Teleporting energy? Is this report F.O.S.?

Can quantum entanglement actually transfer energy, or is this guy a crackpot?

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/physics-04w.html

In my understanding teleporting of information and matter and energy (which are all the same underlying stuff, matter and energy just being “made of information” in a certain sense, there being about 10^65 bits or 10^20 joules in a kilogram) is possible but extremely difficult. I think they teleported atomic quantities in the last few years.

But quantum mechanics attracts all sorts of crackpots and displaced hollow earth enthusiasts. It can be hard to tell if any particular author is a crackpot if you’re not part of the acedemic physics community, and occasionally even if you are.

I understand why scientists use common words, like “spin” and “color,” to describe concepts that are otherwise meaningful only in math, but I wish they would stop it. Calling this teleportation just confuses the issue.

Right now the concepts described in the article are such tenuous extrapolation that he might as well be talking about wormhole drives. Part is it is my problem: I cannot visualize how pouring energy into the cesium on earth would produce an ion thrust effect on the ship. More significantly, I can’t understand why this wouldn’t break the entanglement. Once any of the entangled cesium atoms are removed from the entanglement I would think the whole thing would collapse.

But most of it is simply handwaving. Note the reference to antimatter. We’re only up to the point of making an anti-hydrogen atom with current technology, IIRC. Trying to scale that up to an antimatter power plant is sheer wish-fulfillment. I don’t see any difference between this and scaling up from a laboratory set-up of entangled cesium to the size needed for multiple atomic power plants feeding in laser beams.

It’s probably a good exercise for physics students. IMO it’s otherwise meaningless.

Of course, you can “beam” energy with magnetism if you are looking for “energy teleportation”

No, he’s just a crackpot. As far as I can tell he has no understanding of what quantum teleportation really is and (as Exapno says) is just assuming it acts like Star Trek. It’s not a “scaling” issue; there’s just no way to do what he’s suggesting.

Yup. If it worked the way he says it does, you could quantum entangle two pots of water, and get them both boiling by just heating one of them. The laws of thermodynamics do not approve of this sort of chicanery. If it takes X kcal to boil 1 pot of water, it takes 2X kcal to boil 2 pots of water.
Heck if you had an infinite number of entangled pots of water, you could boil them ALL by heating one of them.
Where would the energy for that boiling come from?

i vote crackpot. He seems to think that energy is actually “teleported” in this process, which is probably a result of the awful choice of “teleport” to describe quantum entanglement. Being an Optical physicist, i also dislike his description of “laser beam teleportation,” which demonstrates his misunderstanding of the topic.

Entangled photons are essentially a pair of photons who are in an entangled state, meaning that there is a definite relation between the quantum state of the photons. This means that if you measure one, you inherently determine the state of the other photon. This has implications for quantum information transmission and cryptography, as he points out.

However, no Energy is transmitted in this process. The photons were already energetic enough to be in whatever possible states they can exist in. As soon as you interact with one of the photons, you interact with it, and usually break the entanglement. I’m not an expert on quantum atomic physics, but adding energy to one atom in an entangled pair would necessarily involve interacting with it, and thus break the entanglement. There would be no reason for the energy to be “teleported” to the other atom, because the interaction with the energy supply is localized to the (now untangled) atom. Indeed, since there are serious implications of violating causality here (in particular, transporting Energy faster than the speed of light), this type of idea would probably be laughed at by most serious physicists.

So short story? crackpot.

It may confuse the issue, but my guess would be that it also helps the people working on it get more funding – in which case they probably aren’t too interested in choosing a new name for it.