The Chinese Solar Machine Layer by Layer Fire in the Library The Mystery Behind Anesthesia
(Page 2 of 2)
Encryption keys used today rely on the belief that it takes huge computing resources to break them, says Jeffrey Shapiro, of MIT's Optical and Quantum Communications Group. But if someone invents a vastly more powerful quantum computer, that advantage would be lost. In addition, the random sequences of numbers generated to make today's encryption keys aren't truly random. They're generated by mathematical operations, and a smart code breaker might be able to figure out the algorithm being used to generate them. Quantum bits, on the other hand, are completely unpredictable, so the keys based on them should be unbreakable. That's appealing to businesses that want to send financial data securely, as well as to governments, which have all sorts of sensitive communications. "We all know that the security of data is one of the essential issues these days," says Zeilinger.
"I think it's wonderful work," Shapiro says of the European group's paper. "The impressive thing about this is they've done it over such a long distance."
The best that researchers had previously done was to detect entangled photons across distances of about 10 kilometers. To improve on that, Zeilinger's team switched to a laser that emits light in pulses instead of a continuous beam. The pulsed laser only has a repetition rate of 249 megahertz--far slower than the 10 gigahertz lasers commonly used in optical communications networks, which limits how much of a signal can be sent in a given time period. The pulsed laser is also not quite as good as the continuous one at producing entanglement. But it's close, and it gave the team members much more control over when they were producing photons, which helped them separate the photons they wanted from stray light at the detector, so they could read the signal more reliably. The researchers also had to deal with atmospheric turbulence that distorts the photons' path. They used an automated system that continually adjusted the alignment of the telescope to take care of that, although the light beam still wandered over the detector somewhat.
The hope, Zeilinger says, is to improve the lasers and detectors enough that such free-space links work between ground stations and satellites, so that encryption keys can be sent from anyplace on Earth to any other. As most communications satellites orbit at heights of 300 to 500 kilometers, "with our 144 kilometers, we are getting there," he says.
The fact that the team covered that distance in free space "certainly is very significant," says Prem Kumar, director of the Center for Photonic Communication and Computing at Northwestern University. He has sent entangled photons over optical fiber, which is fine for short distances, he says. But because fiber absorbs photons, it's not practical for more than 100 to 200 kilometers, which wouldn't allow for worldwide distribution.
The researchers are part of a European consortium of about 20 groups, called SECOQC, working on secure communications based on quantum cryptography. The consortium aims to test a secure system in Europe sometime next year.
Is it really true that it can't be broken / tapped?
I read, "If someone were to intercept the flying photons , he could measure them himself, then send them on to the receiver. But the act of measuring them would change their quantum mechanical properties, so he'd be immediately exposed."
If I have the intelligence and dollars so that I can tap into the system and read it in the first place then I would argue that I also have the intelligence, dollars, and equipment to create from scratch that what I had just read. It's not about continuing to pass along what I had just read, but rather stop what I had just read from continuing, and then recreating that from scratch and then putting that back into the flow stream to the final destination.
It seems straightforward to me. Am I missing something here? I'm not yet convinced that it is 100% impossible to tap / crack into it.
Your responses genuinely appreciated.
Jim
Re: Is it really true that it can't be broken / tapped?
I think applying quantum entanglement for cryptography is like killing a fly with TNT.
But if it payrolls research, so be it.
Re: Is it really true that it can't be broken / tapped?
i'm a little confused on this part as well.
i understand why intercepting the message would screw up the communication between point A and point B, but i dont see would you couldnt do a man-in-the-middle attack and set up a new communication between the attacker and point B.
Re: Is it really true that it can't be broken / tapped?
ah, as it turns out quantum cryptography _is_ vulnerable to this type of man-in-the-middle attack. both sides need to verify the other's identity before proceeding (probably by cryptographic signing, or something like that).
more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_cryptography
I don't understand everything with this technology. But if you can capture the photons and intercept them. Then couldn't you make it so that the photons can not reach the desired place? Another words a terrorist or some other criminal org. might try to disrupt activity for some reason.
"the random sequences of numbers generated to make today's encryption keys aren't truly random"
Maybe sometimes, but true random number generators are commercially available.
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
This document is part of the “How-To Guide for Most Common Measurements” centralized resource portal. This tutorial provides a detailed guide for measurement and device considerations to take temperature measurements using thermocouples. Get an introduction to thermocouples, which are inexpensive sensing devices widely used with PC-based data acquisition systems. Also review some specific thermocouple examples and learn how thermocouples work and ways to integrate them into a data acquisition measurement system.
View full PDF >Our list of the 50 most innovative companies, including the following:
brunascle
65 Comments
"automatically changes its partner" is misleading
a lot of people have a hard time understanding why quantum entanglement doesnt violate special relativity (faster-than-light travel), and i think it's mostly due to wording like "Measuring any quantum mechanical property of one photon automatically changes that same property in its entangled partner"
measuring your photon does not change the entangled photon, in the normal sense of the word "change". that might imply that the entangled photon was a 1 before, but since you measured a 0 on your photon, the other one just changed to 0 as well. that's not what's happening. either both are 1 or both or 0, but you dont know which is the case yet.
the only weird part about this is that, in quantum mechanics, both of those 2 cases really do exist together until a measurement is made. both are 1 and both are 0 at the same time. when the measurement is made, 1 of those cases dissappears into nonexistence. which of the two is truly random.
the best explanation i've heard of this is the many words theory. before the measurement, two words blur together: one in which both are 1 and one in which both are 0. when the measurement is made, those 2 worlds split and can never interact again.
Reply
brunascle
65 Comments
Re: "automatically changes its partner" is misleading
i'm being pedantic, arent i?
Reply
Guest (jim-frank)
Re: "automatically changes its partner" is misleading
There's a time when pedantry is called for...
Reply
blunney
17 Comments
Re: "automatically changes its partner" is misleading
And doing a marvelous job of it, too, I must say! ;-)
Reply