Quantum teleportation achieved over ten miles of free space

I just wanted to comment that THIS IS NOT TELEPORTATION.

The Photons are arriving at normal Light Speed. This is more about "sending information" to the photon's entangled pair. It's actually two sides of the same Photon, but that's another topic -- Photons are, in my view, merely "feedback on Gravity." Gravity is an outward force from particles. Particles are attracted to each other because their "average" pressure on space-time is going to be less towards another particle.

Magnetism is merely the organization of this flow of gravity -- so you can see that Gravity is much more powerful than it appears, but very, very diffuse. This is the same force that is called the strong and weak nuclear forces. So, my PREDICTION, is that there is only ONE FORCE in the Universe, and we only look at Electromagnetism, Nuclear, Gravity and such as aspects of that force.

>> The entire thing is so very clear to me, it's kind of annoying to see it debated. Every year, this prediction or that, gets a bit closer, but then another wild-eyed "quantum theory and particle" makes the concepts that much more complicated.

Levitation and Invisibility are inextricably linked. There is no "Quantum" anything -- it's all wave forms that exchange energy at their peaks when two wave forms intersect. Objects are solid -- not because of the electrons, protons or strong and weak nuclear forces, but because of the "out of phase" release of Gravitons from the structures interfering with "space/time".


>> This should make it pretty obvious: The electron in size is like Jupiter orbiting the Sun. If another solar system were to pass through ours -- if Gravity were not a factory, the chance of any particle hitting another would be a trillion to one. So why do "solids" not just slide through each other? There are NOT particles, just vibrating folds of space with 12 dimensions -- we see the bottom four -- but that is really the top and bottom 4 "interfering" with each other. Empty "space" is the middle 4 dimensions and that is effected by Gravity. When the "space" between objects is disturbed by gravity, it prevents any other organized disturbed space from passing through it.

So that should scream "force fields." Objects are only solid not because they are solid, but because they are producing force fields. It's the same reason that all objects are NOT transparent to light -- interference. When you create a "crystal" patterns are organized and allow light to pass through -- however, depending on the structure, some light and some light doesn't pass through. Objects should be able to pass through each other if you create a phase frequency in the "space" that the object is organizing.

Objects have a POSITION, in Space/Time because of the interaction of the top and bottom "branes" that make up their particles. You can teleport wherever you want to in the Universe, if you manipulate the higher dimensions. It does not violate the "speed of light" -- there are only limits in physics because anything NOT corresponding and balancing ceases to exist. Thus the "many worlds" probability concepts, are true and un-true. There are infinite possibilities but the collapse to ONE REALITY and that correspondence makes up what we understand to be the laws of Physics.

>> So, invisibility, anti-gravity, and teleportation is possible -- time travel however is not. Vacuum energy is merely "sub plank length" energy and is far more abundant than what we use for energy. So, forget Fusion -- the real "grail" is sub-Quantum energy (even though "Quantum" is a misnomer in my view).

reply to post by SeeingBlue

As we've explained before, "quantum teleportation" is quite different from how many people imagine teleportation to work. Rather than picking one thing up and placing it somewhere else, quantum teleportation involves entangling two things, like photons or ions, so their states are dependent on one another and each can be affected by the measurement of the other's state. When one of the items is sent a distance away, entanglement ensures that changing the state of one causes the other to change as well

Oh wow! come off it (In a good way!). Ive heard ages before that this type of thing can happen... Now their proving that things like those photons or irons can regardless of distance still be intertwined with each other? I am no scientist but if this thing is true, then distance could not be a factor at all towards these things...

Which brings me to the point of probes and etc from other galaxies (if there are any) which could mean an unlimited distance could still be within reason for communication. Sure this sounds like the basics, and we would have to build up from here... But the limitations could actually be unlimited.

Ive read up tons of stuff, including that thought itself is one of the most fastest things in existance... I mean if you think of a star and being there.. Your thoughts are already on it. But anyway this last thing I said is just something I had read ages ago and reminded me of the current thing were discussing.

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst

"entangle" more photons with the photons being passed

There is no way to entangle more photons to entangled photons. There are always only two of them.

non-observed and observed photons be your "1's and 0's."

As soon as you observe a photon it is observed. You would see 0's only.

Since most people don't seem to understand quantum mechanics and not even the people making the theories (but they understand the math)

Quantum mechanics is math. The problems begin as soon as people start to interpret it. There are for example interpretations that don't need a wave function collapse at all.

They are trying to steal one of two timelines and for the wrong reason's.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


Let me explain, in 3 easy steps, how FTL communications can work:

Look, there is OBVIOUSLY information that can be useful instantaneously. The Photon somehow is effected immediately by a change at an arbitrary distance. If it's 1AU it could possibly be a photon that has travelled for 10 Billion Years.

The "observer effect" is just that we don't have detectors that are less powerful than the photon itself. You can however, entangle another Photon, and have the transmitting photon "collapse it" -- but ONLY if that Photon is collapsed -- you see?

Observed photons collapse, non-observed photons continue on their merry way. A non-observed photon (non-collapsed, really) will not interfere with another photon. So basically, you get a telegraph of "ON" (has an interference pattern) and "OFF" (no interference pattern) -- there I've just cheated the whole conundrum of observed and unobserved photons. There is no time-travel or "happens before the incident" involved that breaks relativity. The ENERGY requires light speed, but the "collapse" of the Photon does not. The Photon, on the sending side may have an up or down spin and you may not KNOW that for certain -- but all you really care about is that someone "fixed" it's spin -- collapsed it. So, in 8 minutes, you have an error check but right now, you can do something with the data.


Part of the Photon is moving, and part of it is still in the same place. The DIFFERENCE in time between those two phenomena creates what we call "distance." But since we are stuck seeing in the bottom 4 dimensions -- we are stuck having to travel between "position" and "phase change." When we travel to another "place" we are adding energy to a system to slowly change the phase of the intermingling particle system we are interacting with.


>> A simpler example: A particle in the middle of empty space -- how does it know WHERE it is? Would the Universe miss it if nobody were watching and it just blinked out of existence, and only "blinked" back in when some other particle was destined to hit it? Unless the particle is sentient, in normal physics -- no, it would not. However, the same could be said of the Universe itself -- the ONLY difference is, that there are a lot of bits of "nothing" inside this Universe, that would definitely miss it (or not know they ever did not exist). Other than the System OUTSIDE our Universe, however, other than interaction, there is no interaction that fixes the position of our Universe outside the Universe.

OK I didn't make it simple at all. Anyway -- outside our Universe, there is NO DISTANCE. Inside the smallest particle -- there is no distance (likewise, inside a Black Hole). And the only thing that makes things solid and visible is their interference of space such that light "collapses" and bounces off, and other objects don't pass through them. The only thing that gives things distance, is the "time or energy" required to interact with another object. We know distance to things without touching them, because we see the light bouncing off that object. If time/space slowed down to our Right, and sped up to our Left -- we would ONLY know that objects on our Right were relatively further away than our Left -- we would not really know the distance.


Light could be changing speed all the time (in fact it does) but it's consistent in relationship to the ordered system.

Theoretically, if an object were at ABSOLUTE ZERO -- having no temperature, it would cease to exist. Really, temperature is the phase change of space of an ordered system (vibration) -- if something is absolute Zero -- you've also got no light bouncing off of it and nothing is interacting with it (vibrating at a different frequency). But there is another way to get to absolute Zero temperature wise for that object -- have a stronger, vibration in Space-time than the internal "heat" vibration of the ordered system (object). There should be a state called "coherent matter" where one object can pass through others -- for all intents and purposes to other objects, it's at absolute Zero, but internally, it can have any "vibration" or heat that does not supersede the "carrier frequency." This isn't normal vibration -- but that of "space itself."

I can't get into why there are negative and positive electrical charges other than to say that it's "time potential" -- but let's just say, you can "remove" an object from a system, and bring it back into an ordered state in another system by finding that "carrier frequency" local to the space-time of the new area of space.

Well, I'm off, gotta finish a project...

Originally posted by Harte


That is simply a fact and there's simply no way around that fact.


Harte

I always cringe when somebody talks in absolute terms. History has shown that "facts" are highly subjective and there are no limits to man's inventiveness. If we believed your statement we'd have stopped searching at the atom level, because the Greeks said so ...

The photons are indeed travelling at light speed, but that speed was just to move the photons to a distance before the "information" was "transmitted". The transfer of "information" was instantaneous.

Originally posted by Harte
The observer at A will not even know this has happened. All he will know is that when he observed "his" particle, it resolved into a particular quantum state.

When he gets the (presumably) radio transmission from B, he will only see that both particles assumed the same quantum state.

When he gets the radio transmission from B that took 8 minutes to travel at the speed of light, it will contain information about the state of particle B 8 minutes ago, information that observer A knew 8 minutes before the arrival of the radio transmisssion.

If the observer at point A doesn't know anything about the state of particle B when he makes his observation of particle A as you suggest, then the particles are not entangled.

What I'm saying only applies to particles with a quantum entanglement.

Originally posted by moebius
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst

 

"entangle" more photons with the photons being passed

There is no way to entangle more photons to entangled photons. There are always only two of them.

It's not your fault. You are just relying on the "information of strangers." The problem is, that since Einstein kicked out all the old physicists who believed in an Aether -- nobody wants to contemplate anything that doesn't fit into a nice, neat particle. The problem is -- either it's all ONE photon with two ends -- or it's two entangled particles. Because they refuse to see it as a field -- the two "phonons" have to be entangled. I'm telling you WHY it's entangled and their only explanation is a self-referential magical word "entanglement" -- and it's explained by other concepts that very few understand so we go to physics class and nod our heads. That was fine for me when I was ten, but I won't allow "unexplained" magic fields in my model.

If all my atoms are at their core just folded space -- then everything I interact with that is also "fields" is going to interact like particles. I know this boggles the mind -- but look at ripples on the ocean sometime -- they happily pass right through each other -- occasionally two waves of equal frequency and opposite direction collide and there is a momentary "splash." To those waves, they just "had a particle collision."

non-observed and observed photons be your "1's and 0's."

As soon as you observe a photon it is observed. You would see 0's only.

What does "observe a photon" actually mean? It means a magnetic field, or hitting it with another photon, or bouncing it off a mirror -- more fields and matter that is more powerful than the photon.

If you are familiar with the Double-Slit Photon Test, then you know that light appears to interfere with itself when another small slit is opened up NEXT to the slit it moves through. But that really isn't an OBSERVATION -- the photon should just pass through the slit without disturbance. Now the sages of who CANNOT HAVE FIELDS, think that Light is both a particle and a wave -- so you make that particle LIKE a wave, when it is being observed.

More magical thinking. It was always a wave.

I'm only using the language given to me by people who don't SEE how this works but understand the math. The math is predicting Quantum events, but it really isn't describing what is going on at all. You can use statistics to model traffic on a road -- but do you understand a dang thing about each driver? Quantum mechanics, doesn't know if traffic is formed by smart drivers or non-sentient dust -- it merely is a statistical analysis.

You "Clone" the so-called Entangled Photons by having another set of entangled Photons and creating an interference band that is only apparent IF the PHOTON has been "observed" at the other end. If it is NOT OBSERVED (not my language -- I'm saying the field is collapsed -- but I only have a few theories about the Universe -- not this mumbo jumbo), then it will create an interference pattern. If you do NOT open the slit on the other end -- it is NOT interfering. So, if the entangled photon on my end, is traveling parallel to a non-observed Photon -- it does not also "band" but if the message photon is observed (collapsed), it will fall into an interference band.

Please, if anyone copies this idea -- I want the Nobel Prize in physics, like when I was telling everyone how to cancel sound, but who the hell was I to know what I know?

Anyway, it's not too complicated. I could draw the device in less time than it takes to explain the theory behind it. I know that's kind of grandiose -- but it's frustrating, because I've got a trunk load of inventions and physics Ideas from 10, 20, 30 years ago, and quite a few have come out like CDs, Holograms, Noise cancellation, and new experiments in light-levitation. Also, that the Hubble Constant would be shown to be increasing.

I'll also predict right now that "anti-matter" will have a reverse "gravity gradient" such that it repels other objects. So that's your "missing mass" right there. It just doesn't interact with normal matter because it "pulls in space/time" rather than pushes it out -- well, all particles push in and push out "space" but it pulls in MORE space than it pushes out. Anyway, another topic.

Since most people don't seem to understand quantum mechanics and not even the people making the theories (but they understand the math)

Quantum mechanics is math. The problems begin as soon as people start to interpret it. There are for example interpretations that don't need a wave function collapse at all.

The Universe exists. Math describes what happens. We have great math for explaining what happens to an object launched in the earth's gravity well -- but it does not EXPLAIN what Gravity is.

I'm coming from the point of view of explaining how things exist -- and how would that effect itself such that everything were sufficiently rationale to explain how things are the way they are. I know, a bit self-referential. But I model the Universe, from the singularities and time-space folds on down, and it seems to make sense of the forces and particles we see.

The proof is in the pudding, as they say. Heres some of my "ideas:"

I'm pretty sure that Quantum Holes bend light because the "surface" is interfering with "space" which means that the light is not being reflected. It has to do with that "half Plank length" phenomena that I've been talking about; this whole "illusion" of quantum packets has to do with wave forms that transfer energy at their interfering peaks -- anything less, and no energy is transferred and thus, it looks like NOTHING is there -- no in-between states for light, or electrons. That's where the whole "Quantum" or tiny bit came from, and everybody just nods their heads like it explains everything.

Here are a few of my predictions:
The Hubble Constant will be found to be Accelerating. Why?
Because all objects are shrinking/Space is growing -- it's about Geometry. Actually, everything I model is geometric and does not rely on magical forces to balance.

Now theory has it that since the "big bang" -- the Universe did not "explode outward" from a single point, the entire Universe was impossibly dense and energetic and SPACE entered between the particles. But how could they be differentiated from a singularity in the first place to have any "cracks" for space? Anyway, I don't know when or who figured that out -- but that was my understanding about 24 years ago. Since I don't read much physics anymore (it leaves me incapable of functioning in my day to day job), it merely gives me an idea that I at least have some thoughts in common with these other bright minds and I can come to the same understandings without math.

I broke a lot of my old "theories" when I read some sci-fi book a number of years ago that played with ideas of "changing particles in a higher dimension to move through space." I thought it was magic thinking at first, but it bothered me because it felt "familiar." Now, in my model, I think I'm seeing that all particles have a lower dimension that has distance, and another higher dimension, that is still a "part of" original singularity-- separated by space. The gap between these two states is "time" -- so the Universe has a finite amount of time. It is NOT however, open-ended or closed. There is a completely DIFFERENT way the Universe will end that I have not heard anyone else describe. No new original thoughts? Well, I've had a few.

>> The opposite sound at a right angle to the first will cancel it out. I said that to my dad when I was ten. He didn't think I was doing anything but more of my babbling; "That's nice, but call me when you build something.

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst


Dad, I said, we don't have the technology to reproduce an opposite sound wave faster than it takes to travel through the air to prove my point.

>> Divots could be made in a plastic substance to record information. This was like the CD or DVD -- except I thought of a sphere with a hole at one end (for positioning). It's holographic, and the "depth" is related by interferometry. I used a maser beam that stored the information when two opposing beams met -- otherwise the object was transparent to the X-Ray laser. I had to think of a way to make an Xray laser. But you don't read it with a spinning head, you need a reference beam interfering with itself and you change the angle -- so it's like reading "A DVD at once" 360x360 of them.

>> Fusion Beam weapon. I thought about how an atom bomb is made, and realized that you could focus this plasma, and cause the "fusion" to occur at a distance. I called it a "black laser." I ripped up those plans. And don't really draw any weapons since I was twelve, seeing that no good could come of it.

>> Air Bags. But in my idea, I was using it as an external "protector." I the designed a reactive armor that exploded before a projectile, and then imploded to absorb the shock. In cars, I have a idea that you'd have a lot of attachable "buttons" that shot down tubes -- which works for a baby or a large adult. You basically have a hundred "mini" airbags that protect you no matter which direction your inertia takes you.

>> I had an idea for Fusion power, basically, I figured you would force a stream of H3 through a magnetic "tunnel" and "pinch that" into the correct orientation with a Plasma of polarized gas of the opposite charge. It's not the heat or the pressure exactly that allows the Stars to make fusion -- it's GRAVITY. It's just that the light and mass is so dense, that occasionally, the "space time" flowing in and out of an electron and proton are oriented such that the electron creates a new, stable orbit INSIDE the Proton. A Neutron is a complete Electron and Proton together in a tighter "electron shell." But its kind of not, since I believe the Electron is actually it's Proton in a future energy state -- which forced me to understand a bit about the dimensional nature of reality.

>> The multiverse theory. I had that when I was about twelve - pretty much exactly what I'm hearing from physics theory now. About a year ago, I realized that I could simplify my probability model and the mulitverse model if I just realized that "all possibilities collapse" and the only one left is REALITY -- meaning, that Physics is the law of the Universe, only because all other possibilities do not balance out and so they cease to exist. Potentials, however, can influence the course of events.

Originally posted by Blazer
The photons are indeed travelling at light speed, but that speed was just to move the photons to a distance before the "information" was "transmitted". The transfer of "information" was instantaneous.

Yes, exactly! The problem is, that the "theory" is not explaining the phenomena. And they are not creatively looking at how you observe something without observing it.

It's like the puzzle with Shroedenger's cat; he is in a chamber and his life is controlled by the release of a radioactive (uncertain) particle. It if releases -- he is dead, and if not, he is alive. So the cat is in an indeterminate LIVING/UN-LIVING state.

Apparently, this sort of thinking is how Christopher Columbus "DISCOVERED AMERICA" -- even though there were people living here. If you put a good Christian European in that chamber, he could "DISCOVER" that he was indeed alive -- or he would know a dang thing at all -- which means he is dead.

If the Photon KNOWS that it has been observed at the "transmission end" then it will behave differently from a photon that hasn't. We cannot observe the photon -- FINE. But another "entangled photon" which is ALSO not observed, will either be affected by an observed photon, or nothing will happen. That's what I call "cloning" the entangled photon (which isn't entangled -- it's just a field with a POINT at which energy will be transferred).

Make a another entangled photon pair (light field), then see if it interferes with the incoming photon, if it does -- that's a ONE, if not a ZERO. The information is transferred to you quickly, because it's a micron away from the light detector accepting the incoming photon. It's similar to an idea I had to amplify radio waves with lasers by factoring out a reference been NOT tuned to the frequency you want to monitor. It required a liquid lens formed by a ferro-magnetic liquid.

Anyway, it's KIND of like an interferometry comb used in Astronomy -- but it requires another photon that INTERFERES to cause the detection beam to interfere --- nothing happens if nothing is observed, you only observe when there is a result from an observation.

So, in Shroedinger's thought example -- you give the cat a lever that looks like a mouse -- if the cat is alive, it will swipe at the mouse and release itself to freedom. If you do NOT have a free cat that jumped out of your chamber of death -- it is, most likely dead. Not enough Physics geniuses think like a cat, I suppose -- it would definitely help their wisdom.

>> My main challenge in life is to get someone to understand me -- the rest is easy.

Interesting threat,
reminded me of some threat I read earlier.
For people who are interested in the subject of quantum teleportation, this is an article ( you could actually call it a novel because of the length ) you should definitely read:

astroengineer.wordpress.com...

For people with little time I will summarize it:
this is a testimony of a former NASA employee who worked at the mars rover program.
He was in charge of sending commands to the rovers and keep them running smoothly.
When an error occurred with one of the rovers he performed a memory dump, when he analysed the data he received after that dump he accidentally discovered that an other device of which he did not know it existed was broadcasting data to earth with an incredible speed.
Later in his testimony he even tracks down the computer that receives that data.
In short: the conclusion of his story is that a mars rover has a secret quantum teleportation device that sends data faster than light!

I am not an expert on this subject and I could have misinterpreted some key aspects of this story so I strongly advice reading it yourself.
I thought it would be interesting to know that ( if this man speaks the truth) , mankind is capable of quantum teleportation for a longer time than most people know.

His testimony is very detailed and accurate so I tend to believe him.
Flagged your threat!

Originally posted by Blazer
The photons are indeed travelling at light speed, but that speed was just to move the photons to a distance before the "information" was "transmitted". The transfer of "information" was instantaneous.

It might be instantaneous.

This 2008 paper shows the "information" is "transmitted" at least 10,000 times faster than the speed of light, but I'm not aware of a paper that confirms it's instantaneous yet. Maybe that's close enough

Testing spooky action at a distance

the speed of this spooky influence would have to exceed that of light by at least 4 orders of magnitude

Ok im not that good with science, and there seems to be opposing views about the sending information aspect of this story and im not really sure i have the gist of it. To people who understand this a whole lot better than me, can you send information...let's just say my phone number from point A to point B? Simple question i guess.


[edit on 21-5-2010 by Solomons]

Originally posted by Solomons
To people who understand this a whole lot better than me, can you send information...let's just say my phone number from point A to point B?

Simple question i guess.

You can send information at the speed of light, like your phone number. Just say it on a radio broadcast.

You can't send information like your phone number faster than the speed of light.

You can receive information someone else has faster than the speed of light though, but it can't be their phone number. The information that's transmitted faster than light is not all that useful, that's why we say we can't communicate at faster than the speed of light.

I hope that answers your question.

[edit on 21-5-2010 by Arbitrageur]

Originally posted by Solomons
can you send information

Bottomline, any kind of state change is the very thing needed for the basic concept to toggle a bit.

People argue when and how the state change happens since there is generally a question of if there is any effect by the observer on the state change.

One common misconception is if and when someone produces quantum entanglement if what appears to be two entangled particles is actually still one particle. Quantum mechanics has explanations for these kinds of phenomena yet there are attempts to keep the explanation in physical terms (math only).

FTL communication is possible by QM, but physics still says it is not. Hence, the basic argument. In QM, there is no particle that goes FTL, or really there is no particle.

[edit on 21-5-2010 by dzonatas]

This sounds interesting, but too bad I don't understand particle physics. I don't understand how a particle such as a proton has a particular "state" and that it is intertwined with another proton. *scratches head*.

And if it's a photon they're talking about instead of a proton.... how do you teleport a wave? I need a particle physics 101.. lol...

Originally posted by Booker’s
Another cool thing about quantum teleportation is that according to the Observer Effect, any observation of quantum transmitted information changes that information because it was observed - which means that privacy is guaranteed, since there's no way to hide snooping.

Maybe, but maybe also your girlfriend coming to visit you on Alpha Centuri comes with two heads or with a difference in other number of parts? After all, would you say, "Ah-ha, a snooper!" or would you be looking strangly at your GF? I guess it would depend upon your point of view, (no pun intended, of course.)

Again, the whole discussion is not about "transmitting" information, which entails crossing a distance, which entails dealing with a light-speed limit.

With nonlocal simultaneity, you're talking about recreating identical information at a destination point, which could be on the other side of the Universe. Instantly.

There's no "transfer" of data. The data simply comes into existence on the other side, perhaps even before you "send" it.

With much more sophisticated technology and understanding, you could switch on a particular order of particles at any given destination. BOOM — you just "sent" a complete and self-sufficient colony to Mars in an instant, although nothing actually left the Earth, and all the colonists are still right here on terra firma.

Nothing is transmitted in the familiar sense. The information simply comes into existence elsewhere.

More interesting than the Transporter on the old Star Trek TV series, I think, was the Subspace communication system, which would certainly have to function on a quantum level — there would be no other way to establish instantaneous communication with StarFleet, which was 15 light years distant.

— Doc Velocity

Originally posted by Doc Velocity
With much more sophisticated technology and understanding, you could switch on a particular order of particles at any given destination. BOOM — you just "sent" a complete and self-sufficient colony to Mars in an instant, although nothing actually left the Earth, and all the colonists are still right here on terra firma.

There's nothing in this experiment or in foreseeable technology development to suggest that could happen. It's complete speculation like the warp drive is, in that both assume technologies we know nothing about, like whether they even exist or not, but maybe you already know that which is why you say "With much more sophisticated technology".

With the technology referenced in the OP, a foreseeable technology development might be (for example) to send a fax of random characters to a remote destination. As you suggest, you could make the fax at the remote destination have characters identical to the sending destination, and we could send it faster than the speed of light. But at this point, we can't control what information would be in the fax, it would just be a sequence of random characters. And I don't think we know how to decide what particles or characters to send even with more advanced technology, and since doing so would violate the laws of physics as we know them, we'll need some pretty good experimental evidence to rewrite the laws of physics.

I haven't seen any such experimental evidence yet, but if you have any sources to suggest otherwise, please post the link(s). But until I see such evidence, speculating about materializing a colony on Mars is about as speculative as saying someday I might be able to transform into superman and fly through the sky with no propulsion system. Both are perhaps remotely possible if we discover technologies we know nothing about today, but neither are foreseeable advances from existing technology.