have a near instant communication system form anywhere (earth, moon, mars, space vehicles) to anywhere. Away with the clutter of satellites, 'radio'-waves and cables.
@@khatharrmalkavian3306 okay well it is, entanglement you could use it for basic communication. Like a Morris code, but ya you can’t transmit large bits of data, but hypothetically you could communicate with entanglement 😏🤓🧐
yay. more proof we live in a simulation! I talk about this all the time on my channel! But I'm just a dumb pothead, so it's cool to see smart people figure it out.
10:16 - So, that's interesting. The logical conclusions one might draw... So, if this matter level of the universe is resultant from information or patterns in constituent lower dimensions... This particular existence should be very stable, if not inevitable. What a heavenly idea.
TLDW: There is zero indication that we will ever be able to open a wormhole and transport ourselves or even data to another planet. So you can forget about all the Sci-fi stuff you read/watched about wormholes.
Either I don't understand the definition of quantum entangled particles or somehow physicists are missing something that seems very simple to me. Two particles are simultaneously created I'm such a way that their quantum states are both determined at the creation of the particles. Their state will continue to be directly related to the state of the other particle unless some force affects one of the particles. Because we know that these two particles have states that are linked by the initial conditions of their creation we only need to check the state of one to know the state of the other. No information is being transferred across any distance. We are merely using the known laws of physics to reach a logical conclusion. It's like looking outside and seeing the sun directly overhead and then instantly being able to determine that it is night time on the other side of the planet. The other side of the planet didn't transmit information to you instantly. It's hard to believe that people who are supposed to be some of the smartest people in the world wouldn't be able to reach what seems to be a simple conclusion. Maybe I'm just fundamentally misunderstanding something about the nature of quantum entanglement, because otherwise I'm genuinely not sure how this isn't obvious to a physicist.
Schwartzschild is pronounced like Shvurtz Shield (no child there). My 2 cents I guess. Other than that, no particular need to point out how good the video is, it's obvious.
I live one block from CalTech. That means I have officially been within one block of the first wormhole. Probably not accurate, technically incorrect, but that is the story I am sticking to on Twitter. Have a good day,. 🤣
So are you a tech-bro who lives in a $million+ tiny bungalow, or a plebe who sleeps in their car parked on some residential street? Either way, congrats on your Twitter life. Nothing like bragging about swallowing obviously bullsh*t.
This is the kind of news that should be boosted above all else by the msm. Imagine if humanity as a whole focuses on this, we would developed to be star explorers even sooner.
OK, Here's an idea for a practical device using this principle that could potentially give us faster-than light communications without violating the principles of Special Relativity. As follows:- First you have to setup the comms channel. This sadly involves a sub-light transfer (to some destination) of a primed comms device consisting of one-half of this same apparatus with an already-established quantum tunnel between the two halves. The other half remains on Earth of course. (Don't ask me how - that's just technical stuff for the engineers to solve) In order to use the device, the transmitting end can now send a message to the receiver by inserting data into the wormhole and selectively collapsing the section of wormhole that contains the message, squeezing it out at the other end effectively instantly. Messages can be returned the same way. Note that the wormhole gets used up by the transmissions and eventually there is no more entanglement left to be collapsed. So in order to keep a channel open you would need to continue transmitting 'empty' entanglement through normal space (at sublight) and you'd have to use the channel sparingly so that your average data stream over time didn't exceed the lightspeed limit. Otherwise, you'd simply empty the storage and messaging would have to stop. This is just a though and I haven't really considered the implications for causality associated with this schema. So feel free to critique. 🤣🤣
If I understand your idea correctly, I think the issue with that idea is that the collapsing of the worm hole would'nt mean pushing whatever was in it out to the other side, faster than light. if I understand how they function, they are still sub lightspeed travel time relative to actual inputs and not wave functions collapsing. so the law of information is being conserved. hypothetically your message would collapse into a spread out mess across space at the same distance it would have been had you sent it normally, maybe even some time after you collapsed the worm hole (relative to you) as to conserve the law of information, which is just wierd to think about.
@@qwadratix my friend, you yourself said it was an idea. and correct me if im wrong, but this has not been done, far from that it is something you thought up. making it an idea. which is fine.
I think a true wormhole does not create a temporal paradox because you're still not travelling faster than light... it's just that there is a lot LESS space-time to travel through if you take the wormhole. Why go all the way around the lake when you can take the Einstein-Rosen bridge?
I’m quite the nerd in terms of finding stuff like this super interesting, but a lot of this stuff goes straight over my head as I lack the scientific knowledge. I don’t even have an understanding of entanglement, superposition or quantum mechanics. But does this sort of thing mean that in theory we would at some point be able to have instantaneous global communication/internet connectivity etc. given that data would be transferred across thousands of miles in basically 0 seconds? Or am I being very dumb?
I think 10.37 to 11.00 answers your question a bit. The experiment was in a lab and used the maths for a different sort of universe than the one we've actually got (a universe where space itself is curved outwards instead of "flat" like ours is). We probably don't know yet whether it is possible to translate the results into a flatspace universe like the one we live in. Sorting the theory in ADS space is only a first step. But a cool one.
It's exactly what they've done. They've used a quantum computer because it's a useful device when you want to entangle some real-world particles. That's what the video says, anyway.
The very fact that this isn’t the number one headline 48 hour news cycle world wide is very telling of where mankind is currently … It’s a sad state of affairs .. … priorities so far from where they should lie … it’s absolutely absurd . This is the first step to traversing space and time
Watching this i came up with a theory: Knowing that alternative universes are theoretically possible and black holes are matter squezzed into a singular point inside, what if the black hole is some sort of 'portal' to this other universe or to our universe itself? I can't wrap my mind around the idea that gravitational forces pull matter so hard in one point (or deep, accordingly to the fabric experiment) that creates a connection to other entangled particle. If matter is so compressed from every side, how could it go anywhere? My theory is, when you enter a worm/black hole, it sends you to other point in universe it contains -- alternative or this -- in the direction you are looking at without being able to go back (what would explains that nothing can scape from it), spaghettification would just be a 'visual effect' Imagine a water sphere shell with a small ball floating in the center, the shell would be the gravitational lensing effect and the ball the singularity, when you finger tough the shell, it is attracted by the gravity towards the ball touching it and going to the point you 'touched' or to an alternative but extremely similar universe contained inside the singularity. Other ideas that may be part of this: Black holes are matter 'compressed' by gravity right? therefore, what stops this matter of turning into anything else, like exploding (big bang) and creating new galaxies and planets inside?
More like the next 50 million years, or 500 million... but yeah. The one thing that makes it mostly hogwash is that they claim it's gonna be like that in the 24th century. Still cool that people enjoy the show, but a few hundred years probably ain't gonna cut it. As technology becomes indescribably advanced and far beyond anything that's recognizable today, which it will, the biggest hurdle to overcome won't be newer and better technology. It will be preventing our species from using that technology to annihilate itself all in the name of power and politics. Even with older technology, humanity has come very close to eradicating itself from the known universe on a few occasions. That technology is nuclear weaponry. Think of what kind of threat there will be to the world when technology is so advanced that the most powerful nuclear weapons are a total joke.
In my 31 years of life, I have seen so many of these types of headlines and there is always a caveat to then. This one being that it's in a simulation in which they changed something that can't be changed in real life in order to see what would happen. In this case, allowing data to flow out of a black hole. If you guys want to experience science fiction, just play video games. They're much better. Also, this isn't a dig at the creator, I have just become cynical.
awesome video! its sad that some people just shrugged this saying its just a simulation, like I even saw some rando saying how this is different to Portal (the game)
@@TheBiggreenpig To my knowledge, a quantum computer isn’t really a computer, it’s a chamber devoid of air and extremely cold, which eliminates a lot of outside interference. So it seems they really did make a wormhole, but in a very specific environment. So it may be a while before this has any practical use, but it’s still pretty cool
@@lindseylindsey9200 jokes fly past you. But jokes aside, the quantum computer isn't just the qubits. That's like saying an ordinary computer is just its CPU, or even GPU.
This reminds me of Hegels theories, which overlap with both relativity and quantum mechanics. His last section I the phenomenogy is "absolute knowing," perhaps this can be combined with this theory that the universe is made of information?
Bouncing a ball one day ,a wiggle of light came on and around the ball, it disappeared, thinking I was losing my mind a kid came running to me saying how did you do that magic trick and where's the ball, I've yet to go back to that park I think of this everyday,
I'm amazed how big the contribution of my countrymen has been. in this short video already 2 dutch names I didn't know about and I know that there's many other famous Dutch physicists and astronomers. Willem de Sitter and Gerard 't Hooft
@@tomusic8887 I just do not think we did. If we can find something to break causality that would be a game changer, but the universe seems to be keeping that from us... we shell see, I hope we can someday, if not Space travel might not ever happen or if it does, it will be a multiple generational thing... you leave for a new star system, only your great,great,great......great, grand children get there, only to find out the planet sucks....
The answer is general relativity is wrong. But it still works for pretty much everything. But information can travel faster then light to our knowledge unless something changes properly. The video is kinda just running with the idea. Saying it can work but it is not yet fully known
I just wanted to address a very common (and natural) misunderstanding some people are having! Lots of people think that what was creates was just a simulation of a black hole's singularity, but this is so much more than that. It's a bit of a read so buckle up!
Disclaimer: I have spent a lot of time trying to understand this, but my own field of study only brushes up against quantum mechanics, so someone who is academically active in the field may be able to point out some inaccuracies in my explanations.
There's two very natural misconceptions that lead to the idea that what they produced was not an "actual" wormhole, but just a simulation. The first misconception is that a wormhole only refers to the Einstein-Rosen bridge from the ER paper, which describes a theoretical wormhole created by the extreme curvature of spacetime in a black hole.
The second misconception is from the fact that nobody does a very good job at explaining what a quantum computer actually is, and the fact that they are called 'computers' lends itself to the incorrect but understandable assumption that they are just simulating something.
I'll tackle these misconceptions in order:
===WHAT'S THE DEAL WITH THE EINSTEIN ROSEN BRIDGE===
General relativity is probably the single most successful theory in all of physics. It describes space and time not as two separate things, but as a unified four-dimensional spacetime - and most importantly for this discussion, this spacetime has a bad habit of bending and skewing in the presence of concentrated, non-moving energy - or as we call it, mass.
After they were mathematically proven to exist, black holes caused some issues, because the math that proves that the *must* exist, also completely stops working once you get to the singularity. The ER paper mentioned in this video proposed a very mathematically beautiful solution to this problem: Based on the foundation that spacetime can curve and distort, instead of concentrating energy to an infinitely small, infinitely dense point that messes everything up, a singularity must instead connect with another point in distant spacetime. This is what we usually think of as a wormhole, and one might mistakenly call an "actual" wormhole. However, I think we can all agree that *anything* that connects two points of distant spacetime would be a wormhole, so if you could create one through some OTHER mechanism, it would still be a wormhole - would it not?
Up until recently, there was no reason to believe that there was another method through which an ER-bridge could be created through which something could move, so it would seem pointless to make the semantic point I just made above. In the EPR paper referenced in the video, Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen, not content with the seeming violations of causality that quantum entanglement caused, proposed wormholes as a possible explanation for this supposed faster-than-light transmission of information - but as this bridge would not be able to move macroscopic systems across space and time, so it seems like a different idea, so it seems open and shut that you cannot have a real wormhole without gravitation.
This is why the discovery of Dr. Maldacena in 1997 (4:56) and subsequent discoveries - that is, the theory of ER=EPR is so huge. It's incredibly complicated, and even if I was capable of explaining it all, this is all brand new physics that hasn't been fully fleshed out - but what it comes down to is that not only can entangled systems on a very small scale display properties *similar* to the wormholes in a black hole, they are exactly the same phenomenon. That means that wormholes are not just a phenomenon of gravity, but in fact a phenomenon of quantum mechanics, and that it should be possible to create a wormhole by entangling quantum particles on a smaller scale.
So now we know that (if ER=EPR) we can create a wormhole by using entangled quantum particles in the right way... That sounds hard. Now what?
Enter Dr. Spiropulu and her team.
===WHAT'S THE DEAL WITH QUANTUM COMPUTERS===
Quantum mechanics is complicated to say the least, so I'm going to assume you've made yourself familiar with some of the basics of it - at the very least, the idea of quantum superposition, i.e. that quantum particles can only be described in terms of where they might be according to a probability function, until "measured" - aka, until they become entangled with you, the observer. This is important.
What quantum computing does is that it weaponizes these properties. It's extremely easily to accidentally interfere with a quantum particle and thus collapse its waveform, eliminating its quantum mechanical properties - but if you can avoid that by minimizing any direct or indirect interaction with it, by removing any air and supercooling the system down to superconductive temperatures, you can send an electron or photon through a hell of an obstacle course, basically a "circuit", and only collapse its waveform at the end, producing a quantum interference pattern that tells you every single way it could get through that circuit. In a way the famous double slit experiment is the first ever quantum computer, which asked the simple question "what different ways can a photon get through two slits" - and if you measured ahead of time which slit it passed through, you are zeroing in on a different, but related question: Of the ways a photon can pass through two slits, what subset of them involves passing through this one particular slit?
It's not a particularly helpful question to ask if you're trying to compute something, but it IS a very helpful question if you're trying to understand the fundamental nature of quantum mechanics. See, that's what a quantum computer does: It is not a simulation of quantum systems, it is a system to *build* a more complex quantum system without collapsing the waveform, and then to observe the probability space that emerges.
===IN CONCLUSION ===
So what does all this mean for this video? To summarize, when they say they built a wormhole in a quantum computer, they don't mean they simulated a black hole. They mean they worked with Google Quantum to physically build a quantum system which was theorized to produce a wormhole and send an electron or photon (In this case an electron) through the system in such a way that it would create one interference pattern (probability space) if it traveled through a wormhole, and a different one if it didn't - and when the dust settled and they got the quantum system stable and looked at the interference pattern, it showed that they had in fact *physically created a quantum system wherein an electron passed through a wormhole*. So, in conclusion, I hope this convinces you that they did, in fact, create a quantum wormhole right here on earth :)
P.S. There's a lot of other things going on here. For example, this whole thing about De Sitter space. I can't get into it now, but this is all consistent with expectations, and unfortunately does mean that we're probably not going to be zooping across spacetime through wormholes anytime soon. Still though, it's very cool.
Really good explanation!
@Zren the problem is not that there is a misunderstanding of what a wormhole is, but that it was a extremely siplified "simulation" in an "computer" with a computational power that rivals a pocket calculator of the 80s. They had to massively simplify the simulation, like doing brain surgery with a rubber on a drawn stick man. It if you don´t get the expected results, you tweak your simulation for many months till it does? Is that a valid scientific method in other areas? I don´t think so. Do F1 teams simulate their cars by playing mario cart? No, they don´t! Read your own "conclusion". You can´t write it without using words like "thoerized" and "probaility" - this means in conclusion that what they were doing is nothing more than THEORETICAL physics. No proof for irl!
@@gshaindrich Everything about this is theoretical physics. The existence of Black Holes is technically still only theoretical, even if we have a huge amount of evidence at this point! And the existence of wormholes in them is DEFINITELY theoretical. Theories are powerful things, and all of what we accept to basically be factual in modern physics is classified as a theory, because it is difficult to prove anything outright, but evidence points strongly to it being correct.
The same is true here. They cleverly used neural network approaches because of the physical limits of the quantum systems that can be built right now, but the premise was to follow theory to create a quantum system that opened a bridge in spacetime - if the theories had no basis in reality, no amount of "tweaking the settings" would have produced the result they got. This is because, as I said in my original post, they did not SIMULATE a wormhole, they CREATED one on a quantum scale.
@@-Gnarlemagne so does this permit FTL communication, if not travel?
Really fantastic and digestible explanation.
SIMULATED**** NOT CREATED. I hate all the clickbait video titles. No one created a wormhole, it was simulated.
Thank you! I'll toss them a dislike for the clickbait
every time a physicist divides by zero a singularity gets its wings
Time is perspective based. Universe sees you hit 0 aging, while you see universe not hit any limit, and can continue seeing the universe aging into infinity. 5th dimension wee. Then you return to universe time, the universe hasn’t seen you age at all, and you repeat events now in universe time, and change them. Deja vu… Time slip wee.
You have the most enjoyable username! 🧬🐱
what the fuck
@@AleatoricSatan and a much more enjoyable pussy.
white pussies are the best
Attaboy, Clarence
Surely the Caltech folks did not produce an actual wormhole but a quantum system that exhibits properties of a gravitational wormhole 😉
Try watching the video bud.
Why? This is hardly news and the title is extremely misleading. As was the reporting on the Nature article.
@@curiodyssey3867 I did, and the conclusion I came to is that a model (a "virtual reality" construct) was calculated in which, mathematically, a qubit of information managed to traverse a "model" of a wormhole. Please explain what is wrong with this interpretation. In my mind, a "real", physical particle, would be able to traverse a real, physical wormhole, which this was not. I am not a mathematician nor a physicist, but this interpretation is the only one that seems to make sense to me.
this is just sensationalism.
This experiment is no more than a delayed choice experiment, where we have already observed that information propagated faster than speed of light.
This is not new physics or science. This is just new engineering... No, a wormhole wasn't created. It's just entanglement has properties that keeps unitarity intact.
@Sergio Reyes the entire last section addressed that so top reply could be saying, "oh yeah, thanks for repeating the argument in the video like a gotcha"
It wasn't inviting a re explanation of the last section of the video.
Only understood about 35% of that, but I hope this is as significant as it sounds.
It's not. Check out Sabine hossenfelder
@@InTrancedState it is, naming a german physicist doesnt change the experiments results lmfao not to mention she sits and says how Cannabis is a placebo for pain. When no, no its not lol so idk what your point is
Yes and no, the wormholes are still not achievable to be used as the black holes would destroy the matter before it transfers its information through a black hole.
They run a simulation on a quantum computer (which only makes computations).
It is not even an "experiment", just computations.
No actual "wormhole" at all.
@@andsalomoni you clearly didn’t read the experiment in its entirety cause if you did you would say any of this lmao
I wonder how fast the pulse traveled though as I would imagine that it would shed light on whether or not this is a higher dimensional wormhole or a pseudo wormhole in which the pulse at best is still traveling through 3d space at the speed of light.
more likely the 2nd one :/
Wut
Would love to get an answer for this
He made no indication that the wormhole didn't occupy actual space. In which case, all they did was move a qubit through a tube such as toothpaste in a toothpaste tube. Very unremarkable and essentially useless.
A higher dimensional wormhole? Yeah, if we could detect different dimensions in any way, shape or form I think you'd know about it.
No, it's not what a wormhole is and that's not how a wormhole works as far as "our" understanding of physics go. There's no concrete evidence of other dimensions, only very incomplete speculations. We generally can't even agree on what model "time" fits into.
Let me know what you think! Dipped into some Blender for the first time ever for this one. Many weeks passed....
Thank you for the video. So, Dr. Ben in your conclusion / summary, you claim that it isn't anything we can look at or see. But, your entire video shows that this was an experiment, with "actual results". So, was this a real world experiment or just a simulation? And why isn't this something "seeable"?
It's a fantastic learning tool for anyone to use.
Best visuals I’ve seen of this paper. Great work all round
@@marcfruchtman9473 it was a real world experiment, hard to see because it’s using single particles produced on a QC with the results shown as a spike. His visuals here sum it up well
It's a great video but it would be more better if you can add mentioned papers in descriptions and add more pillars to your contents. Thanks for the detailed video.
Not only they didn't created a wormhole, but they didn't pretend that they did.
*didn't pretend that they didn't?
@@MrLethalShots didn't pretend that they did. They simulated a wormhole with a quantum algorithm. You can simulate pac man, it doesn't make pac man real. Experiment didn't bring any news on quantum mechanics, nor on wormholes, nor on quantum computers.
@@piwi2005 I agree. What I am trying to say is that this hype is perpetuating because the original researchers allowed it to get this bad.
@@MrLethalShots ok, finally got it.
They simulated it
It’s virtual reality
They didn’t create a wormhole
Cause not.
It’s not possible with our knowledge end technical knowledge to create wormhole
It’s a dream from scientists
you are a dream from scientists
oh look we made a wormhole inside a computer, a very human controlled environment
Nope, it was not `inside` a computer. They've used a quantum computer because it's a useful device to entangle real-world particles (this is what a quantum computer does, after all). That's what the video says, anyway.
@@plunntic proof???
@@simplex7096 watch the video again and/or ask the author, i've just wrote you what's been said in the video
@@plunntic no, a quantum computer makes complex calculations due to their ability to not just operate on a binary system but a system that can be any number between 1 and 0. This can absolutely not determine how space time and wormholes would behave in real life so this video is absolutely moronic
This goes towards 'explaining' the Bell paradox. There can be no local variable theory of quantum mechanics because the variable involved in an entangled pair is not in this universe. It exists in the wormhole with essentially zero separation between the two. (At least initially)
I am confusion
@@just-a-fnf-fan Me too
@@just-a-fnf-fan nice to meet u confusions. I am lost
Hello Dr. Miles!
First off, thank you for this amazing video. Found it in my reccomended and I don't regret watching it! I only have one problem: can you put a link to the sources in the description? I would really like to read the papers myself.
Best of luck,
-A curious viewer.
it really wasnt wormhole, misleading info
He reads each and every one. Write them down and look them up yourself.
100% Lie. It isn't possible. The reason why they are stating that is for the research money and the knowledge that nobody else can replicate it without spending millions of dollars on equipment that does nothing in the first place. Which means if someone else did try to replicate it, they would say that their equipment to replicate it is wrong and refuse to specify correct equipment as trade secrets. It happens all the time.
Most concise, complete, and clearest explanation I’ve seen or read. Thank you.
And you don't wonder why that is? :/
@@Dawnarow why is that
@@NoOne-qi4tb there's the negative energy we need for the experiment 🤣
People are sleeping on this channel, real high quality stuff here!
@@dogslol1928 Ghetto speak? Bruh...
Every single day new articles, videos, and news headlines come out highlighting some new discovery or experiment that's going to change the world.... but nothing ever happens.
Cause application is different from discovery, and unfortunately we are all terrible at applying what we've learned
@@MonkeSle that’s a weak response, imo. How many times do we have to hear about research in medicine, space exploration, climate change, etc that claim extravagant, life-altering discoveries of which after reading the headline disappears from our lives completely? Sure, there may be more articles and a few UA-cam videos made about it, but none of this stuff ever impacts our lives in a meaningful way. Here’s my example, some people will claim that my life is impacted by quantum computing every single day for the better, supposedly. But my life pre quantum computing is no different then than it is now. Now take this and apply it to some new cancer treatment, yet cancer rates and deaths only continue to rise each year. Apply it to anything supposedly happening in space.
This is a problem with the media, not science.
@@heaz32 This is a weak argument in my opinion, because your argument is purely anecdotal in nature, and generally relies on "if I hear about this or that, why don't I see this affecting my life?"
It's again because adoption is slower than research. You don't just discover something and immediately commercialize it, and even if it is able to be commercialized, politicians may get in the way, and funding is a whole separate issue. These are important discoveries, and things are happening, but to expect things to happen so fast is an impatient mindset that is reliant on everything just happening soon after a discovery, which only happens in a dream world.
Bruh our world has been wildly changed by general relativity and other scientific advancements. Look at two hundred year increments and see how much the world has changed from breakthroughs.
Things don't change much in your day to day life until you look back through the years.
There's a universe where I'm fucking Batman
Means a few different things.... I would say there's a universe where your fucking batman and a universe where your fucking batman .... 🤔
@@TheOnlyHyland why not both
Irresponsible BS. No wormhole was created. No wormhole has been discovered.
Just stop.
Whenever "quantum" is attached to something, I take it to mean "not really". Quantum teleportation? Not really teleportation. Quantum wormhole? Not going to the Gamma Quadrant.
Thanks for helping contribute to undermining the legitimacy of actual science!
Exactly, people are really buying this shit
Guys if you see titles like these but nothing in the news talking about it
Select from button menu
'do not recommend channel'
Well, if someone was going to open up a portal into Hell, of course google would be involved.
Misleading title; it was just a simulation & not a very impressive one.
The fact that it has to be done through quantum computers makes it a bit silly, since transferring the state change would require transferring data from one end to the other through normal space, but it's good to see action on developing useful manifolds. If gross field topology manipulation ever becomes a thing then these kinds of experiments could give a jump start on useful applications.
There's no new physics here, no one's doing anything with quantum gravity here or physical wormholes in spacetime, this experiment is well within the realm of non-relativistic quantum mechanics, and at best is an analogue system for a toy model of wormholes, and in fact the number of qubits involved was so small as to be able to be simulated on a laptop
Thank you for explaining and visualizing this in a way that was easy to understand. I will be subscribing for more content.
It's so strange because I know this idea wasn't new I was watching documentaries way back in 2008 or before. They spoke about wormholes and quantum entanglement when they were talking about TELEPORTATION. They were trying to talk about the many ways one can transfer data/people through space and the pros and cons. I don't think they ever said they were equal though.
I always thought I could just open the wormhole, throw the entangled particles through and then we wouldn't have to worry about how long it stayed opened...because the particles are entangled already. However since it's duality I don't think that's going to be possible now.
you are a victim of clickbait and misleading info. no wormholes were created of any kind. the coin always did have one head and one tail.
This stuff makes me feel super stupid. If you teleported something through their wormhole, would the original be destroyed or would a perfect copy appear at the other end?
@@jasonrhodes9683 I wish I knew the name of that documentary it had all the answers to your questions. That was years ago so my memory may be off but I know they talked about both scenarios.
The best I can tell you is to type into YT "teleportation documentary" You'll either find it or not.
Just know the science isn't defined yet. THEY decide to destroy your body as protocol. They may say that "doing the measurement will destroy the original copy" however that may not be true.
As I also thought, what if I take the original state and save it. Then send it to multiple entangled teleporters?
Then we have cloning and not teleportation. This is why by protocol, they must destroy the original. To preserve originality.
If this teleportation technology exists I ask a second question. Take the persons state, save it for 100,000 years and then recreate it. What happens?
We just made time travel.
it's a very muddy topic not even the smartest people have it down. So don't feel stupid.
@@RatusMax thank you
@@Ghryst false worhmholes have been created as i published on news already
title graphic is clickbait-y and literally the exact type of headline sabine hossenfelder would tell someone to ignore.
The importance of this experiment, assuming it's repeatable, is unfathomable. This will truly change everything in physics, technology, chemistry, basically everything will be directly impacted. But ONLY if this experiment is proven repeatable and I truly hope it does as this is the most exciting potential discovery in physics ever (in my humble, and less than educated opinion).
What do you think it would change exactly?
actually it's just entanglement at a distance..it has nothing todooth wormholes in 3 dimensionalspace
In terms of change it would allow us much more detailed manipulation of entanglement as it deepens or understanding of the fundamental forces at play. Forces which are influencing the rest of physics. In a nut shell, it is a step closer, possibly a large step, towards a truly unified field theory. In terms of application, I can't say. Kinda like the early days in the discovery of radiation, or electricity. Being able to accurately and predictably manipulate and force/phenomena has always eventually led to unpredictable innovation and further discovery, starting with the use of the first tool (likely a stick or rock) and leading to today's tech. Any discovery or experiment has this same potential, some much more than others.
We are still very early in the application of entanglement, but as with all technologies, the growth is likely to be exponential. Hopefully this will be a significant step towards more widespread adoption and innovation because for quantum computing to reach even a portion of its potential, we need as much use in as many different settings as possible.
All that said, I am a biologist, not a physicist, and this experiment could prove to be complete b.s. and I'm getting excited because of hype not actual results. I hope this isn't the case.
they didnt.
Just a small tip... Schwarzschild is split into Schwarz (black) and Schild (shield). Same as Rothschild. Roth and Schild. German-speaking viewers will appreciate this small detail :P
When can I buy one?
that is not a wormhole..its called entanglement
Little help: It's "Schwarzschild", not "SchwarTzschild". Also, pronounciation follows "Schwarz-schild". The "schild" is a distinct part. It would translate to something like "black-shield". It's not "schwarzs-child". A child has nothing to do with it ;) that's just a pattern english native speakers see.
It's a proper noun. There is no correctness to any of what you are preaching, dumbo.
sch=sh=x
That's cool, thanks for pointing it out. Yeah, native English speakers will recognize it as such, most of them anyway.
So basically we can communicate random bits instantly to people on mars lol
No we can't
No we can’t, that would require a space time wormhole, not a simulated one.
Can this be used for FTL communications?
FTL communications break causality...... and you REALLY don't want that.
You mentioned some information gets transfered between quantum entangled particles, what information are you referring to? To my understanding, once particles are entangled the information has been shared at that point. Why does observation of those particles need to transfers information from one particle to the other?
@@mr_clean575 change? The spin is the opposite and remains that way. What information needs to be transferred?
@@mr_clean575 thanks for the info! The confusion came in around the wave function collapse. My understanding is that the collapse does not need to transfer info. If the first observed particle is spin up we know the other one is spin down but only way to know the other one is spin down is by collapsing it. So say 2 entangled particles are taken to each side of the visible universe, we collapse 1 and its spin down. We at one side of the universe know that but the other side does not know and won't know until they collapse their wave which we knownwill be spin down but they have no idea.
1:28 - No! GR has NOT been proven accurate on the largest cosmic scales. Check your facts!
What does the elapsed time for information to get from one side to the other signify? Is it somehow correlated to the physical distance between the two ends of the worm-hole? Has it been observed to be super-luminal? One would think that information transfer being super-luminal would be the proof that a worm-hole has been successfully created. If the information transfer speed is sub-luminal there must be other indications as proof that are probably not very approachable by us layman.
They didn't say but there's no reason to believe the speed was super luminal. The wormhole would just connect the two very distant points but the traveling entity doesn't have to go fast through it.
Don't think the point was that it took a certain amount of time to go through, but rather... The fact that they could reliable predict the time it would take. Though I'm no big brain so meh.
i think they cant confirm the speed unless they build a much bigger quantum computer i remember listening to the youngest of the their team saying their first calculation showed they needed a QC at least 10 times stronger than the existing one in google to collect all needed information this expirement is incomplete but it gave them the most important result that warmholes does exist
Even if the information transfer speed is sub-luminal it shows that we have a definitve tool to have lossless communication over distance when we always condsider the speed and distance between two sources.
Basically, I see this as most helpful as to bring alive the concept of sub space communication in Star Trek that is essentially instantaneous comms across light years
Subspace communications has limited range at a great enough distance it takes time for the message to get through if you actually saw star trek.
@@tonymc9102 i have. Many episodes lol. The point being, it’s much faster than regular travel, my God. And it’s obviously quantum in nature. Just try to enjoy life a lil damn, ha
I wonder if it could be wireless. This wormhole effect seems to only take place in one machine from one point to another point within. It seems to me like this more useful to transport physical cargo at speeds of electricity (or the electro magnetic field needed to stabilize the wormhole through the journey). I don’t think this team found out your to make two openings to the worm hole and separate and stabilize them wirelessly. So I think this could turn out more like a wormhole version of those pneumatic mail delivery tubes and land lines. Ie requiring infrastructure between the two destinations like a wire or physical tunnel.
@@wastelesslearning1245 you're correct. qubits require a superconducting media to travel through or they collapse, you can't just send the m through space.
@@none-ro9dz still potentially awesome technology especially if you can leverage this precision to fabricate or medically operate. Hope the quantum relationship wave information are never deconstructed/disconnected even if De-corporealized during the relay process to keep up with speed. If so this could be just as good as portals “teleportation”; avoiding the kill and clone paradox.
about 14 billion years ago my buddy ziougburg tried something like this and there was a big ass explosion
This I hear here first, and sorta meshes with my personal headcannon of what is what.
Which is that matter is concentrated space. However there is time and causality. So so far my only idea is that concentrated space fluctuates between being concentrated and smoothen out states. The speed at which they do this is basically the speed of causality clocked at light speed. The motion that gravity creates comes off as the inetrtia that remains after each cycle because as each concentration enters its concentrated state, it pulls the entirety of this space towards itself as its contracts into its peak concentrated form governed by the level of energy exist in that spot. When we speak about energy cannot be destroyed is a fact in this theory that the concentration amount space does in each cycle will remain the same across every cycle.
I also got some ideas to test this relieing on the idea that the inertia part relies on a transition phase, i don't think it could happen if its instantenous between fully concentrated and smoothen out space fluctuation and different concentration levels effects each other before a the cycle reach its peak amplitude.
I'm 100% confident that a lot of black holes that exist happened where there was intelligent life that like us, shortly after becoming sentient, cause ourselves.
The 'De Sitter'/'Anti De Sitter' Holographic Space problem can be resolved if we assume cosmos is a black hole - with gravity emerging from its Event Horizon inwards, accelerating the expanding universe outwards (also the explanation for Dark Energy).
I think dark energy is the anti gravity/ massive energy pulse keeping this wormhole(our universe) open as matter passes through it , that’s what they looking for
What crap, building a computer is engineering not science, and putting the parameters you need to get the answer you looking for is not a discovery, it is a computer game.
no they didnt 👍
If macro and micro theories cannot act together, doesn't that mean that they are wrong? Scientists should stop basing their works on incomplete theories and make a new one from scratch. I know, that's a shitload of work, but a theory of everything that doesn't explain everything is obviously incomplete. That's like saying "this specific collision conservates energy, so all ones do so" and basing other papers on the fact that all collisions conservate energy - it doesn't work, something false leads to something false.
Time is an illusion, space also is, thinking is real. Within not so much time we will include consciousness as part of the quantum mechanics and so physics. Thanks for the very good speach.
And the dude that did the quantum programming was a young dude…this was a good feat I’ve been looking at too
physicist: I've created a worm hole!
worm: big deal, I do it every day.
It pains me that so many people, even professionals, still don't actually understand what entanglement is all about. There is no transmission of information. Just a statistical ensemble of macrostates that don't include any outcomes where both electrons are spin up or both down, for example. Those outcomes cannot happen. But physics doesn't care which electron is actually up and which is down, that part is left to chance, but the coin flip determines the state of both particles not just one. It determines which universe you're living in, that's all. No information.
Soo they made a 3D image of a wormhole on a computer? Not impressed.
How was this experiment different from just demonstrating entanglement???
It isn't. Around new fiscal year, Fermi labs always has a half-assed experiment to show new engineering because they have yet to show new physics or new science...but their budget never shrinks...and the scientists get fatter exponentially...🤪
Because they allowed a particle--separate from the group of entangled particles creating the wormhole--to **pass through** the worm hole and come out on the other side. Simply demonstrating entanglement would be to change the spin of the particle and observe that its entangled partner also changed to remain opposite.
There was a time where physics meant things would eventually be observable. Theoretical models and Quantum Computer simulations and applications are not physics. Time crystals and quantum warmholes....they are projections of thought at this moment.
Given time to develop, this will mean that we can have a near instant communication system form anywhere (earth, moon, mars, space vehicles) to anywhere. Away with the clutter of satellites, 'radio'-waves and cables.
This is already achievable with entanglement 😊
@SketchNoyes - No it's not.
@@sketchnoyes7090 I think it isn’t
@@khatharrmalkavian3306 okay well it is, entanglement you could use it for basic communication. Like a Morris code, but ya you can’t transmit large bits of data, but hypothetically you could communicate with entanglement 😏🤓🧐
@@sketchnoyes7090 no
if physics has a good ending, this sounds to be the start.
yay. more proof we live in a simulation! I talk about this all the time on my channel! But I'm just a dumb pothead, so it's cool to see smart people figure it out.
10:16 - So, that's interesting. The logical conclusions one might draw... So, if this matter level of the universe is resultant from information or patterns in constituent lower dimensions... This particular existence should be very stable, if not inevitable. What a heavenly idea.
Looks like they could make a portal in real life now.
TLDW: There is zero indication that we will ever be able to open a wormhole and transport ourselves or even data to another planet. So you can forget about all the Sci-fi stuff you read/watched about wormholes.
Either I don't understand the definition of quantum entangled particles or somehow physicists are missing something that seems very simple to me.
Two particles are simultaneously created I'm such a way that their quantum states are both determined at the creation of the particles. Their state will continue to be directly related to the state of the other particle unless some force affects one of the particles. Because we know that these two particles have states that are linked by the initial conditions of their creation we only need to check the state of one to know the state of the other.
No information is being transferred across any distance. We are merely using the known laws of physics to reach a logical conclusion. It's like looking outside and seeing the sun directly overhead and then instantly being able to determine that it is night time on the other side of the planet. The other side of the planet didn't transmit information to you instantly.
It's hard to believe that people who are supposed to be some of the smartest people in the world wouldn't be able to reach what seems to be a simple conclusion. Maybe I'm just fundamentally misunderstanding something about the nature of quantum entanglement, because otherwise I'm genuinely not sure how this isn't obvious to a physicist.
Didn't they do this already? Maybe 10 years ago, didn't they teleported a proton/photon to outer space?
Oh, they created a simulation.
Schwartzschild is pronounced like Shvurtz Shield (no child there). My 2 cents I guess. Other than that, no particular need to point out how good the video is, it's obvious.
man I'm never gonna beat "43"
so is this going to give me lower call of duty ping times eventually or do we have to wait a decade for this to be developed into something useful
This needs way more views.
That's what bullshit like this is intended for: more views for ad moneys.
Just imagine this technology and all of this information belongs to a very small amount of people. They have control of it.
I fail to see how this is anything more than the usual 'entanglement is correlation, not causal' misunderstanding.
I live one block from CalTech. That means I have officially been within one block of the first wormhole.
Probably not accurate, technically incorrect, but that is the story I am sticking to on Twitter.
Have a good day,.
🤣
So are you a tech-bro who lives in a $million+ tiny bungalow, or a plebe who sleeps in their car parked on some residential street? Either way, congrats on your Twitter life. Nothing like bragging about swallowing obviously bullsh*t.
Only a worm would seek an escape from the reality of its own destruction it has created.
If you believe this I have space water to sell you
This was not an actual wormhole but an analogue to one.
We are still not close to generating one and possibly never will.
This is the kind of news that should be boosted above all else by the msm. Imagine if humanity as a whole focuses on this, we would developed to be star explorers even sooner.
Username checks out
OK, Here's an idea for a practical device using this principle that could potentially give us faster-than light communications without violating the principles of Special Relativity.
As follows:-
First you have to setup the comms channel. This sadly involves a sub-light transfer (to some destination) of a primed comms device consisting of one-half of this same apparatus with an already-established quantum tunnel between the two halves. The other half remains on Earth of course. (Don't ask me how - that's just technical stuff for the engineers to solve)
In order to use the device, the transmitting end can now send a message to the receiver by inserting data into the wormhole and selectively collapsing the section of wormhole that contains the message, squeezing it out at the other end effectively instantly. Messages can be returned the same way.
Note that the wormhole gets used up by the transmissions and eventually there is no more entanglement left to be collapsed. So in order to keep a channel open you would need to continue transmitting 'empty' entanglement through normal space (at sublight) and you'd have to use the channel sparingly so that your average data stream over time didn't exceed the lightspeed limit. Otherwise, you'd simply empty the storage and messaging would have to stop.
This is just a though and I haven't really considered the implications for causality associated with this schema. So feel free to critique. 🤣🤣
Our top physicists are calling they want to get more information on your idea because they never thought of it.
If I understand your idea correctly, I think the issue with that idea is that the collapsing of the worm hole would'nt mean pushing whatever was in it out to the other side, faster than light.
if I understand how they function, they are still sub lightspeed travel time relative to actual inputs and not wave functions collapsing. so the law of information is being conserved.
hypothetically your message would collapse into a spread out mess across space at the same distance it would have been had you sent it normally, maybe even some time after you collapsed the worm hole (relative to you) as to conserve the law of information, which is just wierd to think about.
@@cameronphares2482 It's not 'an idea' it's an explanation of why this is an important demonstration. But never mind.
@@qwadratix
my friend, you yourself said it was an idea.
and correct me if im wrong, but this has not been done, far from that it is something you thought up. making it an idea. which is fine.
I think a true wormhole does not create a temporal paradox because you're still not travelling faster than light... it's just that there is a lot LESS space-time to travel through if you take the wormhole. Why go all the way around the lake when you can take the Einstein-Rosen bridge?
I’m quite the nerd in terms of finding stuff like this super interesting, but a lot of this stuff goes straight over my head as I lack the scientific knowledge. I don’t even have an understanding of entanglement, superposition or quantum mechanics. But does this sort of thing mean that in theory we would at some point be able to have instantaneous global communication/internet connectivity etc. given that data would be transferred across thousands of miles in basically 0 seconds? Or am I being very dumb?
I think 10.37 to 11.00 answers your question a bit. The experiment was in a lab and used the maths for a different sort of universe than the one we've actually got (a universe where space itself is curved outwards instead of "flat" like ours is). We probably don't know yet whether it is possible to translate the results into a flatspace universe like the one we live in. Sorting the theory in ADS space is only a first step. But a cool one.
Okay now do it in real life.
It's exactly what they've done. They've used a quantum computer because it's a useful device when you want to entangle some real-world particles. That's what the video says, anyway.
It wasn’t a wormhole and you well know that. Dislike
12/8/22 7AM local time - Cheyenne Mountain Complex: "Guys put everything back, we're not getting a Stargate, sorry."
The very fact that this isn’t the number one headline 48 hour news cycle world wide is very telling of where mankind is currently … It’s a sad state of affairs .. … priorities so far from where they should lie … it’s absolutely absurd . This is the first step to traversing space and time
Wormholes and quantum entanglement are two very different things. You've got it wrong. Quantum entanglement does not warp space-time. Wormholes do
Watching this i came up with a theory: Knowing that alternative universes are theoretically possible and black holes are matter squezzed into a singular point inside, what if the black hole is some sort of 'portal' to this other universe or to our universe itself?
I can't wrap my mind around the idea that gravitational forces pull matter so hard in one point (or deep, accordingly to the fabric experiment) that creates a connection to other entangled particle. If matter is so compressed from every side, how could it go anywhere?
My theory is, when you enter a worm/black hole, it sends you to other point in universe it contains -- alternative or this -- in the direction you are looking at without being able to go back (what would explains that nothing can scape from it), spaghettification would just be a 'visual effect'
Imagine a water sphere shell with a small ball floating in the center, the shell would be the gravitational lensing effect and the ball the singularity, when you finger tough the shell, it is attracted by the gravity towards the ball touching it and going to the point you 'touched' or to an alternative but extremely similar universe contained inside the singularity.
Other ideas that may be part of this:
Black holes are matter 'compressed' by gravity right? therefore, what stops this matter of turning into anything else, like exploding (big bang) and creating new galaxies and planets inside?
I feel like the the next 50 years is gonna be the pilot episode for Stat trek
More like the next 50 million years, or 500 million... but yeah. The one thing that makes it mostly hogwash is that they claim it's gonna be like that in the 24th century. Still cool that people enjoy the show, but a few hundred years probably ain't gonna cut it.
As technology becomes indescribably advanced and far beyond anything that's recognizable today, which it will, the biggest hurdle to overcome won't be newer and better technology. It will be preventing our species from using that technology to annihilate itself all in the name of power and politics.
Even with older technology, humanity has come very close to eradicating itself from the known universe on a few occasions. That technology is nuclear weaponry.
Think of what kind of threat there will be to the world when technology is so advanced that the most powerful nuclear weapons are a total joke.
What happens if you divide a zero in a quantom computer?
In my 31 years of life, I have seen so many of these types of headlines and there is always a caveat to then. This one being that it's in a simulation in which they changed something that can't be changed in real life in order to see what would happen. In this case, allowing data to flow out of a black hole. If you guys want to experience science fiction, just play video games. They're much better. Also, this isn't a dig at the creator, I have just become cynical.
awesome video! its sad that some people just shrugged this saying its just a simulation, like I even saw some rando saying how this is different to Portal (the game)
It is the same. Both are simulations on a computer. Maybe Portal has better graphics.
@@TheBiggreenpig To my knowledge, a quantum computer isn’t really a computer, it’s a chamber devoid of air and extremely cold, which eliminates a lot of outside interference. So it seems they really did make a wormhole, but in a very specific environment. So it may be a while before this has any practical use, but it’s still pretty cool
@@lindseylindsey9200 jokes fly past you. But jokes aside, the quantum computer isn't just the qubits. That's like saying an ordinary computer is just its CPU, or even GPU.
This reminds me of Hegels theories, which overlap with both relativity and quantum mechanics. His last section I the phenomenogy is "absolute knowing," perhaps this can be combined with this theory that the universe is made of information?
Haha. From strings to muscle movement from chemically stored energy. They were right, and so was I.
Bouncing a ball one day ,a wiggle of light came on and around the ball, it disappeared, thinking I was losing my mind a kid came running to me saying how did you do that magic trick and where's the ball, I've yet to go back to that park I think of this everyday,
For a dissenting view, see Peter Woit’s coverage of this on his blog, _Not Even Wrong._
10:08, please tell me I'm not the only one to spot a cartoon baby in the bottom there XD
Ben Miles is removing any comments that are skeptical of the so called wormhole paper🤡🤡
I'm amazed how big the contribution of my countrymen has been. in this short video already 2 dutch names I didn't know about and I know that there's many other famous Dutch physicists and astronomers.
Willem de Sitter and Gerard 't Hooft
Just in case the Combine invades: all hail the mighty Benefactors!
Kinda crazy how we got wormholes and fusion within a few weeks of each other.
hopefully with the right direction and funding it can be used to power alot of science projects into reality
@@angelguardian21 I'm answering this guys question whats it got to do with what ur saying lol, projecting much
Shoutouts to the algorithm and the aneurysm
"and they unleashed the horrors of the warp upon mankind. emperor protect us!"
So is that the solution to spooky action? Wormholes that always form between entangled particles?
There is still the problem that no information can be exchanged that is usable. Meaning one side has no idea of the other side...
So we got no step further...at all
@@tomusic8887 I just do not think we did. If we can find something to break causality that would be a game changer, but the universe seems to be keeping that from us... we shell see, I hope we can someday, if not Space travel might not ever happen or if it does, it will be a multiple generational thing... you leave for a new star system, only your great,great,great......great, grand children get there, only to find out the planet sucks....
The answer is general relativity is wrong. But it still works for pretty much everything. But information can travel faster then light to our knowledge unless something changes properly.
The video is kinda just running with the idea. Saying it can work but it is not yet fully known
Einstein’s look at the end..!
Write in google: Singularity sphere in the heart of a black hole