Entanglements

William C. Schieve; Lawrence P. Horwitz

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511626555.013

12 - Entanglements

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 August 2015

William C. Schieve and

Lawrence P. Horwitz

Show author details

William C. Schieve: Affiliation:
University of Texas, Austin
Lawrence P. Horwitz: Affiliation:
Tel-Aviv University

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Introduction

We will now turn to quantum entanglements and their contemporary, possibly practical, interest. Entanglements, first discussed in the E.P.R. paradox (Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen, 1935) are a perplexing nonlocal feature of quantum mechanics. This was immediately and succinctly discussed by Schrödinger (1935). The long history of this apparent paradox is outlined in the wonderful book of Jammer (1974). We will not focus on the central issue of “hidden variables” and their resolution by the Bell inequalities (Bell, 1964) and the test, nor the failure, of these in experiment (see Fry, 1998).

The distinctive quantum nature of entanglements has led to two quantum effects which we will discuss: quantum information teleportation (Zeilenger, 1998) and quantum computation by means of entangled states. A nice, recent, elementary introduction to the latter is in the Los Alamos reports of James and Kwiat (2002). The quantum correlations or entanglements are sensitive to environmental destruction. This was pointed out early by Zurek, who termed this “decoherence.” The loss of coherence may occur on a short time scale. Recent discussions have been given by Zurek (2002, 2003). We have already given a theoretical example early in Chapter 2. It is pertinent to discuss this here, since it is a property of opensystem quantum master equations that is a central part of our study in this book. In a sense, the decoherence of correlations has turned out to be a “practical” application of these theoretical notions. Are there remedies for unwanted decoherence? Quantum error correction is a possibility. This will be mentioned also.

Entanglements: foundations

Following the reading of the E.P.R. paper, Schrödinger (1935b) quickly repeated the argument from quantum theory, but more generally. He introduced the term “entanglement” to describe what he seemed to agree was a curious, if not unacceptable, property.

Let us follow his point of view. Given a state ψ (x, y) of a composite system of particles x and y formed in their mutual interaction. ψ (x, y) is not a product state.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Quantum Statistical Mechanics , pp. 221 - 239

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511626555.013 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Agarwal, G. S. (1971). Phys. Rev. A 4, 739.CrossRef

Bell, J.S. (1964). Physics 1, 195.CrossRef

Bennett, C.H. (1998). In Proceedings of Nobel Symposium 104, ed. E. B., Karlsson and E., Brändas, 210 (Stockholm, Physica Scripta).Google Scholar

Bennett, C.H. and Wiesner, S.J. (1992). Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 3121.CrossRef

Bennett, C.H. and Wiesner, S.J. (1992). Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2881.CrossRef

Bohr, N. (1949). In Albert Einstein: Philosopher and Scientist, ed. P. A., Schlipp, 199 (Evanston, Library of Living Philosophers).Google Scholar

Boumeester, D. and Zeilinger, A. (2000). In The Physics of Quantum Information, ed. D., Boumeester, A., Ekert and A., Zeilinger, p. 1 (Berlin, Springer).CrossRef Google Scholar

Boumeester, D., Pan, J.W., Weinfurter, H. and Zeilinger, A. (2000). The Physics of Quantum Information, ed. D., Boumeester and A., Zeilinger, p. 67 (Berlin, Springer).CrossRef Google Scholar

Caldeira, A.O. and Leggett, A.J. (1983). Physica A 121, 587.CrossRef

Courant, R. and Hilbert, D. (1966). Methods of Mathematical Physics 1 (New York, Interscience).Google Scholar

Deutsch, D. (1985). Proc. Roy. Soc. A 400, 97.CrossRef

Deutsch, D. and Ekert, A. (2000). In The Physics of Quantum Information, ed. D., Boumeester, A., Ekert and A., Zeilinger (Berlin, Springer), p. 93.CrossRef Google Scholar

Einstein, A. (1949). In Albert Einstein: Philosopher and Scientist, ed. P. A., Schlipp, 663 (Evanston, Library of Living Philosophers).Google Scholar

Einstein, A., Podolsky, B. and Rosen, N. (1935). Phys. Rev. 47, 777.CrossRef

Ekert, A.K. (1998). In Proceedings of Nobel Symposium 104, ed. E. B., Karlsson and E., Brändas, 218 (Stockholm, Physica Scripta).Google Scholar

Ekert, A.K., Palma, G.M. and Suomin, K.A. (2002). In The Physics of Quantum Information, ed. D., Boumeester, A., Ekert and A., Zeilinger, 222 (Berlin, Springer).Google Scholar

Feynman, R. (1959). Talk before the American Physical Society, California Institute of Technology.

Fry, E.S. (1998). In Proceedings of Nobel Symposium 104, ed. E. B., Karlsson and E., Brändas, 47 (Stockholm, Physica Scripta).Google Scholar

Haroche, S. (1998). In Proceedings of Nobel Symposium 104, ed. E. B., Karlsson and E., Brändas, 159 (Stockholm, Physica Scripta).Google Scholar

James, D.F.V. and Kwiat, P.C. (2002). Quantum state entanglements. Los Alamos Science 27, 53.Google Scholar

Jammer, M. (1974). The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics (New York, Wiley).Google Scholar

Jozsa, R. (1998). In Introduction to Quantum Computation and Information, ed. H., Lo, S., Popescu and T., Spiller (Singapore, World Scientific).Google Scholar

Jozsa, R. (2002). In The Physics of Quantum Information, ed. D., Boumeester, A., Ekert and A., Zeilinger, 104 (Berlin, Springer).Google Scholar

Knill, E., Laflamme, R., Barnum, H.H., Dalrit, D.A., Dziarmaga, J.J., Gubernatis, J.E., Gurvits, L., Ortiz, G., Viola, L. and Zurek, W.H. (2002). Los Alamos Sci. 27, 2.

Kraus, B. and Cirac, J.I. (2001). Phys. Rev. A 63, 1.CrossRef

Macchiavello, C. and Palma, G.M. (2000). In The Physics of Quantum Information, ed. D., Boumeester, A., Ekert and A., Zeilinger, 232 (Berlin, Springer).Google Scholar

Mattle, K., Weinforter, H., Kwiat, P.C. and Zeilinger, A. (1996). Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 46, 56.CrossRef

Nielsen, M.A. and Chuang, I.L. (2000). Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (London, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar

Nussenzweig, H.M. (1973). Introduction to Quantum Optics (London, Gordon and Breach).Google Scholar

Schmidt, E. (1907). Math. Ann. 63, 433.CrossRef

Schrödinger, E. (1935a). Naturwissenschaften 23, 807. Trans. J.D., Trimmer (1980), Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. 124, 323.

Schrödinger, E. (1935b). Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 31, 446.CrossRef

Shor, P.W. (1994). In Proceedings of the 36th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, ed. Caldwasser (Los Alamitos, I.E.E.E.) 124.CrossRef Google Scholar

Shor, P.W. (1995). Phys. Rev. A 52, 2493.CrossRef

Steane, A.M. (1998). Quantum error correction. In Introduction to Quantum Computation and Information, ed. H., Huinkwang, S., Popesco and T., Spiller (Singapore, World Scientific).Google Scholar

Walls, D.F. and Milburn, G.J. (1985). Phys. Rev. A 31, 2403.CrossRef

Wooters, W.K. and Zurek, W. (1982). Nature 299, 802.CrossRef

Zeilinger, A. (1998). In Proceedings of Nobel Symposium 104, ed. E. B., Karlsson and E., Brändas, (Stockholm, Physica Scripta).Google Scholar

Zurek, W. (1991). Phys. Today 46, 13.

Zurek, W. (2002). Los Alamos Sci. 27, 1.

Zurek, W. (2003). Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 715.CrossRef

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.