Complete positivity and quantum dynamics

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of completely positive (CP) maps in quantum dynamics, particularly focusing on the relationship between CP maps in the Schrödinger picture and their duals in the Heisenberg picture. Participants explore the implications of trace-preserving properties, dimensionality of state spaces, and the mathematical rigor involved in these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Joris questions the validity of a manipulation involving trace-preserving properties of the CP map, noting that the dimensions of the spaces involved (k and n) may not match, which could lead to undefined matrix products.
  • Another participant suggests that if the CP map acts on the density matrix of an open system, the dimensions of the state spaces must be the same, challenging the assumption made by Joris.
  • Joris argues that the trace-preserving property implies that the states ρ and Γ(ρ) are the same, which he believes is incorrect in general, particularly if Γ represents the time evolution of the open system.
  • A different participant proposes that the identity involving the trace should hold without the observable X, as the density matrix should be normalized.
  • Bill provides references to Gleason's Theorem and Wigner's theorem as potentially relevant to the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of certain mathematical manipulations and the implications of dimensionality in the context of CP maps. There is no consensus on the correctness of the claims made regarding the trace-preserving property and the relationship between states.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight potential issues with rigor in mathematical notation and the implications of dimensionality in the context of CP maps, which remain unresolved.

JorisL
Messages
489
Reaction score
189
Hi again,

Another, possibly trivial, question.
In quantum dynamics we consider maps containing the evolution of a system.
Suppose we have a completely positive (CP henceforth) map
(1) [itex]\Gamma:\mathcal{M}_k\rightarrow \mathcal{M}_n[/itex]

This map has following properties:
  • Trace-preserving
  • Complex linear
  • Continuous in time (not important here)

This map is CP if it is d-positive for all d. I gather from this it should be possible to trivially extend the system we are interested into the system+an environment 'of dimension d'.
More usable is the fact that the extended map [itex]id_d\otimes \Gamma[/itex] is positive.

This map is defined for the Schrödinger picture, acting on density matrices. There exists a dual map [itex]\Gamma^*[/itex] in the Heisenberg picture, i.e. acting on observables. (this dual is unity/unital preserving)

In various texts I've found that it should be easy to show that
[itex]\Gamma[/itex] is CP iff [itex]\Gamma^*[/itex] is CP

Now some class mates used some really fishy manipulation (perhaps bad mathematical notation/practice) which seems to have gotten me completely lost.

Here's what they did.
in the schrödinger picture the map is trace-preserving thus
[tex]tr \rho X = tr \Gamma(\rho)X = tr \rho\Gamma^*(X)[/tex]
So far it seems ok to agree except for the first equality. In general the dimensions k and n in (1) aren't the same so the matrix product in one of the sides will not be defined.

Then they extend the map to use d-positivity of [itex]\Gamma[/itex]. From this they infer that the dual map is also d-positive. (symbolic, no explanation)

I'm not sure how they justified all this hand-wavy(at best) stuff. Another problem is that they don't appreciate attaining maximal rigour in this kind of things so they might have overlooked these problems.

Looking forward to some suggestions,

Joris
 
Physics news on Phys.org
JorisL said:
In general the dimensions k and n in (1) aren't the same so the matrix product in one of the sides will not be defined.
What are Mk and Mn? Some kind of state space? If the CP map acts on the density matrix of a certain open system, the dimensions of these spaces must be the same.

JorisL said:
in the schrödinger picture the map is trace-preserving thus
[tex]tr \rho X = tr \Gamma(\rho)X[/tex]
This identity not only uses the trace-preserving property of Γ but implies that ρ and Γ(ρ) are the same state. This is certainly wrong in general. If Γ is the time evolution of the open system your equation states that the expectation value of all observables X is constant.
 
You are right, the spaces Mk are the observable on a k-dimensional system.
The identity should in my opinion hold if we don't have the observable X in there since the trace of a d.m. should be normalised (in our convention, one can use a normalisation constant).

I'll try to figure some more of this out and give an expanded explanation of the context. Although it's only 2 pages long in my notes (a little bit short if you ask me). Some reference texts would be nice.
 
Two things that may interest you in this context is Gleason's Theorem:
http://kof.physto.se/cond_mat_page/theses/helena-master.pdf

And especially Wigner's theorem:
http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.0779

Thanks
Bill
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
10K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K