Multi-particle Entanglement in Quantum States and Evolutions
-
Upload
matthew-leifer -
Category
Education
-
view
1.675 -
download
2
description
Transcript of Multi-particle Entanglement in Quantum States and Evolutions
![Page 1: Multi-particle Entanglement in Quantum States and Evolutions](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022082920/555046a9b4c9058f768b4e1f/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Multi-particle Entanglement in Quantum States and
Evolutions
Matthew Leifer - 1st Year Ph.D., Maths Dept., University of BristolSupervisor - Dr. Noah Linden
1. Background and Motivation
2. Physical Meaning of Entanglement
3. Quantum Mechanics
4. Entanglement in Quantum States
5. Entanglement in Quantum Evolutions
6. Further Investigations
![Page 2: Multi-particle Entanglement in Quantum States and Evolutions](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022082920/555046a9b4c9058f768b4e1f/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
1. Background and Motivation
• Quantum Mechanics is weird! – role of probability
– measurement problem (“collapse of wave-function”)
– non-local correlations (entanglement)
• Quantum Mechanics is Successful!– Atomic Physics and Chemistry
– Solid State Physics (semiconductors)
– Quantum Field Theory (Particle Physics)
– Anomalous magnetic moment of electron
• We do not have full control of the quantum degrees of freedom in these applications.
![Page 3: Multi-particle Entanglement in Quantum States and Evolutions](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022082920/555046a9b4c9058f768b4e1f/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
What happens if we can control quantum systems?
• Quantum Computers– Feynman (1982)
• Holy Grails of Information Theory– Polynomial time prime
factorisation - Shor (1994)
– Perfectly secure key distribution in cryptography
• Other discoveries– Teleportation - Bennett et al
(1992)
– Quantum error correction - Shor (1995)
• These procedures use entangled states! Peter Shor
Richard Feynman
![Page 4: Multi-particle Entanglement in Quantum States and Evolutions](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022082920/555046a9b4c9058f768b4e1f/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
3. Quantum MechanicsMeasurement
• Quantum states, |>, are vectors (rays) in a Hilbert space
• Usually we normalise s.t. < |> = 1
• Observables are represented by Hermitian operators (i.e Q s.t. Q† = Q)
• If we construct an orthonormal eigenbasis{|i>} of Q s.t. Q|i> = i |i> then |> = ai
|i> with |ai|2 = 1 and ai = <i|>
• The possible results of measurements of Q are its eigenvalues i
• The result of a measurement will be i with probability |ai|2
• After obtaining a value i, the state will become |i>
![Page 5: Multi-particle Entanglement in Quantum States and Evolutions](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022082920/555046a9b4c9058f768b4e1f/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
3. Quantum MechanicsQuantum Dynamics
• States can also evolve between measurements |> U |>
• Conservation of probability => states must remain normalised: <|U†U|> = <|> => U†U = 1
• Quantum evolutions are unitary!
• Can also see this from Schrödinger eqn.
dt
diH
In theory, can implement any unitary transformation by correct choice of H.
![Page 6: Multi-particle Entanglement in Quantum States and Evolutions](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022082920/555046a9b4c9058f768b4e1f/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
3. Quantum MechanicsSystems and Subsystems
• If we have 2 systems A and B, with Hilbert spaces HA and HB then the quantum state of the combined system is a vector in HAHB
• Example - 2 dimensional subsystems (spin-1/2 particles)
HA has basis {|0>A, |1>A}
HB has basis {|0>B, |1>B}
HAHB has basis {|0>A|0>B, |0>A|1>B, |1>A|0>B, |1>A|1>B}
or {|00>, |01>, |10>, |11>}
An example vector 10012
1 AB
![Page 7: Multi-particle Entanglement in Quantum States and Evolutions](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022082920/555046a9b4c9058f768b4e1f/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
4. Entanglement in Quantum States
• An entangled state is one that cannot be written as |AB> = |A>|B> for any choice of basis in HA and HB
• Specialise to n spin-1/2 particles.
• General unitary transformation
• Local unitary transformation
• Each copy of U(2) acts on corresponding particle
• Local unitaries do not change entanglement of state
n2C
NU 2U
222 UUU n U
![Page 8: Multi-particle Entanglement in Quantum States and Evolutions](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022082920/555046a9b4c9058f768b4e1f/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
4. Entanglement in Quantum States
# Non-Local Parameters
• In general
• Linear span of XTs = tangent space to orbit at v.
• No. linearly indep. XTs gives dimension of orbit.
• E.g. infinitesimal change under a trans. in 1 direction:
• Write ar=cr+idr (r = 0,1) and
• Then
• and f(c0,d0,c1,d1) f(c0-d1,d0+ c1,c1- d0,d1+ c0)
• so
• Similarly we can find u0,u2,u3. Only 3 are linearly indep. So we have 4-3 = 1 non-local parameter
0
vefvfX Ti
T
0
11 ai
aii
Tdcdc 1100
Tcdcd 0011
Tcdcdufuf
0011110
where,.
![Page 9: Multi-particle Entanglement in Quantum States and Evolutions](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022082920/555046a9b4c9058f768b4e1f/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
4. Entanglement in Quantum States
Polynomial Invariants
• Construct invariants by contracting with U(2) invariant tensors) (ij and ij)in all possible ways
• Example: for 1 particle
• For 2 particles
• General case: Contract a’s with a*’s using ’s in all possible ways until we have as many functionally indep. invariants as non-local params.
ji i
iijiij aaaa,
**
ji
ijijjjii
jjiijiij aaTraaaaI,
†*
,,,
*1
11
1111
2†****
2 11111111aaTraaaaaaaaI jkjlilikllkkjjiikjjlliik
![Page 10: Multi-particle Entanglement in Quantum States and Evolutions](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022082920/555046a9b4c9058f768b4e1f/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
4. Entanglement in Quantum States
Stability Groups
• Each orbit has a stability group < U(2)n.
• Certain states have larger stability groups than the generic case.
• States with maximal symmetry are especially interesting.
• Example: 3 particles
– Generic states have no stability group.
– Singletvector is invariant under SU(2)U(1)
– Direct products are invariant under U(1)3
– GHZ are invariant under U(1)2 and discrete symmetry Z2
2312
1 10010
8333232131
323222121313212111
1
T
![Page 11: Multi-particle Entanglement in Quantum States and Evolutions](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022082920/555046a9b4c9058f768b4e1f/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
5. Entanglement in Quantum Evolutions
• Consider UV1UV2, where UU(2n) and V1,V2 U(2)n
• Does orbit space make sense?
• Apply same ideas– No. invariant parameters
– Canonical points
– Polynomial invariants
• 1 particle case -– Lie Algebra elements can now work on both
sides.
• 2 particle canonical form -– How are j’s related to polynomial
invariants?
)sincos1( 2 jj
ieU
jjjie
n
n
U
U22
2
![Page 12: Multi-particle Entanglement in Quantum States and Evolutions](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022082920/555046a9b4c9058f768b4e1f/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
6. Future Work
• Density matrix formalism - Linden, Popescu and Sudberry 1998
• Find canonical forms, polynomial invariants and special orbits for n particle unitaries.
• Determine relation between non-locality in states and evolutions.
• Allow measurements. What is the significance of
– Carteret, Linden, Popescu and Sudberry (1998)
yyyy ~