.
.
..
Wanted: Schodingers
Cat: Dead and Alive
Howard A. Blair
Syracuse University
[email protected]
November 4, 2014
Syracuse University
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
1 / 33
Quantum Computation
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
2 / 33
Nondeterministic classical states work like this:
Someone puts either a black marble in the box with probability p,
or a white marble in the box with probability 1 p.
The state of the box with regard to the color of the marble it
contains is either black with probability p, or white probability
(1 p).
You look in the box to measure the state of the box in regard to the
color of the marble. Suppose you see a black marble. Then there
was a marble there along and it was black.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
3 / 33
Quantum States:
A simple example: One bit. We physically represent bits many
ways. One way: circularly polarized photons.
3D glasses at the movies.
Clockwize polarization can be regarded as representing bit value
0 and counterclockwize polarization regarded as representing 1.
.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
4 / 33
Spin:
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
5 / 33
Quantum States:
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
6 / 33
Leibniz gave us two things important for computer
science
The Principle of Inertia: Everything remains in the state in which it
is, unless caused to change state.
The Principle of the Identity of Indiscernables: Two things are
the actually the same thing if, and only if, they bear exactly the
same essential relationships to everything. (HUGE)
Essential?
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
7 / 33
And then came Mach
Ernst Machs positivist/empiricist view: Stick to observables. If
with the help of the atomic hypothesis one could actually establish
a connection between several observable properties which
without it would remain isolated, then I should say that this
hypothesis was an economical one. (i.e: The atom concept is,
maybe, a useful hack.)
Machs positivist/empiricist view, which remains at the heart of
contemporary physics, leads right back into metaphysics. What
we observe has profound metaphysical implications: For
something to exist it must have properties observable in
principle. (Theres the rub!)
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
8 / 33
Superposition:
The circular polarization property of a photon is one of
implementing a qubit: its state, i.e. its polarization direction, is a
quantum state: a 0 + b 1, called a wave function.
a, b are square roots of probabilities with phase - called
amplitudes. Wave functions can with combine constructively and
destructively.
a 0 + b 1 = ei p 0 + ei (1 p) 1
The squares of the absolute values of a and b are probabilities.
The absolute value operation removes phase. e.g.
i
p = p
e
.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
9 / 33
The rules (of projective measurement)
Observe a qubit thats in state a 0 + b 1.
The result of your observation will be either 0 or 1.
The probability of getting 0 is |a|2 and of getting 1 is |b|2 .
(Wave function collapse.) After the observation the photon is
either
in state 0 or in state 1
depending on whether 0 or 1 was observed.
Important Question: How do we know the state really wasnt 0 or
1, like the marble in the box, before we observed it?
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
10 / 33
2 qubits: Entanglement
a 00 + b 01 + c 10 + d 11
Suppose we have two photons, the first in state a 0 + b 1 and the
second in state c 0 + d 1.
The combined system is in the separable state
(a 0 + b 1) (c 0 + d 1) = ac00 + ad 01 + bc 10 + bd11
What about states like
1
1
00 + 11
2
2
The quantum states of the separate qubits arent there. Therefore
those qubits do not separately exist? (Quantum Leibniz)
.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
11 / 33
Quantum Teleportation
The Setup 1: On an apparatus in her lab in New York, Alice has a
qubit in some quantum state a 0 + b1. She does not know the
quantum state of her qubit. She wants to send the qubit to Bob
who is in Paris. Specifically, she wants to cause the quantum state
of the qubit storage apparatus in Bobs lab in Paris to become
a 0 + b1.
The Setup 2: Alice and Bob have prepared a pair of entangled
qubits in (Bell or EPR) state
1
1
00 + 11
2
2
on a pair of single qubit storage devices, one of which they each
took to their labs.
We have suggested there are no separate qubit states stored in
their qubits from the entangled pair.
.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
12 / 33
Quantum Teleportation
Initially, there are three qubit storage devices in play: (1) holds
Alices qubit that she wants to teleport; (2) Alices qubit
participating in the entangled pair; (3) Bobs qubit participating in
the entangled pair.
AToBeSent AEntangled BEntangled
The state of the three devices is partially entangled like this:
1
1
(a0 + b1) ( 00 + 11)
2
2
=
a
a
b
b
000 + 011 + 100 + 111
2
2
2
2
.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
13 / 33
Quantum Teleportation
Alice pretends that the state of her qubit part of the entangled pair
really exists and sends her qubit state that she wants to teleport
and her qubit state from the entangled pair through a
controlled-not quantum gate. The state of the three devices
becomes:
a
b
b
a
000 + 011 + 110 + 101
2
2
2
2
Classical controlled-not gate:
Control
0
1
0
1
.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
14 / 33
Quantum controlled-not gate
Qubit values 0 and 1, respectively:
[ ]
[ ]
1
0
0
1
The quantum controlled-not gate must map pairs of inputs to pairs
of outputs in the same that the classical controlled-not gate does.
Pairs of quantum states on separate, distinguishable components
result in tensor products of the separate states. In matrix form we
take Kronecker products.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
15 / 33
Distinguishable multi-partite quantum systems
Suppose we have two quantum bits
a 0 + b1
c 0 + d1
In matrix notation
[
a0 + b1 = a
[
c0+d1=c
1
0
1
0
[
+b
[
+d
0
1
0
1
]
=
]
QuantumComputing
[
=
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
a
b
c
d
11/04/14
16 / 33
Distinguishable multi-partite quantum systems
The combined system of two qubits is in state
ac
ad
(a 0 + b 1) (c 0 + d 1) =
bc
bd
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
17 / 33
Distinguishable multi-partite quantum systems
For the controlled-not gate we have the following inputs
1
0
0
0
1
0
00=
0 01= 0 10= 1 11=
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
and corresponding outputs
1
0
00=
0 01=
0
0
0
1
0
1
11=
0
0
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
0
10=
0
1
11/04/14
18 / 33
Distinguishable multi-partite quantum systems
In matrix notation this unitary
1
0
0
0
operation is
0 0 0
1 0 0
0 0 1
0 1 0
Classical (sequential) computation: A sequence of small
changes in the computational state; i.e. a state is given by the
values of all of the variables involved. State change consists of
changing the value of one of the variables.
Quantum computation: State is multipartite: some components
of the state a quantum states, others classical states. State
change is consists of classical changes to classical components,
or unitary changes to quantum components, or measurements of
quantum components.
.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
19 / 33
Quantum Teleportation
We left Alices and Bobs three qubit multipartite system in state
a
a
b
b
000 + 011 + 110 + 101
2
2
2
2
Alice then sends her qubit (the one to be teleported) through a
Hadamard gate:
1
1
0 7 ( 0 + 1)
2
2
1
1
1 7 ( 0 1)
2
2
Substituting on the first qubit, the state of the three partially
entangled devices is now:
1
1
a
1
1
a
( 0 + 1)00 + ( 0 + 1)11
2
2
2
2
2
2
b
1
1
b
1
1
+ ( 0 1)10 + ( 0 1)01
2
2
2
2
2
2
.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
20 / 33
Quantum Teleportation
which simplifies to
a
a
a
a
000 + 100 + 011 + 111
2
2
2
2
b
b
b
b
+ 010 110 + 001 101
2
2
2
2
(and now for more quantum wierdness):
=
1
1
1
1
00(a 0+b 1)+ 01(a 1+b 0)+ 10(a 0b 1)+ 11(a 1b 0)
2
2
2
2
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
21 / 33
Quantum Teleportation
Alice performs a projective measurement on both of her qubits
which will cause a wave function partial collapse of the entire
three-qubit system shared by Alice and Bob.
Suppose for example that Alices qubit to sent is measured to be 1
and the qubit originally entangled with Bobs is measured to be 0.
Then the quantum state of the system collapses to
10(a 0 b 1)
Bobs qubit is now in state a 0 b 1. He doesnt know a and b.
Alice emails Bob to tell him the result of her measurement. Bob
then knows that if he applies a phase-flip operation (i.e. 0 7 0 and
1 7 1) he will have Alices qubit (value) in the device in his lab
a0 + b1
.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
22 / 33
Factoring pure quantum states
Let Fn2 be the set of all n-tuples of bits.
A pure quantum state of n distinguishable qubits has the form
=
ax x
xFn2
where
|ax |2 = 1
xFn2
Consider the ax arranged in a 2 2 . . . 2 array, i.e. an n
dimensional hypermatrix T . Then is factorable as a tensor
product of individual qubit states if, and only if, the determinant of
every 2 2 submatrix of T vanishes.
.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
23 / 33
Factoring pure quantum states
Entangled?
a
a
a
a
000 + 100 + 011 + 111
2
2
2
2
b
b
b
b
+ 010 110 + 001 101
2
2
2
2
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
24 / 33
Factoring pure quantum states
a/2 001
a/2 011
b/2 010
-b/2 110
b/2 001
-b/2 101
a/2 000
a/2 100
.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
25 / 33
SQIL
qubit p,q,r; // All qubits are assumed to be randomly
// initialized in some quantum state.
bit u,v,w; //u,v,w are initialized to 0.
measure q in w; // After execution the state of q and v
// is either 0 and 0, or 1 and 1.
if (w = 1) // Notice that the state transition performed by
// this branching command is not unitary.
then
NOT(q); // The state of q after this branching command is
// is 0. NOT(x0 + y1) = y0 + x1
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
26 / 33
SQIL
measure r in w;
if (w = 1)
then
NOT(r); // At this point the state of the qubit pair (q,r) is
// 00. The combined state of all three qubits is
// a 000 + b 100
BELL(q,r); // BELL(x,y) can be any 2-qubit unitary that maps
// 00 to the Bell state
// (1/sqrt2) 00 + (1/sqrt2) 11.
// To see the combined state of all three qubits,
// multiply (a 0 + b textbf1)((1/sqrt2) 00 + (1/sqrt2) 11)
CNOT(p,q); // CNOT(00) = 00. CNOT(01) = 01.
// CNOT(10) = 11. CNOT(11) = 10.
.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
27 / 33
SQIL
Hadamard(p);
measure p in u;
measure q in v; // Four possibilities for u, v
if (u = 0) and (v = 1)
then
NOT(r)
else if (u = 1) and (v = 0)
then
PhaseFlipPi(r) //PhaseFlipPi(x 0 + y 1) = x 0 - y 1
else {
PhaseFlipPi(r);
NOT(r)
}
.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
28 / 33
How do we know quantum states are not classical?
Answer: Kochen-Specker, Bell/CSHS inequality, ...
Simon Kochen, Ernst Specker, 1968
J.F. Clauser, M.A. Horne, A. Shimony, R.A. Holt, 1969
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
29 / 33
Bell
Alice and Bob are given a large collection of entangled pairs of
qubits, where each pair is entangled in a phase-flipped Bell state
1
1
01 10
2
2
For each pair, Alice has one of the qubits, Bob the other.
Alice prepares two apparatuses to perform a projective
measurement on each of her qubits that will return +1
corresponding to bit-value of 0 and -1 corresponding to a bit-value
of 1. Specifically, Alice prepares the observables
[
]
[
]
1 0
0 1
Z =
X =
0 1
1 0
.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
30 / 33
Bell
Bob prepares similar but more elaborate observables
1
S = (Z X )
2
1
T = (Z X )
2
Bob leaves for our Martian colony with his qubits and apparatuses.
At a prearranged time when Mars and Earth are about 20
light-minutes apart, Alice and Bob each measure their qubits
using their prepared observables. We assume their actions take
much less than 20 minutes and are therefore relativistically
causally separated.
? What is the expected value of the random variable
V = ZA SB + XA SB + XA TB ZA TB
.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
31 / 33
Bell
If we assume that Alices and Bobs qubits had definite
probabilistically determined 0 or 1 valued states prior to
measurement, then we obtain, independently of the probability
distribution, the first Bell inequality :
E(V ) = E(ZA SB + XA SB + XA TB ZA TB ) 2
If we calculate the expected values of the quantum mechanical
observables on the entangled qubit pairs, we obtain for each of
the component observables
1
E(ZA SB ) = E(XA SB ) = E(XA TB ) = E(ZA TB ) =
2
Hence
E(V ) = 2 2
.
Howard A. Blair (Syracuse University)
QuantumComputing
11/04/14
32 / 33
