La fase geométrica en mecánica cuántica: teoría y experimentos J. C. Loredo O. Ortíz A. Ballón...
-
Upload
jessie-gascoigne -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
1
Transcript of La fase geométrica en mecánica cuántica: teoría y experimentos J. C. Loredo O. Ortíz A. Ballón...
La fase geométrica en mecánica cuántica:teoría y experimentos
J. C. Loredo O. Ortíz
A. Ballón S. Chávez
M. J. BustamanteA. P. Galarreta C. Sihuincha
F. De Zela
Departamento de Ciencias – Sección Física – Grupo de Óptica Cuántica
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Coloquios de la Sección Física, 19 de mayo 2011
)cos(kx
)cos( kx
ikxe
( ) ( )i kx ikxiee e
Fases
Fase relativa entre dos ondas
Interferometría
ikxe
( )i kxe
En la mecánica cuántica se usa la “función de onda”, una función que toma valores complejos
( , )x t
La función de onda encierra toda la información que se tiene sobre un sistema físico.
( , )x t debe ser físicamente equivalente a ( , )i te x
Por ejemplo, la cantidad:*( , ) ( , )x t x t
es invariante bajo el cambio
* *
( , ) ( , )
( , ) ( , )
i
i
x t e x t
x t e x t
Ondas que pasan a través de una doble rendija
Experimento de la doble rendija
1*22
*1
2
2
2
1
2
21 I
12 ie
1 cos( )I
1
2
B 1 cos ( )BI
Efecto Aharonov-Bohm
1
2
Φ(B)
Berry’s phase
In 1984 Berry analyzed an adiabatic, unitary and cyclic evolution of a quantum system that obeys Schrödinger’s equation. He discovered that the quantum state acquires a geometric phase besides the (expected) dynamical phase.
Later on, it was shown that geometric phases appear even in non-adiabatic, non-unitary and non-cyclic situations of a general kind.
Geometric phases are an interesting subject for many fields: differential geometry and topology, classical dynamics, relativity, quantum dynamics, classical and quantum optics, quantum computation, etc.
La función de onda que representa a un sistema físico evoluciona en el tiempo.
La evolución la rige la ecuación de Schrödinger:
opi Ht
Los estados cuánticos se pueden describir matemáticamente mediante “vectores” o “kets”:
Spin evolves following adiabatically a slowly changing magnetic field
B(T) = B(0)
ψS (T) = eiφ ψS (0)
Fast variation
Slow variation
H(t) = -μ.B(t)
Parallel transport
iv
fv
A vector vi parallel-transported along a closed path generally doesn’t return to its original value: vi ≠ vf
The difference vf – vi depends on the underlying space
One important field of interest is quantum computation
0 and 1
0 1
Classical computation requires bits:
Quantum computation requires qubits:
Qubits in a register (memory) must be submitted to (unitary) transformations.
Having a universal set of elementary transformations one may perform any computational task.
A key task in quantum computation: to cop with decoherence.
A possible solution: all-geometric quantum computation, which is robust against decoherence.
Different scenarios: NMR, Josephson junctions, quantum dots, ion traps, polarized states.
Using NMR Jones et al. (Nature 403, 869 (2000)) removed the dynamical phase, leaving a geometric phase alone. They used a setup that adiabatically changed the spin-state
Motivation
Goals for (nonadiabatic) geometric quantum computation:
To find paths, along which the dynamical phase vanishes. To implement robust one- and two-qubit phase-gates.
D. Leibfried et al. Nature 422, 412 (2003): two-qubit phase gates (using beryllium ions) in which the geometric phase is proportional to the dynamical phase (Zhu and Wang, PRL 91, 187902 (2003))
Pancharatnam’s phase
1956: Pancharatnam addressed polarization states and defined for them the notion of being „in phase“, thereby anticipating Berry‘s phase.
121 2 1 2( ) ( ) ( ) ( )ie
Consider two states that depend on some parameters ξ and write
The relative phase is naturally defined as φ12 and calculated as
12 1 2Im log ( ) ( )
1( )
2( )
3( )
4( )
Several states joined by a closed path
For several states joined by a closed path we define the total phase as
12 23 34 41
1 2 2 3 3 4 4 1Im log ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
This is an observable quantity, invariant under gauge transformations.
( )( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
ie
For a continuous, closed path we define
( ) ( )
exp( ) ( )
i
( ) ( )i
, 11
NN
s ss
d
( ) ( )d i d
Generalization to nonadiabatic evolution and open trajectories
For ξ=ξ(s) we define the total phase as
1 2arg ( ) ( )tot s s
Defining
2
1
1 2arg ( ) Im ( ) (( ))geo to dyn
s
m t
s
s ss d s one can prove that Φgeom is gauge invariant:
( )( ) ( )i sA ses A
and also under parameter changes: s →u
Φgeom depends only on the curve traced back by |ψ(s)ψ(s)| in “ray space”, e.g., on the Poincaré sphere.
The total phase Φtot can be measured using, e.g., polarization states by
Polarimetry
(robust)
Interferometry (supposed to be unstable)
Measuring the total phase
As well known, polarization states can be represented through Jones vectors or through Stokes vectors.
cos
sinx
iy
EP
Ee
1ˆ
2P P I s
ˆ (cos 2 ,sin 2 cos ,sin 2 sin )s
The action of intensity-preserving optical elements is represented by matrices belonging to SU(2).
s lies on the Poincaré sphere and represents |P.
Different trajectories described by s on the Poincaré sphere
Measuring the total phase
Initial state |i evolves under U(β,γ,δ) SU(2) to |f = U |i.
U can be realized using three retarders: two λ/4 and one λ/2.
For the “ZYZ” parametrization of U
( , , ) exp exp exp2 2z y zU i i i
cosii f e
so that arg , mod( )tot i f
we have
Polarimetry (Wagh and Rakhecha)
Take initial state |+z
Subject it to /2-rotation: |+z → (|+z - i |z)/2
Phase-shift the state by applying exp(- i φ σz/2):
/ 21
2 2
ii
z z z z z z
ei ie V
Now apply U(βγδ) and then the inverse transformation V-1. Then project back to |+z and measure the intensity:
2 2 2 2cos cos sin cosI
z zi
/ 2 / 2i i
z ze ei
/ 2 / 2i i
z zUe iUe
z
(2)SU
Phase-shift
State-splitting
2 2 221 2 coscos sin cos ( )I V UV
Analyzer
+
Pancharatnam’s phase can be extracted from I by measuring Imin and Imax :
2 min
max min
cos1
I
I I
Utot = V U can be implemented with 5 retarders: 1 Half-wave and 4 Quarter-wave plates:
The angles ξ, η, ζ refer to a YZY form of U SU(2):
( , , ) exp exp exp2 2 2y z yU i i i
3 5 2 9 2( ) 7
4 4 42 2 2 4 42 2Q Q Q H Q
Experimental arrangement for polarimetry
Polarimetric measurements of cos2(ΦP) as a function of one Euler angle. J. C. Loredo, O. Ortíz, R. Weingärtner, and F. De Zela, Phys. Rev. A 80, 012113 (2009)
Interferometry
Consider two non-orthogonal polarization states and A B
Introduce a variable phase-shift φ on one state and measure the interference pattern
22 2 cos argiI e A B A B A B
Maximal intensity is obtained forarg A B
This is, by definition, Pancharatnam’s relative phase.
Interferometry (Wagh and Rakhecha)
2
11 cos cos
2 z z
i UeI
By interferometry we could in principle measure the relative shift of the pattern
with respect to a reference pattern corresponding to U = 1:
2
0
11 cos
2 z z
iI e
One can use a Mach-Zehnder, a Sagnac, or a Michelson array.
But the array should be robust against mechanical and thermal disturbances, to allow capture of reference pattern I0
Reference pattern
U(αβγ)
z zi
/ 2 / 2i i
z ze ei
/ 2 / 2i i
z ze ieU U
z
(2)SU
Phase-shift
Flipper (state-splitting)
2 2 221 2 coscos sin cos ( )I V UV
Analyzer
Let’s go back to polarimetry
Take a laser beam and let it pass through two polarizers, so that half the beam is vertically and the other half is horizontally polarized.
Let both halves go through the same optical components of an interferometer.
We have two patterns now:
11 cos cos
2VI
11 cos cos
2HI
The relative shift between IV and IH is 2δ, i.e., twice Pancharatnam’s phase.
Mach-Zehnder like, robust interferometric arrangement
Interferograms and corresponding filtered patterns to measure relative phase shift
Interferometric measurement of visibility v (θ1,θ2,θ3).
Interferometric measurements of cos2ΦP as a function of two Euler angles.
Using the same techniques we can measure the geometric phase.
Generally, we can choose the gauge so as to make zero either the total or else the dynamical phase.
2
1
1 2arg ( Im ( ) ( )) ( )tot
s
d n
s
g y A s A A s dA ss
( )( ) ( ) (
can always be achieved by choosing a
.
0 "gauge":
(In such a case ) ( ) "horizon, This is called a tal lift"
)
. .
dyn
g to
i
t
sA s
C
A s e s
C
A
tot
g dy
2
n
Alternatively, we can make
by choosing the phase
0,
of A(s ) .
Horizontal lift ( ): ( ) / 0 g totA s dA s ds
Being able to make Φg = Φtot for any curve we avoid the restriction of using only those special curves C for which the dynamical phase automatically cancels.
C = loop 1 + loop 2
Φdyn(C) = 0
See, e.g., Y. Ota et al., Phys. Rev. A 80, 052311 (2009)
1
1ˆ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
2ˆ( ) (cos ( )sin ,sin (
arg cos tan cos tan2 2
)sin ,cos )
g
s A s A s I n s
n s s s
( )( ) ( , )( ),z
tiA t e U t
0
cos( )
2( )t tc
Consider the state obtained by applying U(γβχ) SU(2):
The phase-shift necessary to make the dynamical phase zero is
We can thus measure Φg along non-geodesic paths
Interferometry
U{ Φdyn
Polarimetry
Array with seven retarders (another version uses five)
Φg by interferometry
Φg by polarimetry
Φg by interferometry
Φg by polarimetry
Φg by interferometry
Φg by polarimetry
Φg by interferometry
Conclusions
Polarimetric and interferometric methods could be applied in an all-optical setup that allowed us to generate geometric phases with great versatility.
Our interferometric arrangement is robust against mechanical and thermal disturbances.
We expect to upgrade our approach to deal with single-photons, in order to implement one and two-qubit gates, testing them against decoherence.