Can we look upon entanglement as measurement?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of the state of entangled photons, specifically focusing on the implications of tracing out one photon to analyze the polarization state of the other. Participants explore the nature of the resulting state, questioning whether it represents a definitive measurement outcome or a mixed state.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the global state of entangled photons and derives the reduced density operator, seeking clarification on its interpretation as either a definite state or a mixed state.
  • Another participant explains that tracing over one photon leads to a reduced density operator that indicates an unpolarized beam, suggesting that the observer measures either horizontally or vertically polarized photons with equal probability.
  • A subsequent reply questions whether the term "totally unpolarized beam" implies a statistical mixture, contrasting it with the concept of a linear superposition of states.
  • Another participant argues that the photon pair should still be considered entangled, implying that the particles remain in superposition despite the tracing process.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of the reduced density operator, with some suggesting it indicates a statistical mixture while others maintain that the entangled nature of the photons persists. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these interpretations.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the assumptions made about the nature of the states and the implications of tracing out one photon, which may affect the understanding of entanglement and measurement.

Albert V
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I have a question about how to interpret the state of an entangled photon

H = horisontal, V = vertical polarization



The global state is |Phi> = (|H>|V> + |V>|H>)/sqrt2.

By density operator formalism:

rho = |Phi><Phi|
= (1/2) ( |H>|V><H|<V| + |H>|V><V|<H| + |V>|H><H|<V| + |V>|H><V|<H| ).

in order to find the state on the right side, trace out the left side :

rho_right = Tr_left(rho) = (1/2) (|H><H|+|V><V|),

How should this state be interpreted? 1) as a photon EITHER in H OR V, or 2) a mixed state (superposition) containing components of both the left and the right side.

This would help me to understand this paper:

http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.1673
 
Physics news on Phys.org
First of all, you start with a two-photon state with entangled photons. It's a pure state given by a normalized state ket [itex]|\Phi \rangle[/itex]. The corresponding statistical operator of the pure state is the projection operator [itex]\hat{\rho}_{2 \gamma}=|\Phi \rangle \langle \Phi|[/itex]. This gives you the statistical properties on the polarization of both photons according to Borns rule.

Now you want to forget about the fact that you deal with a two-photon state and only know about the polarization state state of one photon. Thus you trace over the other photon's polarization states to end up with your reduced density operator [itex]\hat{\rho}_{\text{right}}=1/2 \mathbb{1}[/itex]. This shows that an observer only looking at this photon's polarization measures an totally unpolarized beam of photons, i.e., he finds with probability 1/2 either a horizontally or a vertically polarized photon, and that's it.
 
Thanks for your answer, but when you say a "totally unpolarized beam of photons" does that imply a statistical mixture of states? Under the discussion: "What is the difference between entangled and "normal" photons?" another Sci Advisor said that:

"When you discard information about the other particle, you are left with a statistical mixture. (mathematically, this amounts to taking a partial trace)"

A statistical mixture of states is not equivalent to a linear superposition of states.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
7K
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K