AAWSAP DIRD, The Space Communication Implications of Quantum Entanglement and Nonlocality, March 2010

Text

This text came with the file. It may have mistakes. When the text and the image disagree, the image is right.

UNCLASSIFIED//FOA OFFI€Ial.k Wiili 8NLY
time standing wave (w•) between the locations (for example, a photon source and a
photon detector). After an initial exchange of offer and confirmation waves, a particular
transaction is selected probabilistically from all that are possible, based on the \Jf\/1*
values of the alternatives. The offer/confirmation exchange continues until all the
conserved quantities (energy, momentum, angular momentum, and so forth) have
been transferred.
For the nonlocal communication test system described above, we will consider two
cases:
•
Case 1: The switch is positioned so that each fiber from the slits is routed to one
detector, producing a "which-way" measurement of the slit through which the VLP
photon passed. In this case, the HLP photon as detected by the camera should have
a recorded position that falls on a broad single-slit-diffraction-pattern distribution,
(not a two-slit interference pattern).
•
Case 2: The switch is positioned so that light from the two fibers is combined before
detection. Therefore, the detection produces no information on the path of VLP
photon, which could have passed through either slit. In this case, the HLP photon
detected by the camera should be in a position that falls on a two-slit interference
pattern distribution.
Figure 8 shows the transaction that forms for the nonlocal communication test system
in the Case 1 configuration. Here, as in the Ghost Interference experiment, we have
treated the nonlinear crystal source of entangled pairs as an effective "reflector" and
have represented the rays with straight-through paths to "unfold" the system,
duplicating the lens for each photon and representing the system as two-lens optical
imaging, with nearly parallel rays between the two lenses. Slit systems S1 and S2 are
located one focal length f away from the lenses. The left-going photon is assumed to
arrive at the upper slit of S2 and to be detected by the upper detector (circled). The
momentum-entangled right-going photon must then go to S1, which is the optical
image of S2, and be diffracted by the slit and detected by the camera. If Figure 8 were
vertically inverted, it would provide a similar diagram for the equally probable arrival of
the left-going photon at the lower slit of S2 and detection by the lower detector. The
three stages of transaction formation are shown.
UNCLASSIFIED//rOR. 0rr1e11et U:!I! OHL I
14