Controlled NOT Gate: Explained

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dragonfall
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gate
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the mechanics of a controlled NOT gate, particularly how its matrix representation operates on qubit states. The initial poster questions the identification of control and target bits within the state vector, suggesting confusion between classical and quantum interpretations. It is clarified that the state vector represents joint amplitudes of qubits rather than distinct control and target components. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding tensor products in quantum mechanics, as opposed to direct sums. Overall, the thread elucidates the mathematical framework necessary for grasping controlled NOT gates in quantum computing.
Dragonfall
Messages
1,023
Reaction score
5
I'm not sure where to post this, so here it is:

\left[\begin{array}{cccc}<br /> 1&amp;0&amp;0&amp;0\\<br /> 0&amp;1&amp;0&amp;0\\<br /> 0&amp;0&amp;0&amp;1\\<br /> 0&amp;0&amp;1&amp;0\\<br /> \end{array}\right]

How is this a controlled NOT gate? If I multiply this with \left[\begin{array}{c}1\\0\\1\\0\end{array}\right], the second bit is flipped regardless.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
That looks fine to me. Maybe it would be more clear with Kronecker products in the ket notation? Let |0> and |1> denote the standard basis on C². Then...

<br /> \left[\begin{array}{c}1\\0\\1\\0\end{array}\right]<br /> = |0\rangle \otimes |0\rangle + |1\rangle \otimes |0\rangle<br />

while

<br /> \left[\begin{array}{c}1\\0\\0\\1\end{array}\right]<br /> = |0\rangle \otimes |0\rangle + |1\rangle \otimes |1\rangle<br />
 
Which coordinates in that column vector represents the control, and which the target bit?
 
Dragonfall said:
Which coordinates in that column vector represents the control, and which the target bit?
You're thinking classically. Your state vector cannot be partitioned into "control" and "target" parts -- instead, the vector represents the joint amplitudes of the two qubits. In your chosen basis, the components of the state vector correspond to each of the four ways to choose a basis vector for each qubit. If you had three qubits, your state vector would have eight components.

Algebraically, the joint state space is the tensor product of the individual state spaces. You, however, were thinking of the direct sum (equivalently, direct product) of the individual state spaces.
 
So suppose my control bit is 0, and target is 1, then the vector representing the joint amplitudes of them (on which the matrix acts) is \left[\begin{array}{c}1\\0\end{array}\right] \otimes \left[\begin{array}{c}0\\1\end{array}\right] = \left[\begin{array}{c}0\\1\\0\\0\end{array}\right]
 
Last edited:
That looks right.
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top