- #36
sirchasm
- 95
- 0
See how I'm using "potential" abstractly, it's just "something we might use" in this context.
Polarization of EM fields and radiation (from small to large wavelengths = distance operators on momentum), are connected to entanglement, since we can entangle photons.
There's a 'tanglement' potential which we entangle = connect; this is the machine needed. Entangled photons, then have a distance operator which acts in a 'moment-free' space, as a photon's distance acts in a 'mass-free' one. Down-converting is an operator that rotates a potential in photons (in their momentum) so it's now at right angles to itself as 2 photons, 1 e-bit. This implies a photon is entangled 'with' itself; a photon implies a rotational group on U(1) called SU(2), because mass-charge is scalar for all d.o.f. in wherever e-space is (obviously it's a subspace of momentum-space).
We can derive entangled states from momentum (of mass charge spin) as exchanges along mass-spin and charge-spin directions (pair-production and Hawking-Bekenstein radiation, q-bits or 'qubits'); spin-spin directions (Stern-Gerlach, neutron interferometry, QH-effect, AB effect, q-bits); but not mass-charge, because [tex][h, \hbar]\; [/tex] has to encode entanglement; mass-charge terms are scalar in e-space.
QIS calls an entangled quantum 'direction' an e-bit, which interacts with q-bit representations (atoms, electrons, photons); we haven't managed to encode e-bits in terms of quasiparticles yet. Or have we?
Polarization of EM fields and radiation (from small to large wavelengths = distance operators on momentum), are connected to entanglement, since we can entangle photons.
There's a 'tanglement' potential which we entangle = connect; this is the machine needed. Entangled photons, then have a distance operator which acts in a 'moment-free' space, as a photon's distance acts in a 'mass-free' one. Down-converting is an operator that rotates a potential in photons (in their momentum) so it's now at right angles to itself as 2 photons, 1 e-bit. This implies a photon is entangled 'with' itself; a photon implies a rotational group on U(1) called SU(2), because mass-charge is scalar for all d.o.f. in wherever e-space is (obviously it's a subspace of momentum-space).
We can derive entangled states from momentum (of mass charge spin) as exchanges along mass-spin and charge-spin directions (pair-production and Hawking-Bekenstein radiation, q-bits or 'qubits'); spin-spin directions (Stern-Gerlach, neutron interferometry, QH-effect, AB effect, q-bits); but not mass-charge, because [tex][h, \hbar]\; [/tex] has to encode entanglement; mass-charge terms are scalar in e-space.
QIS calls an entangled quantum 'direction' an e-bit, which interacts with q-bit representations (atoms, electrons, photons); we haven't managed to encode e-bits in terms of quasiparticles yet. Or have we?
Last edited: