B Decoherence thought experiment

jartsa
Messages
1,582
Reaction score
141
Let's say a memory qubit inside a quantum computer is in state

## α \left|1\right>+β\left|0\right> ##

This computer is equipped with a device that emits photons that carry the same qubit as the aforementioned memory location.

Alice and Bob, that are very far from each other, receive and measure those photons.

Let's say Bob measures this sequence of bits:
01010111011011111011111111111111111111

And Alice measures this sequence of bits:
010100100010000001000000000000000000000

I tried to make those sequences realistic looking in such case when probability of measuring either 1 or 0 is the same at the beginning.

Now Bob contains a classical bit 1, and Alice contains a classical bit 0.

Who has decohered here? The computer can still send out qubits to Joe and Jill, who can go to opposite classical states, so I guess the computer is not decohered. So it's more like Bob and Alice became decohered by their own measurements. Right?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
If I understand you right, what you are proposing is not possible.
jartsa said:
This computer is equipped with a device that emits photons that carry the same qubit as the aforementioned memory location.
This violates the no-cloning theorem. You could have a device that would spew out a pair of qubits in a predefined state, but not copy an arbitrary state.

Also, I see no entanglement in what you propose, so why do you need two qubits and two observers?
 
DrClaude said:
If I understand you right, what you are proposing is not possible.
This violates the no-cloning theorem. You could have a device that would spew out a pair of qubits in a predefined state, but not copy an arbitrary state.
I want Bob and Alice to measure the state of the memory location. I don't care if the state is predefined. I would also like there to be no collapse to 1 or 0 when Bob and Alice make the first measurement.

So how about if we entangle lot of photons with the memory location, send the photons to Bob and Alice, who are equipped with measuring devices that produce results with lot of uncertainty.

Now I hope that as Bob makes more and more measurements, Bob's state becomes gradually the state "I know the memory location is in state 1". And as Bob is using the not so good measuring device, a good measuring device located nearby changes so that it only measures photons to be in the state that correspond state 1 of the memory location.
 
I really think this violates the no-cloning theorem.
 
DrClaude said:
I really think this violates the no-cloning theorem.

So do I. Thread closed.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
71
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top