China Quantum Communiations Technology: Cryptography, Radar, Satellite, Teleportation, Network

[gambit]

Suddenly, it has become more believable, hasn't it?

There is nothing 'suddenly' about it. I read about concept yrs ago when 'quantum' was a buzzword everywhere. I would not be surprise if someone come up with a quantum breakfast cereal.

I have nothing against theoreticals, but in engineering, we have to deal with the real world. When a concept exit the laboratory, then we will take it seriously. Field testing is considered laboratory, lest anyone starts quibbling about the context of the word. So if a concept requires at least another decade before the engineers, regardless of country or nationality, get their greasy hands on it, it is pointless to start speculating on how effective the concept will be in a real war.

This is the progression of any technological achievement...

First...You have a 'science project'. It is essentially asking 'Can something be done ?'. You answer that question by putting experiments together to prove that the concept can transition to the physical realm: Proof of Concept.

Next...You enter 'research and development' (R/D). This is where you take cost into consideration. You have to use the lowest cost in materials to make more than just a few working models. You explore avenues of packaging. Does mobility matter ? If yes, you must 'trim the fat', so to speak.

Next...You enter initial manufacturing. This is where you investigate if you have the necessary industrial infrastructures to support mass production.

For example...If the item requires maraging steel, can you access it ? FYI, maraging steel is internationally controlled, meaning its production and sales are closely monitored by every major power in the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maraging_steel

...is closely monitored by international authorities because it is particularly suited for use in gas centrifuges for uranium enrichment...

If the item requires unique electronics, do you have existing capabilities to custom manufacture said unique electronics ? If not, can you get it and in stable supplies ?

Next...You enter mass production. It does not matter if the item can be made by one manufacturer. The point here is that the item can be manufactured from proven processes and materials at the lowest possible cost and from steady suppliers.

This is why it can take decades for anything to go from proof of concept to mass production.

In the context of military applications, engineers and the military do not have the luxury of time. If I am to be attacked by a squadron of low radar observable enemy, I cannot console myself by thinking that my scientists are working on something that will defeat this enemy a few yrs from now.

The science world is filled with science projects that ended at the lab's doors. I joined this forum in 2009, since then, I have repeatedly said that the greatest threat to 'stealth' is the bi-static radar, but even so, the bi-static (or multi-static) radar have its weaknesses and limitations. Today, those weaknesses and limitations made the bi-static radar limited in military deployment. The Kolchuga and VERA wannabes are nowhere to be found. The greatest threat to American 'stealth' fighters fizzled out.

 

[Viet]

Wow I can't believe so many Vietnamese members are upset by this technology.

@Viet why are you so upset? Do you think this is some sort of weapon? It's communications technology.

I´m upset because the poster posts nonsense. he mixes up everything into a cocktail.

look what he says:

"quantum technology require the sender and receiver to encrypt"
I would be more happy if he said: the sender encrypts the message before sending out, once received the receiver decrypts it. and vice versa.

or
"the principle of quantum is to disrupt the encryption once it is being observed. This mean even the original creator of the tech cannot tell what is in the package that is send".
really embarrassing what he states. correct is, photon entanglement will be destroyed if being observed. of course the sender knows the clear text because he possesses the secret key.

 

[GeHAC]

The laser and flash light in the pictures is for high speed precisive targeting,not quantum communication.The single photons for communication can only be captured by EMCCD.

 

[xunzi]

I´m upset because the poster posts nonsense. he mixes up everything into a cocktail.

look what he says:

"quantum technology require the sender and receiver to encrypt"
I would be more happy if he said: the sender encrypts the message before sending out, once received the receiver decrypts it. and vice versa.

or
"the principle of quantum is to disrupt the encryption once it is being observed. This mean even the original creator of the tech cannot tell what is in the package that is send".
really embarrassing what he states. correct is, photon entanglement will be destroyed if being observed. of course the sender knows the clear text because he possesses the secret key.

The one who post nonsense are YOU and your lack of understanding how quantum encryption works is disgusting. LOL I didn't say as a sender we don't know the message in the encryption. Duh! I said, as the creator of the quantum technology or you can call it the "provider of the quantum encryption machine", we cannot know what message is being encrypt because that is the job of the sender and the receiver to decide how they want to determine their message in the encryption. So in practice, Germany can used our quantum machine technology, and be able to communicate with your country Vietnam and we still wouldn't be able to eardrop and crack the code since of the nature in quantum entanglement which affect the state of two photons spin despite separating by distance once it is being observed. Do you understand my friend?

 

[randomradio]

There is nothing 'suddenly' about it. I read about concept yrs ago when 'quantum' was a buzzword everywhere. I would not be surprise if someone come up with a quantum breakfast cereal.

No, no, again you misunderstand. When I first spoke about quantum, you used the words "decades" and dismissed it.

I have nothing against theoreticals, but in engineering, we have to deal with the real world. When a concept exit the laboratory, then we will take it seriously. Field testing is considered laboratory, lest anyone starts quibbling about the context of the word. So if a concept requires at least another decade before the engineers, regardless of country or nationality, get their greasy hands on it, it is pointless to start speculating on how effective the concept will be in a real war.

This is the progression of any technological achievement...

First...You have a 'science project'. It is essentially asking 'Can something be done ?'. You answer that question by putting experiments together to prove that the concept can transition to the physical realm: Proof of Concept.

Next...You enter 'research and development' (R/D). This is where you take cost into consideration. You have to use the lowest cost in materials to make more than just a few working models. You explore avenues of packaging. Does mobility matter ? If yes, you must 'trim the fat', so to speak.

Next...You enter initial manufacturing. This is where you investigate if you have the necessary industrial infrastructures to support mass production.

For example...If the item requires maraging steel, can you access it ? FYI, maraging steel is internationally controlled, meaning its production and sales are closely monitored by every major power in the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maraging_steel

If the item requires unique electronics, do you have existing capabilities to custom manufacture said unique electronics ? If not, can you get it and in stable supplies ?

Next...You enter mass production. It does not matter if the item can be made by one manufacturer. The point here is that the item can be manufactured from proven processes and materials at the lowest possible cost and from steady suppliers.

This is why it can take decades for anything to go from proof of concept to mass production.

In the context of military applications, engineers and the military do not have the luxury of time. If I am to be attacked by a squadron of low radar observable enemy, I cannot console myself by thinking that my scientists are working on something that will defeat this enemy a few yrs from now.

Okay, let me explain a bit about how open source works.

There are a few ways you get to know how to determine if something is possible or not. For one, they start talking about it. Take the PAK FA as an example. Right until the day it first flew and pictures were released, most people didn't know or didn't believe it existed. However only after the Russians started talking about it did we know more about the program, that happened 10 years later. Only in about 2011 or 2012 did we come to know that the program has been going on for a decade. We got to know about the engine program about 15 years after it started. The Russians probably revealed more about their engine because the Americans started talking about the ADVENT program about the same time, the last few years.

This is a pretty common occurrence in the civilian domain, when military projects are revealed in the civilian domain. But when this happens, you can be sure that they are talking about technologies that have surpassed most or all the hurdles that would take them from a demonstrator to a pre-production prototype. Basically, they talk about the high end tech when it has come up to TRL 6 or higher standards.

Another way is when they actually announce the program, like DARPA's program for Digital phased arrays or ISRO's RLV or China's quantum satellite and so on.

Finally, in the field of electronics, civilian tech is a decade ahead compared to the military, so it's easy to guess how advanced something can be just by studying open source materials.

The Kolchuga and VERA wannabes are nowhere to be found. The greatest threat to American 'stealth' fighters fizzled out.

That's stuff from the 70s and 80s. These sensors work with the combination of other sensors, active and passive for stealth detection. Don't get carried away by news articles that publish only half the story.

 

[gambit]

No, no, again you misunderstand. When I first spoke about quantum, you used the words "decades" and dismissed it.

Yeah...It should be dismissed. The idea of a quantum radar have been around for nearly 10 yrs without the idea ever been out of the laboratory.

 

[Viet]

The one who post nonsense are YOU and your lack of understanding how quantum encryption works is disgusting. LOL I didn't say as a sender we don't know the message in the encryption. Duh! I said, as the creator of the quantum technology or you can call it the "provider of the quantum encryption machine", we cannot know what message is being encrypt because that is the job of the sender and the receiver to decide how they want to determine their message in the encryption. So in practice, Germany can used our quantum machine technology, and be able to communicate with your country Vietnam and we still wouldn't be able to eardrop and crack the code since of the nature in quantum entanglement which affect the state of two photons spin despite separating by distance once it is being observed. Do you understand my friend?

you are so funny. ok, let me ask you some questions. Care to explain:

- what do you mean with "the creator of the quantum technology"?

- define "provider of the quantum encryption machine"?

- why "we cannot know what message is being encrypt" if we can´t read it?

- why the hell should Germany and Vietnam use "made in china" quantum communication technology?

- can you ensure date security against Chinese spying activities if we use made in china a black-box, using made in china satellites?

 

[randomradio]

Yeah...It should be dismissed. The idea of a quantum radar have been around for nearly 10 yrs without the idea ever been out of the laboratory.

No, the idea has been around since the 1980s. You were introduced to it 10 years ago at best. Quantum communications, computers, radars etc have been around for ages in theory and mathematics. They have been designing logic gates for quantum systems since decades, like CNOT and CCNOT gates. It's been 15 years now since nm level circuits for quantum information have been in the process of design and development.

Even 5 years is a lot of time when it comes to electronics.

Here, they have already made a functional quantum computer.

http://www.dwavesys.com/d-wave-two-system

http://news.usc.edu/104391/worlds-most-powerful-quantum-computer-now-online-at-usc/

 

[gambit]

No, the idea has been around since the 1980s.

And look how far have the concept been since then.

 

[randomradio]

And look how far have the concept been since then.

This is how all of this stuff starts. The microelectronics revolution did not happen overnight. Similarly, we are now at the cusp of the photon revolution.

 

[gambit]

This is how all of this stuff starts. The microelectronics revolution did not happen overnight. Similarly, we are now at the cusp of the photon revolution.

And like I said that engineers and the military do not have the luxury of time.

If the military requests that I designed something to counter a potential threat, usually that threat is not hypothetical but real, in other words, a jet fighter against a jet fighter, not an F-16 against a TIE fighter from Star Wars. So until the quantum radar leave the laboratory, there is nothing the soldier can do. I do not understand why is that so difficult for you to grasp.

 

[xunzi]

you are so funny. ok, let me ask you some questions. Care to explain:

- what do you mean with "the creator of the quantum technology"?

- define "provider of the quantum encryption machine"?

- why "we cannot know what message is being encrypt" if we can´t read it?

- why the hell should Germany and Vietnam use "made in china" quantum communication technology?

- can you ensure date security against Chinese spying activities if we use made in china a black-box, using made in china satellites?

LOL

Please allow to answer your question.

As I told you, creator of the quantum technology is the provider of the quantum encryption machine. The quantum encryption machine features method on how to encode and decode a message through the used of encrypting in a photon.

In order to explain how a third party can't read that message, I can on and on and I"m afraid you won't be able to understanding if you don't understand quantum mechanics. So I keep it simple.

In this quantum machine, we will used LED to create photon because of LED inherently unpolarized nature. This means an unpolarized photon can exhibited all state of its spin ( like left, right, up, and down displaying all of its spin property all at once). This is what we called the wave function of how light behaves in quantum physics. And the advantage of an unpolarized photon is it makes a photon spin state unpredictable. So in order to regulate the 4 spins to a single spin property, you will need to send an unpolarized photon through a polarized filter before send off to the receiver which then used to decode the spin in the photon using the same filter the sender used, otherwise the property of the original spin in that photon message will be throw off. And spin will be represented by the traditional method of how communication technology communicate with each other, through binary of 1 and 0. This means 1 can be corresponded to left/right spin, and 0 can be up/down spin, unlike in traditional encryption, the message is displaying just binary. In quantum, you take a step further and display its spin but these spins are represented by binary, which only the sender knows because he/she is the guy that set the spin correspondence. So a third party can try to eardrop by placing a filter to intercept the message, but the beauty is like I said before, the nature of quantum entanglement caused photon spins to change once it is being observed. Thus the whole encryption will break off.

Because we are one of the few country that know how to create this quantum machine and be able to put it in space and able to deliver sensitive message over vast distance as opposed to the earlier limitation of quantum cryptography. And the fact the breakthrough in quantum communication will lead to quantum computer with the power of all known current supercomputer put together that don't even compare. So if you want to be safe from hacking proof from Uncle Sam, you might want to use our technology. This will have enormous impact in many industry that wants to keep data safe. In fact, we invest in quantum technology because we are the biggest victim of hacking groups across the world. LOL

Like I said and I predict in the future, only two countries are capable of hacking everyone system and that is us and USA because of our research in quantum computer far advance than everyone else in the world. So you can use our technology or not, it is up to you but do know if you don't, then be ready that we can hack into all of systems.

 

[randomradio]

And like I said that engineers and the military do not have the luxury of time.

If the military requests that I designed something to counter a potential threat, usually that threat is not hypothetical but real, in other words, a jet fighter against a jet fighter, not an F-16 against a TIE fighter from Star Wars. So until the quantum radar leave the laboratory, there is nothing the soldier can do. I do not understand why is that so difficult for you to grasp.

Of course I understand that. That's also why I said there's no point having the quantum radar if it can't leave the lab.

The Russians have already finished development of the Digital PAR, while DARPA has started one now. And the Russians are now moving on to hardware that allows the creation of the Photonic PAR, the next evolution of the AESA after the Digital PAR, that's 2018. This Photonic PAR will allow the creation of the first quantum radar, that's before 2025.

Until these technologies are created and the PAK FA is operational, the Americans are going to continue to have the advantage with the F-22/F-35. The same with the Chinese. So that's not changed. But once it's ready, that means the F-22/F-35 are going to be obsolete. And it could happen in just a few years.

That's also why the US has decided to skip making a brand new fighter and just stick to modernizing an existing fighter just to keep up.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-backs-off-sixth-gen-fighter-in-quest-for-air-423994/

“F-X would have been most likely like a sixth-generation fighter and would have had a 20 or 30-year development programme,” Holmes said at an Air Force Association forum in Washington DC on 7 April. “What we want to try to do is solve the problem faster than that by looking out across the range of options and building what we’re capable of building instead of waiting for the next generation.”

When you start looking at what others are doing, everything starts coming together. F-22/F-35 are really good today. But the Russians and maybe the Chinese are developing technologies that are going to make the jets obsolete. It starts making sense when you consider that even the Israelis believe the F-35's stealth will be useless in 5-10 years, that's about the time the Russian and Chinese fighters come online. So an aircraft that's supposed to have an RCS smaller than 0.0001m2 is going to be obsolete in just a few years time. The only answer to this drastic change is brand new technology.

And to deal with this, the USAF has decided to junk their original plans and have their next new fighter developed in just 5-10 years now with existing technologies that will mature soon. That's a pretty big U-turn from the initial plan of making a brand new 6th gen aircraft.

 

[Furqan Sarwar]

China’s quantum satellite – nicknamed Micius after a Chinese scientist and philosopher – blasts off
from the Jiuquan launch centre in Gansu province last week.

BEIJING: The international power struggle for the control of data has intensified with a number of Chinese companies now trying to challenge entrenched cloud vendors such as Microsoft, Google and Amazon.

The growing market, targeted by Chinese players such as Huawei, Alibaba and Baidu, has raised serious questions about security of data storage and whether tech firms in China or elsewhere are vulnerable to attack.

China last week took a major step towards resolving the cyber security challenge by launching the world’s first "hack-proof" quantum satellite.

"The satellite’s two-year mission will be to develop ‘hack-proof’ quantum communications, allowing users to send messages securely," Xinhua news agency reported.

The Quantum Experiments at Space Scale, or Quess, satellite programme is part of the Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s space programme.

"There’s been a race to produce a quantum satellite, and it is very likely that China is going to win that race," Nicolas Gisin, a professor and quantum physicist at the University of Geneva, told The Wall Street Journal. "It shows again China’s ability to commit to large and ambitious projects and to realise them."

The satellite is designed to secure messages between Beijing and Urumqi, the capital of Xinjiang, a sprawling region of deserts and snow-capped mountains in China’s extreme west.

The technology is extremely complex and based on the scientific principle of quantum entanglement.

According to this theory, two particles become "entangled" when they interact. However, any subsequent interaction with one impacts, instantaneously and regardless of distances between them, on both particles. "It is hence impossible to wiretap, intercept or crack the information transmitted through it," Xinhua reported after Tuesday’s launch.

But there are concerns about who has the keys to such technological developments and whether sensitive – or mission critical – data could be at risk in the absence of international rules and controls.

"There is a global focus on who controls data. But there is no transparency in this business," Sheila Jasanoff, director, programme on science, technology and society at Harvard Kennedy School tells The National.

"A new kind of frontier has been opened up, and it does not have any rules," she says.

There has been a proliferation of companies in the cloud computing sector, where sensitive or critical data is stored outside an organisation’s physical boundary, and very little commitment to data security, she adds.

The world market for cloud solutions is expanding rapidly. Global spending on cloud services is expected to see a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 19.4 per cent between 2015 and 2019, according to the statistics analyst, Statista. Amazon Web Services (AWS), the cloud arm of Amazon, generated revenues of US$7.88 billion in 2015, it says.

But the biggest hurdle for the sector is cyber security in the absence of any international treaty to enshrine it.

Cloud companies offer an extensive array of often expensive software solutions "to rent" to clients unable or unwilling to make the extremely heavy investment in money and expertise required to build such systems. As the sector expands, the leasing companies are increasingly focusing on safety in a bid to convince customers to move to cloud.

"Data security is an issue everywhere and, as [customers] move from internal IT networks largely based on computers and software located inside their own facilities to a cloud model in which the firm’s employees can use cheap mobile devices to access their IT network anywhere in the world at any time, the threats to data security grow," says Lee Branstetter, an associate professor of economics at the Heinz School of Policy and Management of the Carnegie Mellon University.

"But the shift to cloud computing will only succeed if firms believe their essential data to be reasonably secure.

"For this reason, major players are making very large investments in technology that can ensure reasonably secure access to IT networks," he says.

 

[PaklovesTurkiye]

So, when are we getting that ? I mean we r already using Beidou navigation system. Next year we will launch our satellite too. I mean we are closely cooperating with China in this regard...