Skip to main content

Closed timelike Curves: Solving the "Grandfather Paradox" and foiling Quantum Cryptography.

•Entering a closed timelike curve tomorrow means you could end up at today.
On June 28, 2009, the world-famous physicist Stephen Hawking threw a party at the University of Cambridge, complete with balloons, hors d'oeuvres and iced champagne. Everyone was invited but no one showed up. Hawking had expected as much, because he only sent out invitations after his party had concluded. It was, he said, "a welcome reception for future time travelers," a tongue-in-cheek experiment to reinforce his 1992 conjecture that travel into the past is effectively impossible.
But Hawking may be on the wrong side of history. Recent experiments offer tentative support for time travel's feasibility—at least from a mathematical perspective. The study cuts to the core of our understanding of the universe, and the resolution of the possibility of time travel, far from being a topic worthy only of science fiction, would have profound implications for fundamental physics as well as for practical applications such as quantum cryptography and computing.
Closed timelike curves
The source of time travel speculation lies in the fact that our best physical theories seem to contain no prohibitions on traveling backwardthrough time. The feat should be possible based on Einstein's theory of general relativity, which describes gravity as the warping of spacetime by energy and matter. An extremely powerful gravitational field, such as that produced by a spinning black hole, could in principle profoundly warp the fabric of existence so that spacetime bends back on itself. This would create a "closed timelike curve," or CTC, a loop that could be traversed to travel back in time.
Hawking and many other physicists find CTCs abhorrent, because any macroscopic object traveling through one would inevitably create paradoxes where cause and effect break down. In a model proposed by the theorist David Deutsch in 1991, however, the paradoxes created by CTCs could be avoided at the quantum scale because of the behavior of fundamental particles, which follow only the fuzzy rules of probability rather than strict determinism. "It's intriguing that you've got general relativity predicting these paradoxes, but then you consider them in quantum mechanical terms and the paradoxes go away," says University of Queensland physicist Tim Ralph. "It makes you wonder whether this is important in terms of formulating a theory that unifies general relativity with quantum mechanics."
Experimenting with a curve
Recently Ralph and his PhD student Martin Ringbauer led a team that experimentally simulated Deutsch's model of CTCs for the very first time, testing and confirming many aspects of the two-decades-old theory. Theirfindings are published in Nature Communications. Much of their simulation revolved around investigating how Deutsch's model deals with the “grandfather paradox,” a hypothetical scenario in which someone uses a CTC to travel back through time to murder her own grandfather, thus preventing her own later birth. (Scientific American is part of Nature Publishing Group.)
Deutsch's quantum solution to the grandfather paradox works something like this:
Instead of a human being traversing a CTC to kill her ancestor, imagine that a fundamental particle goes back in time to flip a switch on the particle-generating machine that created it. If the particle flips the switch, the machine emits a particle—the particle—back into the CTC; if the switch isn't flipped, the machine emits nothing. In this scenario there is no a priorideterministic certainty to the particle's emission, only a distribution of probabilities. Deutsch's insight was to postulate self-consistency in the quantum realm, to insist that any particle entering one end of a CTC must emerge at the other end with identical properties. Therefore, a particle emitted by the machine with a probability of one half would enter the CTC and come out the other end to flip the switch with a probability of one half, imbuing itself at birth with a probability of one half of going back to flip the switch. If the particle were a person, she would be born with a one-half probability of killing her grandfather, giving her grandfather a one-half probability of escaping death at her hands—good enough in probabilistic terms to close the causative loop and escape the paradox.Strange though it may be, this solution is in keeping with the known laws of quantum mechanics.
In their new simulation Ralph, Ringbauer and their colleagues studied Deutsch's model using interactions between pairs of polarized photons within a quantum system that they argue is mathematically equivalent to a single photon traversing a CTC. "We encode their polarization so that the second one acts as kind of a past incarnation of the first,” Ringbauer says. So instead of sending a person through a time loop, they created a stunt double of the person and ran him through a time-loop simulator to see if the doppelganger emerging from a CTC exactly resembled the original person as he was in that moment in the past.
By measuring the polarization states of the second photon after its interaction with the first, across multiple trials the team successfully demonstrated Deutsch's self-consistency in action. "The state we got at our output, the second photon at the simulated exit of the CTC, was the same as that of our input, the first encoded photon at the CTC entrance," Ralph says. "Of course, we're not really sending anything back in time but [the simulation] allows us to study weird evolutions normally not allowed in quantum mechanics."
Those "weird evolutions" enabled by a CTC, Ringbauer notes, would have remarkable practical applications, such as breaking quantum-based cryptography through the cloning of the quantum states of fundamental particles. "If you can clone quantum states,” he says, “you can violate the Heisenberg uncertainty principle,” which comes in handy in quantum cryptography because the principle forbids simultaneously accurate measurements of certain kinds of paired variables, such as position and momentum. "But if you clone that system, you can measure one quantity in the first and the other quantity in the second, allowing you to decrypt an encoded message."
"In the presence of CTCs, quantum mechanics allows one to perform very powerful information-processing tasks, much more than we believe classical or even normal quantum computers could do," says Todd Brun, a physicist at the University of Southern California who was not involved with the team's experiment. "If the Deutsch model is correct, then this experiment faithfully simulates what could be done with an actual CTC. But this experiment cannot test the Deutsch model itself; that could only be done with access to an actual CTC."
Alternative reasoning
Deutsch's model isn’t the only one around, however. In 2009 Seth Lloyd, a theorist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, proposed an alternative, less radical model of CTCs that resolves the grandfather paradox using quantum teleportation and a technique called post-selection, rather than Deutsch's quantum self-consistency. With Canadian collaborators, Lloyd went on to perform successful laboratory simulations of his model in 2011. "Deutsch's theory has a weird effect of destroying correlations," Lloyd says. "That is, a time traveler who emerges from a Deutschian CTC enters a universe that has nothing to do with the one she exited in the future. By contrast, post-selected CTCs preserve correlations, so that the time traveler returns to the same universe that she remembers in the past."
This property of Lloyd's model would make CTCs much less powerful for information processing, although still far superior to what computers could achieve in typical regions of spacetime. "The classes of problems our CTCs could help solve are roughly equivalent to finding needles in haystacks," Lloyd says. "But a computer in a Deutschian CTC could solve why haystacks exist in the first place.”
Lloyd, though, readily admits the speculative nature of CTCs. “I have no idea which model is really right. Probably both of them are wrong,” he says. Of course, he adds, the other possibility is that Hawking is correct, “that CTCs simply don't and cannot exist." Time-travel party planners should save the champagne for themselves—their hoped-for future guests seem unlikely to arrive.
More @ http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/time-travel-simulation-resolves-grandfather-paradox/
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is OOP? In Layman terms...

What is OOP? OOP stands for Object Oriented Programming. It is not just a programming language, but a paradigm (An example or model used to explain a concept or theory). OOP does not tell you how to program, rather it tells you how to go about designing your software. There are many languages that implement/help you in implementing OOP. C++ is one of them. When you are developing Object-oriented programs/software the emphasis is more on how you think about and design the software rather that on actually implementing(coding) it. Why ‘Object-Oriented’?       What should you do to make sure your program is object oriented? Simple, you stop thinking in terms of Bits, Bytes, Pointers, unions, structures, et al. Instead you think in terms of objects and the interactions between them. It is actually more natural for humans to think Object-oriented than to think in terms of memory and variables, etc.       Simply put, OO is nothing but defining the behavior of software as a collecti…

Shridharacharya: Solving Quadratic equations in the 9th Century.

SridharAcharya (c. 870, India – c. 930 India) was an Indianmathematician, Sanskrit pundit andphilosopher. He was born in Bhurishresti (Bhurisristi or Bhurshut) village in South Radha (at present Hughli) in the 10th Century AD.He was known for two treatises: Trisatika(sometimes called the Patiganitasara) and thePatiganita. His major work Patiganitasara was named Trisatika because it was written in three hundred slokas. The book discusses counting of numbers, measures, natural number, multiplication, division, zero, squares, cubes, fraction, rule of three, interest-calculation, joint business or partnership and mensuration.He was one of the first to give a formula for solving quadratic equations.He found the formula :- (Multiply by 4a)
Proof of the Sridhar Acharya Formula,let us consider,Multipling both sides by 4a,Substracting  from both sides,Then adding  to both sides,We know that,

BLACK...Hindi Cinema's Coming of Age Movie....

Went to See BLACK this Saturday with my Friends.... It was a really unforgettable Experience...BLACK is Unlike any HIndi Movie ever-made. It is Stark, Thought Provoking, Rough, Beautiful, Poetic, Gossamer, and Tough at the same time. Very Few Movie-Makers are able to attain this level of Movie Making. Hats off to Sanjay Leela Bhansali. Black stars Amitabh Bachchan and Rani Mukerji. Bacchan, in one of his best roles, plays the TEACHER and Portrays both Unsurmountable Weakness and Indomitable Strength with equal Ease. Rani(the Girl Next Door) portrays the role of a Deaf and Blind Girl with such conviction, that the viewer cannot help but get affected with her plight. Ayesha Kapur plays the young Rani -- a blind, deaf and hence mute girl -- to perfection. One can just wonder at the performance by a 10 year old little girl. Frustrated by her inability to comprehend the world around her, little Michelle McNally is an untamed 'animal'. Her Father keeps a distance, her mother is to…

Adsense