Questions from Quantum Measurements

12 replies · 3K views · last reply
ARoyC
Messages
56
Reaction score
11
Homework Statement
Please check the attached screenshots for the questions.
Relevant Equations
Spectral Decomposition of Y, Probability of a Measurement Outcome and Posterior State Formula
[Mentor Note: Two similar thread starts merged]

The questions are from MIT OCW. First of all, I cannot understand what is the meaning of the measurement outcome being 0. How can an eigenvalue be 0? I tried doing the problems guessing that by 0 they mean the posterior state will be |0>. The only correct answer I got was for the first part of the second problem. I first wrote the state of the first qubit after passing through the first Hadamard gate. Then I wrote the tensor product state of the two qubits. After that, I applied the cNOT gate on the second qubit and then again the Hadamard gate on the first qubit. Then I used Born Rule to find the probability of the first qubit being in |0>. But I cannot get the answer for the other two parts using this method. Same problem for the first question.

It would be great if someone can help me out. Thank you in advance.
 
Attachments
  • Screenshot of a quantum measurement exercise listing three states to analyse: |psi> = |0>, |psi> = |+>, and an equal mixture of |0> and |1>, each with an empty answer box.
    Screenshot 2023-07-08 122050.jpg
    17.8 KB · Views: 193
  • Quantum circuit with qubit lines |0> and |psi_i>, showing a Hadamard gate on the top line, a controlled U gate joining the two lines, a second Hadamard on the top line, then a measurement meter, output labelled |psi_f>.
    Screenshot 2023-07-08 122200.jpg
    33.1 KB · Views: 199
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi, everyone.

Please check the following two questions.

1.
Homework problem text: apply U = e^(i(θ/2)Y) to |ψ⟩ and measure in the {|0⟩, |1⟩} basis; three empty answer boxes for |ψ⟩ = |0⟩, |ψ⟩ = |+⟩, and an equal mixture of |0⟩ and |1⟩.

2.
Quantum circuit diagram: qubit |0> passes through a Hadamard gate H, then a controlled U gate with a control dot, then another H gate, then a measurement meter; second qubit input |psi_i> goes to the U box, output labeled |psi_f>.

The questions are from MIT OCW. First of all, I cannot understand what is the meaning of the measurement outcome being 0. How can an eigenvalue be 0? I tried doing the problems guessing that by 0 they mean the posterior state will be |0>. The only correct answer I got was for the first part of the second problem. I first wrote the state of the first qubit after passing through the first Hadamard gate. Then I wrote the tensor product state of the two qubits. After that, I applied the cNOT gate on the second qubit and then again the Hadamard gate on the first qubit. Then I used Born Rule to find the probability of the first qubit being in |0>. But I cannot get the answer for the other two parts using this method. Same problem for the first question.

It would be great if someone can help me out. Thank you in advance.

Regards

Annwoy Roy Choudhury
 
Please give a complete problem formulation. If we don't know, what ##Y## is, we can't answer any of the questions!

What do you think is a problem of a eigenvalue 0? Take, e.g., ##\hat{S}_z## of a spin-1 particle. It has the eigenvalues 1, 0, -1. In the corresponding eigenbasis the corresponding matrix is
$$\begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 &-1 \end{pmatrix}.$$
 
vanhees71 said:
Please give a complete problem formulation. If we don't know, what ##Y## is, we can't answer any of the questions!

What do you think is a problem of a eigenvalue 0? Take, e.g., ##\hat{S}_z## of a spin-1 particle. It has the eigenvalues 1, 0, -1. In the corresponding eigenbasis the corresponding matrix is
$$\begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 &-1 \end{pmatrix}.$$
Y is Pauli Y matrix.

0 eigenvalue is common for every linear transformation for (0,0,0). So it is a trivial case. And in these questions, even if they mean that the eigenvalue is 0, then what is the method to do the problems?
 
What is "Pauli Y matrix". You HAVE TO clearly define symbols in physics, that are not standard! Otherwise nobody can understand, what's the problem.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: George Jones
vanhees71 said:
What is "Pauli Y matrix". You HAVE TO clearly define symbols in physics, that are not standard! Otherwise nobody can understand, what's the problem.
I apologise.

Quantum circuit diagram with a single-qubit gate labelled Y on one wire, above the 2x2 matrix [[0, -i], [i, 0]].
This is the Pauli Y matrix.
 
Few Information:

1. X and Y are written in the {∣0⟩,∣1⟩} X = |0><1| + |1><0| and Y = |0><1| - |1><0|

2. ∣+⟩=(1/√2)*(∣0⟩+∣1⟩)
 
PeroK said:
The usual notation for that is ##\sigma_y##.
I am sorry. The screenshots of the questions are directly from MIT OCW. So, I had nothing to do with it.
 
ARoyC said:
0 eigenvalue is common for every linear transformation for (0,0,0). So it is a trivial case. And in these questions, even if they mean that the eigenvalue is 0, then what is the method to do the problems?
By definition, an eigenvector is a non-zero vector satisfying ##T \vec x = \lambda \vec x##. While ##\vec x## has to be non-zero, there's no condition on ##\lambda##.
 
vanhees71 said:
What is "Pauli Y matrix".

PeroK said:
The usual notation for that is ##\sigma_y##.

I think this depends on context, and that it is not unusual to see X, Y, Z in quantum computing books, or quantum books that have substantial sections on quantum computing. I am not entirely sure, and I ould like to check my books, but I'm at my in-laws, and thus separated from my books by several thousand kilometres. As compensation, my mother-in-law made some wonderful aloo paratha for me.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PhDeezNutz and PeroK
George Jones said:
As compensation, my mother-in-law made some wonderful aloo paratha for me.
I'm quite partial to saag aloo myself.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: George Jones
Without a Gulab Jamoón, Kuch Nahi.
Edit: But, yes, eigenvalues can be 0, eigenvectors not the 0 vector. The eigenvalues will actually be 0 when the matrix is singular, almost by definition.
 
Last edited: