Testing methodology for the Chinese quantum satellite link?

Bill Woodcock woody at pch.net
Thu Jul 13 16:57:37 CST 2017

Does anyone who understands quantum networking better than I do have an opinion on the testing methodology that the Chinese team used to confirm entanglement?  I guess, more specifically, my question is: when they say that they got 911 positive results out of “millions” of attempts, does this significantly exceed any expected false-positive rate for the confirmation methodology?  If so, by what margin?  Obviously, if you were just flipping coins, and measured the results once, you’d get 50% positive correlation, twice and you’d get 25% correlation, ten times and you’d get 0.1% correlation, and you’d be at 911 out of a million.  So, how much better than that are we talking about?


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20170713/6a04ea89/attachment.sig>

More information about the NANOG mailing list