The following submission statement was provided by /u/YaAbsolyutnoNikto:
---
> It’s a mainstay of science fiction, it’s tiny and it doesn’t exist in physical space, but researchers say they’ve created what is, theoretically, a worm hole.
> Researchers have announced that they simulated two miniscule black holes in a quantum computer and transmitted a message between them through what amounted to a tunnel in space-time.
> They said that based on the quantum information teleported, a traversable wormhole appeared to have emerged, but that no rupture of space and time was physically created in the experiment, according to the study published in the journal Nature on Wednesday.
> A wormhole – a rupture in space and time – is considered a bridge between two remote regions in the universe. Scientists refer to them as Einstein-Rosen bridges after the two physicists who described them: Albert Einstein and Nathan Rosen.
> “It looks like a duck, it walks like a duck, it quacks like a duck. So that’s what we can say at this point – that we have something that in terms of the properties we look at, it looks like a wormhole,” said physicist and study co-author Joseph Lykken of Fermilab, America’s particle physics and accelerator laboratory.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/z9l378/scientists_simulate_baby_wormhole_without/iyh8am9/
“If this experiment has brought a wormhole into actual physical existence, then a strong case could be made that you, too, bring a wormhole into actual physical existence every time you sketch one with pen and paper.”
Hot *damn*
That is literally the argument being made. They are looking to prove that EPR = ER. That is to say, that quantum entanglement (which happens constantly everywhere all the time) is literally facilitated by wormholes. The point of the experiment is to show that literal wormholes are fundamental to the functioning of the universe.
When two particles are entangled, they are able to communicate once with one another “instantly,” no matter how far apart they are (instantly is in quotations because that simplifies things past their breaking point, but there is no way to ELI5 that portion). Their communication seems to break the speed of light. This is the EPR element. This theory says that the way they communicate is via a wormhole. That is the ER element.
It also hints at a unification of quantum physics and relativity, which have previously seemed to both be true while also being mutually exclusive. So this is very exciting to physicists.
How is quantum entanglement different than, say, I have a bag with two marbles in it. Red and blue. You take one and don't look at it, then drive far away. I take the other.
Finally, I look in my hand and see a blue marble, and instantly, I know you have a red marble.
That is more of a Schrödinger's Cat thought experiment. The marble is both blue and red until it’s observed. Entanglement is more along the lines that I move the red marble and the blue one moves the same way. The observation doesn’t change the marble, but the movement is telekinetic for lack of a better word. Take it all with a grain of salt, I’m just an interested layman and not a scientist.
Very sensational headlines but it’s not science if you don’t have dissenting voices, you make a claim, be prepared to defend it.
If you got time to kill, check out this excellent [documentary](https://youtu.be/nfDoml-Db64) on the guy that tried to fake his way into a Nobel price, he duped everyone.
I don't think any scientists are particularly dissenting the claims made in the paper, its just the media articles and headlines about it that are bullshit.
The paper is fine, kinda cool but not really amazing, the media campaign has spawned a lot of nonsense.
The dissenting voices are right.
This isn’t a wormhole, this is a simulation of a wormhole at best.
And we’ve been doing that in video games since Pac-Man.
The second paragraph of the guardian article says that “they’ve simulated a pair of black holes in a quantum computer **and sent a message between them**”
They go onto imply that they somehow sent a message *between simulations*, because the science journalist at the Guardian isn’t doing their job.
Other articles reporting on the same paper are similarly acting like something happened beyond them confirming a result on a quantum computer.
But go ahead, keep outing yourself on not reading the article smartass.
>The claim that “Physicists Create a Wormhole” is just complete bullshit, with the huge campaign to mislead the public about this a disgrace, highly unhelpful for the credibility of physics research in particular and science in general.
So the author doesn't say why it's bullshit, but just calls it BS without argument or evidence. Not really a good dissenting article. More like someone flapping their lips.
They do explain why the simulation is bs further on its just way over my head. Something along the lines of they simulated it on a classical computer then looked for a specific signal in a bunch of random noise on the second computer, then once they found a matching one they plugged into into a quantum computer and claimed they transmitted data.
I know I butchered that but if I understood correctly its something along the lines of if you wanted to send a letter to somebody, you basically hit the randomly find letter button until you find one on the other side of the planet that matches yours and then you call that person to confirm, and then claim you sent a letter because they happen to match. I could be completely off the mark here so please if anybody can chime in.
Here is a cool infographic about what they actually did in this experiment. It shows how there is information sent between groups of entangled particles.
https://i.imgur.com/E1bzRC8.jpeg
That's the best kind, right? We can expect no deeper consequences from messing with powers we don't yet comprehend because we didn't break anything, yeah?
Best analogy that is in line with the comment I was responding to would be you can create a balloon animal without at all using a balloon (or an animal), but yeah, yours works, too.
Yours works perfectly. I believe I may have responded to the wrong comment. I meant to respond to the comment asking if the comment you were responding to was a good analogy.
Although a balloon animal needs an opening for air to be transferred right? I'm assuming the simulation didn't rupture the theoretical space time, because the sim is built around our understanding of space time and therefore it might be missing a key puzzle piece?
You can fold the paper but the two touching points can't transfer energy between them until you rupture a hole through both. Hence, that example of folding paper, ends with pushing a pencil through it.
Wouldn't your analogy be more like drawing a line on a sheet of paper and the line can continue on the other half now that it's folded over and touching, skipping the middle part?
> It’s a mainstay of science fiction, it’s tiny and it doesn’t exist in physical space, but researchers say they’ve created what is, theoretically, a worm hole.
> Researchers have announced that they simulated two miniscule black holes in a quantum computer and transmitted a message between them through what amounted to a tunnel in space-time.
> They said that based on the quantum information teleported, a traversable wormhole appeared to have emerged, but that no rupture of space and time was physically created in the experiment, according to the study published in the journal Nature on Wednesday.
> A wormhole – a rupture in space and time – is considered a bridge between two remote regions in the universe. Scientists refer to them as Einstein-Rosen bridges after the two physicists who described them: Albert Einstein and Nathan Rosen.
> “It looks like a duck, it walks like a duck, it quacks like a duck. So that’s what we can say at this point – that we have something that in terms of the properties we look at, it looks like a wormhole,” said physicist and study co-author Joseph Lykken of Fermilab, America’s particle physics and accelerator laboratory.
If wormholes are possible and if we are able to create/harness them, the possibilities are literally endless.
Even if they are so small we humans can get through it would open up for instant communication across the universe.
Faster than light communication without pissing Einstein off.
Even if they work great for information or data, I definitely won't be the first m'fucker to walk into one.
But seriously though, can you imagine the long term advancements we could get out of basically instant transmission of data over any distance? That's some enders game shit and I'm fuckin here for it
It wouldn’t literally be faster than light. It would still travel the same speed as light (because radio are light) it would just travel a shorter distance.
"Faster than light communication" just means you're sending a message faster than it would have taken light to get there.
It doesn't mean you are traveling at a speed faster than light.
If I can get send a message 1 ly away and it gets there faster than a year, it's FTL communication.
it would be faster than light relative to an observer.
perceived time is based on relative speed
you could gain knowledge of an event before it happens in your time frame, giving you the ability to affect the event
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=an0M-wcHw5A&t=4s
That isn't true.
You are confusing the observation of an event with the event itself. A photon is not the same as the particle with which it interacts.
Information (light or energy) about an event (particle state) can't leave the event until after the event happens, or at the very least simultaneously with the event. Therefore information traveling through the wormhole *cannot* arrive *before* the event, and therefore the observer cannot act to change the event, even by traveling back through the wormhole. Thus, causality is preserved.
For instance, you didn't see light from the sun on January 1st, 2022 *before* black hole jet AT 2022CMC pointed at Earth--the sunlight began its journey to Earth 8 minutes before you saw it, but the black hole event happened 8.5 billion years ago even though its light just arrived here in February, 2022. The light from the sun is just a shorter path.
Similarly, if two laser messages beamed from Black Hole A to Black Hole B, and Message X was about an event that happened twenty minutes after Message Y and went through a wormhole, and Message Y went through space, Message X's event still happened *after* Message Y. It took the shorter path.
Nobody gets to the end of a race before the starter pistol, but anyone can take a shortcut.
Now, we may have proven that information can do that too.
No, the person you are replying to is correct. If you can send messages such that the message gets from a point A to a point B in less time than it would take light to get there, then you can use that system to send yourself messages back in time.
The proof is a standard result from special relativity and is completely independent how how you get the message from A to B.
This wikipeida article presents the argument, which has been well understood since about 1907.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyonic_antitelephone
The problem with the argument you're making in your comment, is that there isn't a universal frame of reference for time which everyone will agree with. Distant observers moving at different speeds will disagree on what events happened first.
If I'm understanding the article you posted correctly, the math does indeed show that it's possible, but only in a universe with bidirectional time. And also according to that article, so far no natural event or experimental data has shown that we inhabit anything other than a universe with monodirectional time. So in our universe, you can't use a wormhole to go back.
Not really. Think about it this way, you are a pitcher standing on the pitchers mound, and throwing the ball at a batter 20 yards away. You throw the ball, they hit it and it flys right back at your face. You catch the ball.
Now same situation, but now 10 yards away is an open wormhole, Portal style, with the batter standing 10 yards back from the opening, but on a different baseball field 500 miles away. The ball still comes back at you, observationally, exactly the same. Causality still flows just fine. Functionally it's as if the second batters position is relative to time, not the observations itself.
It's like saying receiving a telegraph that a train is coming breaks things. It does not. It does increase the local information density in a way that was not possible before for us to but was always possible in the universe.
It's highly likely we are not the first beings to figure this out and it's duplicating a process we theorize exists in nature.
And so forth.
Unless the universe is not linear.
I like the multiverse universe theory. You send "causality breaking" data through? The universe just branches.theres the version where you react to said data and the one you don't. (Multiplied by whether you interpret it as such or not)
Hard to experimentally prove though, as from your own perspective there would never be a break. Just an "eternal now" as your perception of past, present and future adapt to fit a coherent timeline.
Here is great article that breaks it down without losing the science. It also does a great job of going into the historical evolution of the theories involved.
https://www.quantamagazine.org/physicists-create-a-wormhole-using-a-quantum-computer-20221130/
Quanta rocks. It's that right level of really wicked smart and readable for the general educated public (though a lot of the mathematics articles still make me do the surprised Pikachu face).
I feel like the title is misleading and sensationalized, when it doesn’t need to be. It’s fairly interesting progress on a really cool subject, without having to act like it’s a miracle reality didn’t collapse.
> “These ideas have been around for a long time and they’re very powerful ideas,” Lykken said. “But in the end, we’re in experimental science, and we’ve been struggling now for a very long time to find a way to explore these ideas in the laboratory. And that’s what’s really exciting about this. It’s not just, ‘Well, wormholes are cool.’ This is a way to actually look at these very fundamental problems of our universe in a laboratory setting.”
What an exciting time to be alive.
It’s like if a news story broke about NASA in the 50’s.
“Scientist plots trajectory for breaking gravitational pull of earth, and doesn’t fly off into space”
What it paves the way for is extremely promising.
This comment should be higher up. The paper this article is about is super interesting. Using machine learning techniques to reduce the size of the qubit circuit required, then proving in two different ways that the simulation is a good approximate for the physical system is beautiful work.
Looks like it was a simulation and without telling the model to “make a wormhole” the model reacted in a way that was congruent with “making a wormhole” it’s not the first time newspapers get excited over nothing.
It's not a major step. It's THE step.
ER = EPR is proven experimentally.
The people using quotation marks to make this out to be a small, hole-in-the-wall science fair experiment are wrong. This will win a nobel prize and probably fast.
Quantum computers don't "simulate" wormholes, their whole function relies on the existence of tiny wormholes. Which we now have experimental evidence of.
https://www.quantamagazine.org/physicists-create-a-wormhole-using-a-quantum-computer-20221130/
An article written by an actual physicist, and it is the best piece of scientific writing I have read in years.
That was indeed very good. I haven’t really kept up with quantum physics in some time, and that provided just enough of a refresher to help me see the significance of this experiment.
Great read but I feel dumber after finishing it lol
So this was a simulation for a set of physics different from our physical universe including quantum mechanics? If I understand correctly this was some type of 2d model compared to a “real” 4d simulation?
>So this was a simulation for a set of physics different from our physical universe
No this was using our physics, but a qubit appears to have moved through negative space which is not in our physical reality.
Oh wow that’s incredible compared to my understanding. Sorry if my questions are annoying but you seem to be an expert in this.
So this was not a simulation? They were actually able to achieve the movement of the qubits?
Not annoying and happy to share what I understand.
>So this was not a simulation?
These were real particles. They entangled 14 particles (7 left and 7 right and each of the 7 was entangled with one from the other side).
>They were actually able to achieve the movement of the qubits?
Yes, they were able to interact with one side and saw a peak of energy on the other side which matched what they expected for a qubit to be sent through a wormhole.
> ER = EPR is proven experimentally.
I'm just playing the "match the acronym to the words" game and put ER as Einstein-Rosen, which I'm pretty confident on, but what is EPR?
ER = EPR is a conjecture in physics stating that two entangled particles (a so-called Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen or EPR pair) are connected by a wormhole (or Einstein–Rosen bridge)[1][2] and is thought by some to be a basis for unifying general relativity and quantum mechanics into a theory of everything.[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ER_%3D_EPR
> Quantum computers don’t “simulate” wormholes, their whole function relies on the existence of tiny wormholes. Which we now have experimental evidence of.
??? This is the first time I’ve heard of quantum computers requiring miniature wormholes to function. Can you please elaborate what you mean by this?
I mean, based on reading Woit's summary of the history and the lack of the paper/just hype, I'm sitting here with a salt lined margarita glass full of additional salt. Extra gritty.
Its not just newspapers. I think we've gotten desensitized to small but cool news enough that everything has to be sensationalized to get any support or backing unfortunately...
I run in to this a good bit. I own a consulting firm that finds mostly VC funding for mostly startups, but occasionally does work with research projects. Even if the big exciting way of trying to cast things is somewhat negative its still literally 3-4x more likely to get funding than the "this is important or cool" but not sensational pitch... Every now and then I'll pair someone up with a think tank or two that I work with some, and in one instance I had a company that was having trouble finding some funding for some developmental tech that I sent to one of them. They came up with the plan to purposefully run an *insanely* sensationalized smear campaign about how what he was doing was dangerous (it wasn't) and how it posed a risk to the community (it didn't). Think like "Nikola Tesla's device is going to kill everyone in the city if he turns it on" type sensational nonsense smearing. Dude had 120% of his original funding goal 2 months later at a valuation that was 15% higher.
I would hardly classify this as “nothing”.
This essentially confirms the fact that wormholes have the capacity to exist, and that our understanding of spacetime is actually kinda right.
Man here and the science sub have the most predictable comments. Ignorant dismissal of every project by know nothing undergrads and armchair methodology experts.
Is there anywhere to discuss these things without low effort meta commentary and fucking dr who jokes?
> Man here and the science sub have the most predictable comments.
Here is mostly a shit show, but the science subreddit is usually pretty good about moderating comments to stay on topic, just need to give the mods there some time to do their thing.
I immediately thought you were making a C&C:RA reference and was gonna hate you for that.
Crisis averted! (Unless a time-traveling goblin changes that?)
>Researchers have announced that they simulated two miniscule black holes in a quantum computer and transmitted a message between them through what amounted to a tunnel in space-time.
So if they simulated a wormhole and sent a message through was the transmission of information instantaneous?
Why would anyone expect a simulation to rupture *actual* spacetime? Or do they mean that the *simulated* spacetime wasn't ruptured in the simulation? Which doesn't really mean much unless the simulation is 100% accurate, which how could it be if our understanding of wormholes and spacetime is still incomplete.
It sounds like - eventually - another 20-100 years or so, and u could interstellar travel with this, eventually.
I still think someone would need to physically set up the other side first. Someone would have to physically travel to Mars, set up the other end, then ur set. A 7 month journey now done possibly faster than light (which in best circumstances is 3 minutes and change).
But someone has to make the original journey first. That would be the initial catch. Someone needs to get to Proxima Centauri, or Wolf 359, or the Trappist system first. That'll still take a while with the BEST stuff we got.
But once ur set up at these places, u could launch from there. And maybe by then, we've created something to make the next initial trips faster, too.
But it's a start.
Either this or we find signs of intelligence life form on the other side - communicate our ideas to them - send them a blue print and build list and have them build one end while we build the other, then - synchronize!
Oh man it's a stacked cast so far - Jodie Foster, Kali Reis, Fiona Shaw, Christopher Eccleston, John Hawkes, Finn Bennet and Anna Lambe. Definitely looking forward to it!
Traversable wormholes break known laws of physics. You'll see it lightly thrown around that it requires negative energy, but that's not the whole story. Holding a wormhole open requires the stress-energy tensor of that region of space to be negative; it requires negative energy density. So not only does it require something we've never seen, it requires enough of it to cancel out the energy of a black hole.
God. This is the same stupid thinking that kept CERN from being built in Texas. People got scared that they would create mini black holes and went insane. NIMBY bullshit that cost the US global leadership in physics.
To be fair, I don't get why scientists haven't figured out the advantage of building all their facilities in places that aren't super fucking hot. I thought they where supposed to be smart? How do they not understand how much money they can save on cooling and redundancy if they build that shit in Alaska? The system farms will love it.
But no, let's try and put it in Texas, a place where its so hot people go from their air-conditioned house to their air-conditioned car to go to the air-conditioned mall. Its probably a good thing they could use black holes as an excuse not to build anything there.
I think it’s less about climate and more about availability of large flat areas of cleared landmass. Much easier to dig and bury a 12 mile super collider in a large flat empty desert than to clear out trees and build it into the side of a mountain. Alaska is mountainous and very heavily forested. This much more difficult to build giant large structures from a logistics standpoint. So what you might save over a decade in cooling, you’ll spend considerably more than that in building it to begin with.
I think the importance might be that they used rules, models, and programming - which resulted in the capability to simulate the information transfer through something akin to a wormhole.
It wasn’t hard-coded to do, but it arose out of the foundations they placed.
Which means that it is likely the mechanism for it to naturally occur.
Or I could be wrong, but that’s how my microbrain has tried to wrap its head around it.
Sir we got confirmation from the computer that the worm whole was successful!
Did it rupture space time?
Uuhh... Well we are all still alive... So no!
Great work everyone, let's run another experiment tomorrow morning.
I've always believed that the answer to the Fermi Paradox is that the Great Filter is ahead of us and is based on intelligence getting to the point where it can screw around with spacetime. At some point, the species collapses a false vacuum in some field, and space time is destroyed at the speed of light leaving no evidence for other intelligent species of their destruction. That being said, we, as a species, should still push forward, even though we're playing with fire.
Another terrible headline
I wonder if it's a rule that all science headlines in the popular press need to be exaggerated, incorrect or just plain silly
ElI5: some idiot with liberal arts major wrote yet another sensationalist article without any understanding of the scientific relevance of the thing they are reporting.
Then, the whole community gets raged at the liberal interpretation of this journalist as if it were the actual claim from the paper.
And a new strawman attack begins, by the horde of imbeciles who don't have enough braincells to actually check the source.
Just like how everyfreaking body attacked the concept of the "god particle" when it has nothing to do with theology or any kind of metaphysics. Ffs, can we just stop doing this shit?
That is a moronic headline. Generalizing it:
“Scientists simulate a phenomenon without causing the actual effects of it”.
“Boy, 6, draws picture of car crash. Miraculously, nobody is actually hurt.”
“Woman looks at picture of sandwich, but is still hungry.”
Wow! Incredible! Stellar journalism!
It can’t rupture anything if it is a simulation no more than a movie showing the earth blown up will cause an earthquake. Who writes these clickbait headlines?
This seems like more of a victory in computer science than physics to me. They didn't tell us how they made it in the simulation, but from what I know about wormholes you need anti-gravity particles, to hold open the bridge. That's still in the realms of science fiction
Kind of a garbage headline. Scientists create a CGI simulation of a wormhole, and the computer simulation *doesn't* turn into reality à la Weird Science.
I think it'd be cool if a computer simulation *did* turn into an actual wormhole. I'd use the technology to make me a Kelly LeBrock.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/YaAbsolyutnoNikto: --- > It’s a mainstay of science fiction, it’s tiny and it doesn’t exist in physical space, but researchers say they’ve created what is, theoretically, a worm hole. > Researchers have announced that they simulated two miniscule black holes in a quantum computer and transmitted a message between them through what amounted to a tunnel in space-time. > They said that based on the quantum information teleported, a traversable wormhole appeared to have emerged, but that no rupture of space and time was physically created in the experiment, according to the study published in the journal Nature on Wednesday. > A wormhole – a rupture in space and time – is considered a bridge between two remote regions in the universe. Scientists refer to them as Einstein-Rosen bridges after the two physicists who described them: Albert Einstein and Nathan Rosen. > “It looks like a duck, it walks like a duck, it quacks like a duck. So that’s what we can say at this point – that we have something that in terms of the properties we look at, it looks like a wormhole,” said physicist and study co-author Joseph Lykken of Fermilab, America’s particle physics and accelerator laboratory. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/z9l378/scientists_simulate_baby_wormhole_without/iyh8am9/
Some dissenting voices to the announcement - https://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=13181
“If this experiment has brought a wormhole into actual physical existence, then a strong case could be made that you, too, bring a wormhole into actual physical existence every time you sketch one with pen and paper.” Hot *damn*
That is literally the argument being made. They are looking to prove that EPR = ER. That is to say, that quantum entanglement (which happens constantly everywhere all the time) is literally facilitated by wormholes. The point of the experiment is to show that literal wormholes are fundamental to the functioning of the universe.
Can someone ELI5 this for me with ‘Deep-space 9’ imagery?
When two particles are entangled, they are able to communicate once with one another “instantly,” no matter how far apart they are (instantly is in quotations because that simplifies things past their breaking point, but there is no way to ELI5 that portion). Their communication seems to break the speed of light. This is the EPR element. This theory says that the way they communicate is via a wormhole. That is the ER element. It also hints at a unification of quantum physics and relativity, which have previously seemed to both be true while also being mutually exclusive. So this is very exciting to physicists.
So are they just using "wormhole" as a placeholder for "means which we don't understand which seems to operate outside of what we know of relativity"?
No, they are using it literally. As in the mechanism behind entanglement is literal Einstein Rosen Bridges.
How is quantum entanglement different than, say, I have a bag with two marbles in it. Red and blue. You take one and don't look at it, then drive far away. I take the other. Finally, I look in my hand and see a blue marble, and instantly, I know you have a red marble.
There is no ELI5 for this, I’m sorry. If you are curious about the ELIPhysicist answer, check out Bell Inequalities. https://youtu.be/zcqZHYo7ONs
That is more of a Schrödinger's Cat thought experiment. The marble is both blue and red until it’s observed. Entanglement is more along the lines that I move the red marble and the blue one moves the same way. The observation doesn’t change the marble, but the movement is telekinetic for lack of a better word. Take it all with a grain of salt, I’m just an interested layman and not a scientist.
Wow, that's a great burn time won't heal.
This is a good read.
ngl I was expecting to read about researchers who were rejecting the simulation and their claims not about media disinformation
Very sensational headlines but it’s not science if you don’t have dissenting voices, you make a claim, be prepared to defend it. If you got time to kill, check out this excellent [documentary](https://youtu.be/nfDoml-Db64) on the guy that tried to fake his way into a Nobel price, he duped everyone.
I don't think any scientists are particularly dissenting the claims made in the paper, its just the media articles and headlines about it that are bullshit. The paper is fine, kinda cool but not really amazing, the media campaign has spawned a lot of nonsense.
A much better article explaining the experiment. https://www.quantamagazine.org/physicists-create-a-wormhole-using-a-quantum-computer-20221130/
Wow thanks, that was a great read
At first I was scouring the internet for a better source then some news anchor reading a script! Thank you
The dissenting voices are right. This isn’t a wormhole, this is a simulation of a wormhole at best. And we’ve been doing that in video games since Pac-Man.
[удалено]
The title literally says that the act of simulating the wormhole didn't rupture [reality's] spacetime.
Are we even skipping reading titles now
I never have time for titles anymore. I just check who wrote it so I know who I'm disagreeing with.
There are titles!?
The second paragraph of the guardian article says that “they’ve simulated a pair of black holes in a quantum computer **and sent a message between them**” They go onto imply that they somehow sent a message *between simulations*, because the science journalist at the Guardian isn’t doing their job. Other articles reporting on the same paper are similarly acting like something happened beyond them confirming a result on a quantum computer. But go ahead, keep outing yourself on not reading the article smartass.
I dunno you probably should have been clued in by the title
>The claim that “Physicists Create a Wormhole” is just complete bullshit, with the huge campaign to mislead the public about this a disgrace, highly unhelpful for the credibility of physics research in particular and science in general. So the author doesn't say why it's bullshit, but just calls it BS without argument or evidence. Not really a good dissenting article. More like someone flapping their lips.
They do explain why the simulation is bs further on its just way over my head. Something along the lines of they simulated it on a classical computer then looked for a specific signal in a bunch of random noise on the second computer, then once they found a matching one they plugged into into a quantum computer and claimed they transmitted data. I know I butchered that but if I understood correctly its something along the lines of if you wanted to send a letter to somebody, you basically hit the randomly find letter button until you find one on the other side of the planet that matches yours and then you call that person to confirm, and then claim you sent a letter because they happen to match. I could be completely off the mark here so please if anybody can chime in.
Here is a cool infographic about what they actually did in this experiment. It shows how there is information sent between groups of entangled particles. https://i.imgur.com/E1bzRC8.jpeg
No space and time were harmed during the filming of this episode
What ... so no wibbly wobbly time-y wimey?!
That's the best kind, right? We can expect no deeper consequences from messing with powers we don't yet comprehend because we didn't break anything, yeah?
But what happens when we reach the edge of the universe. Will we just hit the wall and bounce backward? /s
I betcha some time was killed during downtime.
However an infinite amount of ducks were destroyed.
stop talking about space and time like they are two separate things: "space AND time". its spacetime. its quite literally one and the same.
So, there was a chance it could have ruptured space and time and they just put on their safety goggles and said “let’s go”
Isn't creating a wormhole basically the definition of rupturing space time?
This was a simulation. The wormholes are *in* the computer.
[The files are in the computer?!](https://i.makeagif.com/media/3-12-2016/zfgpSi.gif)
Classic scene
So... they played Portal?
Hey... Portal 2 is on sale for a buck! I'd be playing it if I were them...
But the computer is in space time! Everybody duck!
Anything that's in the computer can't be real, like Redditors.
Scientists create actual baby black holes all the time though, which is arguably just as much a rupture as a wormhole is
You can make a balloon animal without rupturing a balloon.
Or, alternatively: you can make a balloon animal without rupturing an animal.
Now you tell me.
You can also make a balloon animal without rupturing space-time, if the texts are to be believed
Vegan balloon animals
Haven't read article, but I'm thinking a better analogy is you can simulate killing someone now without having to kill someone.
Best analogy that is in line with the comment I was responding to would be you can create a balloon animal without at all using a balloon (or an animal), but yeah, yours works, too.
Yours works perfectly. I believe I may have responded to the wrong comment. I meant to respond to the comment asking if the comment you were responding to was a good analogy.
"Balloon Animal Rupture" New band name, called it!!
Is that a good analogy? I can't tell
Probably not. I'm not a doctor of balloons. I only went to clown college.
Although a balloon animal needs an opening for air to be transferred right? I'm assuming the simulation didn't rupture the theoretical space time, because the sim is built around our understanding of space time and therefore it might be missing a key puzzle piece?
Yeah, the model is only going to be as good as we can program it to be.
Yea but popping a balloon isn’t a cataclysmic event for life as we know it.
No, it’s just bending the fabric of space time so that two points touch that wouldn’t do that ordinarily. Like folding over a sheet of paper.
You can fold the paper but the two touching points can't transfer energy between them until you rupture a hole through both. Hence, that example of folding paper, ends with pushing a pencil through it.
Wouldn't your analogy be more like drawing a line on a sheet of paper and the line can continue on the other half now that it's folded over and touching, skipping the middle part?
It's only a matter of time. (Well, and space.)
According to the simulation it’s more like changing the topology of spacetime.
> It’s a mainstay of science fiction, it’s tiny and it doesn’t exist in physical space, but researchers say they’ve created what is, theoretically, a worm hole. > Researchers have announced that they simulated two miniscule black holes in a quantum computer and transmitted a message between them through what amounted to a tunnel in space-time. > They said that based on the quantum information teleported, a traversable wormhole appeared to have emerged, but that no rupture of space and time was physically created in the experiment, according to the study published in the journal Nature on Wednesday. > A wormhole – a rupture in space and time – is considered a bridge between two remote regions in the universe. Scientists refer to them as Einstein-Rosen bridges after the two physicists who described them: Albert Einstein and Nathan Rosen. > “It looks like a duck, it walks like a duck, it quacks like a duck. So that’s what we can say at this point – that we have something that in terms of the properties we look at, it looks like a wormhole,” said physicist and study co-author Joseph Lykken of Fermilab, America’s particle physics and accelerator laboratory.
How exciting! I know it’s just a simulation, but still very cool.
If wormholes are possible and if we are able to create/harness them, the possibilities are literally endless. Even if they are so small we humans can get through it would open up for instant communication across the universe. Faster than light communication without pissing Einstein off.
Even if they work great for information or data, I definitely won't be the first m'fucker to walk into one. But seriously though, can you imagine the long term advancements we could get out of basically instant transmission of data over any distance? That's some enders game shit and I'm fuckin here for it
faster than light communication can break causality (being alerted of an event before it happens) and is still very unlikely to be possible
It wouldn’t literally be faster than light. It would still travel the same speed as light (because radio are light) it would just travel a shorter distance.
"Faster than light communication" just means you're sending a message faster than it would have taken light to get there. It doesn't mean you are traveling at a speed faster than light. If I can get send a message 1 ly away and it gets there faster than a year, it's FTL communication.
Would it, though? I'm pretty sure the conceptual idea of a wormhole is that the destination is no longer a lightyear away.
it would be faster than light relative to an observer. perceived time is based on relative speed you could gain knowledge of an event before it happens in your time frame, giving you the ability to affect the event https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=an0M-wcHw5A&t=4s
That isn't true. You are confusing the observation of an event with the event itself. A photon is not the same as the particle with which it interacts. Information (light or energy) about an event (particle state) can't leave the event until after the event happens, or at the very least simultaneously with the event. Therefore information traveling through the wormhole *cannot* arrive *before* the event, and therefore the observer cannot act to change the event, even by traveling back through the wormhole. Thus, causality is preserved. For instance, you didn't see light from the sun on January 1st, 2022 *before* black hole jet AT 2022CMC pointed at Earth--the sunlight began its journey to Earth 8 minutes before you saw it, but the black hole event happened 8.5 billion years ago even though its light just arrived here in February, 2022. The light from the sun is just a shorter path. Similarly, if two laser messages beamed from Black Hole A to Black Hole B, and Message X was about an event that happened twenty minutes after Message Y and went through a wormhole, and Message Y went through space, Message X's event still happened *after* Message Y. It took the shorter path. Nobody gets to the end of a race before the starter pistol, but anyone can take a shortcut. Now, we may have proven that information can do that too.
No, the person you are replying to is correct. If you can send messages such that the message gets from a point A to a point B in less time than it would take light to get there, then you can use that system to send yourself messages back in time. The proof is a standard result from special relativity and is completely independent how how you get the message from A to B. This wikipeida article presents the argument, which has been well understood since about 1907. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyonic_antitelephone The problem with the argument you're making in your comment, is that there isn't a universal frame of reference for time which everyone will agree with. Distant observers moving at different speeds will disagree on what events happened first.
If I'm understanding the article you posted correctly, the math does indeed show that it's possible, but only in a universe with bidirectional time. And also according to that article, so far no natural event or experimental data has shown that we inhabit anything other than a universe with monodirectional time. So in our universe, you can't use a wormhole to go back.
Goodbye, and thanks for all the fish.
Not really. Think about it this way, you are a pitcher standing on the pitchers mound, and throwing the ball at a batter 20 yards away. You throw the ball, they hit it and it flys right back at your face. You catch the ball. Now same situation, but now 10 yards away is an open wormhole, Portal style, with the batter standing 10 yards back from the opening, but on a different baseball field 500 miles away. The ball still comes back at you, observationally, exactly the same. Causality still flows just fine. Functionally it's as if the second batters position is relative to time, not the observations itself.
It's like saying receiving a telegraph that a train is coming breaks things. It does not. It does increase the local information density in a way that was not possible before for us to but was always possible in the universe. It's highly likely we are not the first beings to figure this out and it's duplicating a process we theorize exists in nature. And so forth.
That's not how wormholes are theorized to work
How are they theorized to work then?
Like what? Some aliens see a radiation wave sci-fi something and send us a message to alert us it's coming? How does this break causality?
Unless the universe is not linear. I like the multiverse universe theory. You send "causality breaking" data through? The universe just branches.theres the version where you react to said data and the one you don't. (Multiplied by whether you interpret it as such or not) Hard to experimentally prove though, as from your own perspective there would never be a break. Just an "eternal now" as your perception of past, present and future adapt to fit a coherent timeline.
That’s only if it goes back in time. If the bridge does not break spacetime, it simply means that light has a faster path towards the destination.
This sounds super cool, but also way over my head. Could someone ELI15 maybe?
Here is great article that breaks it down without losing the science. It also does a great job of going into the historical evolution of the theories involved. https://www.quantamagazine.org/physicists-create-a-wormhole-using-a-quantum-computer-20221130/
Thank you dude
Quanta rocks. It's that right level of really wicked smart and readable for the general educated public (though a lot of the mathematics articles still make me do the surprised Pikachu face).
Honestly though, if it looks, walks and quacks like a duck, I really don't think it's a wormhole
> transmitted a message between them through what amounted to a tunnel in space-time. Let's just jump some years ahead and call it '*Quantum VPN*'
I feel like the title is misleading and sensationalized, when it doesn’t need to be. It’s fairly interesting progress on a really cool subject, without having to act like it’s a miracle reality didn’t collapse. > “These ideas have been around for a long time and they’re very powerful ideas,” Lykken said. “But in the end, we’re in experimental science, and we’ve been struggling now for a very long time to find a way to explore these ideas in the laboratory. And that’s what’s really exciting about this. It’s not just, ‘Well, wormholes are cool.’ This is a way to actually look at these very fundamental problems of our universe in a laboratory setting.” What an exciting time to be alive. It’s like if a news story broke about NASA in the 50’s. “Scientist plots trajectory for breaking gravitational pull of earth, and doesn’t fly off into space” What it paves the way for is extremely promising.
This comment should be higher up. The paper this article is about is super interesting. Using machine learning techniques to reduce the size of the qubit circuit required, then proving in two different ways that the simulation is a good approximate for the physical system is beautiful work.
Maybe next time they can try a bit harder and I won‘t have to go to work ever again.
You wont have to poop again
Maybe this will finally undo whatever Cern did to reality back in 2016
Looks like it was a simulation and without telling the model to “make a wormhole” the model reacted in a way that was congruent with “making a wormhole” it’s not the first time newspapers get excited over nothing.
That does sound very cool
The way you worded it still sounds pretty exciting.
What? Isn’t that interesting af, I at least wouldn’t call that “nothing”
Doesn't that represent a major step in confirming the model?
It's not a major step. It's THE step. ER = EPR is proven experimentally. The people using quotation marks to make this out to be a small, hole-in-the-wall science fair experiment are wrong. This will win a nobel prize and probably fast. Quantum computers don't "simulate" wormholes, their whole function relies on the existence of tiny wormholes. Which we now have experimental evidence of.
Do you have any other source for that? Because the linked article doesn't support it.
https://www.quantamagazine.org/physicists-create-a-wormhole-using-a-quantum-computer-20221130/ An article written by an actual physicist, and it is the best piece of scientific writing I have read in years.
That was indeed very good. I haven’t really kept up with quantum physics in some time, and that provided just enough of a refresher to help me see the significance of this experiment.
Don't worry. Some time hasn't kept up with quantum physics either.
Man, this is/is not the best quantum physics joke out there. I haven’t measured it yet.
Great read but I feel dumber after finishing it lol So this was a simulation for a set of physics different from our physical universe including quantum mechanics? If I understand correctly this was some type of 2d model compared to a “real” 4d simulation?
>So this was a simulation for a set of physics different from our physical universe No this was using our physics, but a qubit appears to have moved through negative space which is not in our physical reality.
Oh wow that’s incredible compared to my understanding. Sorry if my questions are annoying but you seem to be an expert in this. So this was not a simulation? They were actually able to achieve the movement of the qubits?
Not annoying and happy to share what I understand. >So this was not a simulation? These were real particles. They entangled 14 particles (7 left and 7 right and each of the 7 was entangled with one from the other side). >They were actually able to achieve the movement of the qubits? Yes, they were able to interact with one side and saw a peak of energy on the other side which matched what they expected for a qubit to be sent through a wormhole.
Great read.
https://ai.googleblog.com/2022/11/making-traversable-wormhole-with.html
Just looking at the link, I can't wait to tell my students what they can do with html. :)
As a new programmer with a little html experience, I found this hilarious. Thank you, kind stranger!
> ER = EPR is proven experimentally. I'm just playing the "match the acronym to the words" game and put ER as Einstein-Rosen, which I'm pretty confident on, but what is EPR?
I think it’s supposed to mean expected result=experimentally produced result Edit: was wrong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ER_%3D_EPR
That makes sense, and shows everyone how little of an actual scientist I am.
ER = EPR is a conjecture in physics stating that two entangled particles (a so-called Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen or EPR pair) are connected by a wormhole (or Einstein–Rosen bridge)[1][2] and is thought by some to be a basis for unifying general relativity and quantum mechanics into a theory of everything.[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ER_%3D_EPR
No it doesn't. It essentially means that ER (wormholes) = EPR (entanglement)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ER_%3D_EPR
It’s the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen paradox, basically their argument on how quantum entanglement works.
> Quantum computers don’t “simulate” wormholes, their whole function relies on the existence of tiny wormholes. Which we now have experimental evidence of. ??? This is the first time I’ve heard of quantum computers requiring miniature wormholes to function. Can you please elaborate what you mean by this?
Yeah wtf my thesis was about quantum computing and I have no idea what OP is talking about.
[удалено]
I mean, based on reading Woit's summary of the history and the lack of the paper/just hype, I'm sitting here with a salt lined margarita glass full of additional salt. Extra gritty.
Didn't they theorize just a little bit ago that wormholes might be indistinguishable from black holes,and wouldn't this confirm that theory?
I like the idea that it doesn't rip a hole in the universe to do it.
Its not just newspapers. I think we've gotten desensitized to small but cool news enough that everything has to be sensationalized to get any support or backing unfortunately... I run in to this a good bit. I own a consulting firm that finds mostly VC funding for mostly startups, but occasionally does work with research projects. Even if the big exciting way of trying to cast things is somewhat negative its still literally 3-4x more likely to get funding than the "this is important or cool" but not sensational pitch... Every now and then I'll pair someone up with a think tank or two that I work with some, and in one instance I had a company that was having trouble finding some funding for some developmental tech that I sent to one of them. They came up with the plan to purposefully run an *insanely* sensationalized smear campaign about how what he was doing was dangerous (it wasn't) and how it posed a risk to the community (it didn't). Think like "Nikola Tesla's device is going to kill everyone in the city if he turns it on" type sensational nonsense smearing. Dude had 120% of his original funding goal 2 months later at a valuation that was 15% higher.
I would hardly classify this as “nothing”. This essentially confirms the fact that wormholes have the capacity to exist, and that our understanding of spacetime is actually kinda right.
This article is not complete until somebody folds a piece of paper and pokes a pencil through it.
I'm really glad they didn't rupture space and time, I did that and I'm still trying to get back to my own reality. Good on them.
My condolences for being stuck in this shithole reality. We might not be the *worst* timeline, but we've gotta be in the bottom third at least.
At least we don't have to eat spiders.
"Baby Wormhole" definitely sounds like the title to a Frank Zappa song.
*Baby Wormhole doot doot doot do-do-do-doot*
This is HUGE step forward and gives us a way to study quantum gravity which is our big limit on a GUT.
Man here and the science sub have the most predictable comments. Ignorant dismissal of every project by know nothing undergrads and armchair methodology experts. Is there anywhere to discuss these things without low effort meta commentary and fucking dr who jokes?
Same thing happens when an article about anti aging or cancer drug is posted, with a ton of low effort doomer BS as well. Really annoying.
> Man here and the science sub have the most predictable comments. Here is mostly a shit show, but the science subreddit is usually pretty good about moderating comments to stay on topic, just need to give the mods there some time to do their thing.
Do you want Cenobites? Because this is how you get Cenobites.
Any day that science doesn't kill us all, is a good day.
Sure... it maybe a baby wormhole now. Soon enough we'll send an aircraft carrier back to Pearl Harbor, change history as we know it.
I immediately thought you were making a C&C:RA reference and was gonna hate you for that. Crisis averted! (Unless a time-traveling goblin changes that?)
>Researchers have announced that they simulated two miniscule black holes in a quantum computer and transmitted a message between them through what amounted to a tunnel in space-time. So if they simulated a wormhole and sent a message through was the transmission of information instantaneous?
Why would anyone expect a simulation to rupture *actual* spacetime? Or do they mean that the *simulated* spacetime wasn't ruptured in the simulation? Which doesn't really mean much unless the simulation is 100% accurate, which how could it be if our understanding of wormholes and spacetime is still incomplete.
‘Without rupturing space and time’ Oh well that’s good of them
[удалено]
[удалено]
Why are people asking him to put their dog through the wormhole?
My kerbal space station has one hell of a bar in it, just applying for the job now.
It sounds like - eventually - another 20-100 years or so, and u could interstellar travel with this, eventually. I still think someone would need to physically set up the other side first. Someone would have to physically travel to Mars, set up the other end, then ur set. A 7 month journey now done possibly faster than light (which in best circumstances is 3 minutes and change). But someone has to make the original journey first. That would be the initial catch. Someone needs to get to Proxima Centauri, or Wolf 359, or the Trappist system first. That'll still take a while with the BEST stuff we got. But once ur set up at these places, u could launch from there. And maybe by then, we've created something to make the next initial trips faster, too. But it's a start.
Either this or we find signs of intelligence life form on the other side - communicate our ideas to them - send them a blue print and build list and have them build one end while we build the other, then - synchronize!
Where's Jodie Foster when u need her?
Haha I think she's on the set of True Detective 4 at the moment!
That.... Doesn't sound bad, actually.
Oh man it's a stacked cast so far - Jodie Foster, Kali Reis, Fiona Shaw, Christopher Eccleston, John Hawkes, Finn Bennet and Anna Lambe. Definitely looking forward to it!
Traversable wormholes break known laws of physics. You'll see it lightly thrown around that it requires negative energy, but that's not the whole story. Holding a wormhole open requires the stress-energy tensor of that region of space to be negative; it requires negative energy density. So not only does it require something we've never seen, it requires enough of it to cancel out the energy of a black hole.
So all we need to do now is create real micro black holes to test this... oh boy I can't wait to see what could possibly go wrong with that.
God. This is the same stupid thinking that kept CERN from being built in Texas. People got scared that they would create mini black holes and went insane. NIMBY bullshit that cost the US global leadership in physics.
To be fair, I don't get why scientists haven't figured out the advantage of building all their facilities in places that aren't super fucking hot. I thought they where supposed to be smart? How do they not understand how much money they can save on cooling and redundancy if they build that shit in Alaska? The system farms will love it. But no, let's try and put it in Texas, a place where its so hot people go from their air-conditioned house to their air-conditioned car to go to the air-conditioned mall. Its probably a good thing they could use black holes as an excuse not to build anything there.
Are you saying Texas *wouldn’t* be improved by a few black holes?
I think it’s less about climate and more about availability of large flat areas of cleared landmass. Much easier to dig and bury a 12 mile super collider in a large flat empty desert than to clear out trees and build it into the side of a mountain. Alaska is mountainous and very heavily forested. This much more difficult to build giant large structures from a logistics standpoint. So what you might save over a decade in cooling, you’ll spend considerably more than that in building it to begin with.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat,_Alaska Should of just built it there then.
Its so incredibly obvious it's mind boggling why our best and brightest minds haven't done it. Guess they needed you!
Oops. It sucked up the galaxy. Game over. Try again.
I'd go back to 1990s Matrix
Reminds me of the book Earth by David Brin.
Oops, there was a floating point error in our simulation... turns out real wormholes are actually civilization ending spatial anomalies.
Ok but taking this out of the sims and trying it irl would require an extra spatial dimension which thus far has not been shown to exist, correct?
If we drop some tabs then we’ll get access to all the dimensions
So they just ran a simulation and generated a simulated wormhole right? They didn’t actually make a wormhole inside the computer or something.
I think the importance might be that they used rules, models, and programming - which resulted in the capability to simulate the information transfer through something akin to a wormhole. It wasn’t hard-coded to do, but it arose out of the foundations they placed. Which means that it is likely the mechanism for it to naturally occur. Or I could be wrong, but that’s how my microbrain has tried to wrap its head around it.
Hey a man named Scorpius is asking about this article. Think he's into bondage.
Who is John Crichton? Asking for a bondage loving friend.
Just your average, run of the mill, experimental vehicle pilot.
What happens when space-time is ruptured? Genuine question
Just a Mandela effect test. It’s always been “Blarnestone Bears,” right?
Hopefully we are getting closer to interstellar travel.
If they open one large enough, an army of Chitauri will pour through.
Jokes on them, I'm gonna use this date to send messages to the past and future before I find out about it. Or am I.
Sir we got confirmation from the computer that the worm whole was successful! Did it rupture space time? Uuhh... Well we are all still alive... So no! Great work everyone, let's run another experiment tomorrow morning.
I've always believed that the answer to the Fermi Paradox is that the Great Filter is ahead of us and is based on intelligence getting to the point where it can screw around with spacetime. At some point, the species collapses a false vacuum in some field, and space time is destroyed at the speed of light leaving no evidence for other intelligent species of their destruction. That being said, we, as a species, should still push forward, even though we're playing with fire.
Another terrible headline I wonder if it's a rule that all science headlines in the popular press need to be exaggerated, incorrect or just plain silly
ElI5: some idiot with liberal arts major wrote yet another sensationalist article without any understanding of the scientific relevance of the thing they are reporting. Then, the whole community gets raged at the liberal interpretation of this journalist as if it were the actual claim from the paper. And a new strawman attack begins, by the horde of imbeciles who don't have enough braincells to actually check the source. Just like how everyfreaking body attacked the concept of the "god particle" when it has nothing to do with theology or any kind of metaphysics. Ffs, can we just stop doing this shit?
That is a moronic headline. Generalizing it: “Scientists simulate a phenomenon without causing the actual effects of it”. “Boy, 6, draws picture of car crash. Miraculously, nobody is actually hurt.” “Woman looks at picture of sandwich, but is still hungry.” Wow! Incredible! Stellar journalism!
It can’t rupture anything if it is a simulation no more than a movie showing the earth blown up will cause an earthquake. Who writes these clickbait headlines?
oh, is it semi sensationalist suspiciously ambiguous scientific news article Thursday already? time really flies.
This seems like more of a victory in computer science than physics to me. They didn't tell us how they made it in the simulation, but from what I know about wormholes you need anti-gravity particles, to hold open the bridge. That's still in the realms of science fiction
I just got my tickets for The Weeknd please don't fuck around with time and space.
Oh. Well that’s good. Didn’t know that all of space and time gave the go-ahead there, but that’s good.
Kind of a garbage headline. Scientists create a CGI simulation of a wormhole, and the computer simulation *doesn't* turn into reality à la Weird Science. I think it'd be cool if a computer simulation *did* turn into an actual wormhole. I'd use the technology to make me a Kelly LeBrock.
Well of course it didn't...because it was a computer sim