Reduced Density Operator and Entanglement

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of the reduced density operator and its relationship to entanglement in quantum states, particularly focusing on Bell states and the implications of purity in density matrices. Participants explore how to determine entanglement from the reduced density operator and the conditions under which a state is considered entangled.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about how the reduced density operator indicates entanglement, particularly in relation to Bell states.
  • It is noted that a reduced density operator proportional to the identity indicates a maximally entangled state, but the reasoning behind this is questioned.
  • One participant suggests calculating the purity of the reduced density operator to assess entanglement, stating that if the reduced state is less pure than the full state, entanglement is present.
  • A participant describes a general composite state of two spin-1/2 particles and states that the state is entangled unless specific conditions on the coefficients are met.
  • Another participant discusses the relationship between mixed states and entanglement, explaining that tracing out degrees of freedom from an entangled pure state results in a mixed reduced density matrix.
  • There is a query about whether the smallest possible value for the purity of any density matrix is one half, particularly in the context of Bell states being maximally entangled.
  • One participant clarifies that for a two-level system, the lowest purity is indeed one half, while also noting that purity can vary in different contexts, such as thermal states.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the relationship between reduced density operators and entanglement, but there are differing views on the implications of purity and the conditions under which states are considered entangled. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the minimum purity value across different systems.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of purity and entanglement, as well as the specific conditions under which the claims about entanglement hold true. The discussion does not resolve the nuances of these definitions.

Sharkey4123
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
I'm having a little bit of trouble getting my head around the idea of the reduced density operator being used to tell us about the entanglement of a state.

I understand that if you take the reduced density operator of any of the Bell states, you get a reduced density operator proportional to the identity, and this is defined as being a maximally entangled state.

But why is this a proof that the state is entangled?

I have written problem that asks to solve the reduced density operator for a particular state. I solve for the reduced density operator and I get a 2x2 matrix with elements in each slot. It satisfies the conditions to be a density operator, but what does it tell me about the entanglement of the state?

Any clarification would be much appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sharkey4123 said:
I have written problem that asks to solve the reduced density operator for a particular state. I solve for the reduced density operator and I get a 2x2 matrix with elements in each slot. It satisfies the conditions to be a density operator, but what does it tell me about the entanglement of the state?
You could calculate the purity. If the reduced state is less pure than the full state, you have entanglement.
 
Sharkey4123 said:
I'm having a little bit of trouble getting my head around the idea of the reduced density operator being used to tell us about the entanglement of a state.

I understand that if you take the reduced density operator of any of the Bell states, you get a reduced density operator proportional to the identity, and this is defined as being a maximally entangled state.

But why is this a proof that the state is entangled?

I have written problem that asks to solve the reduced density operator for a particular state. I solve for the reduced density operator and I get a 2x2 matrix with elements in each slot. It satisfies the conditions to be a density operator, but what does it tell me about the entanglement of the state?

Any clarification would be much appreciated!

Let's stick to the very simplest type of wave function, which is a 2-component spinor. If we have two spin-1/2 particles, then the most general composite state is:

[itex]|\Psi\rangle = C_{uu} |u\rangle |u\rangle + C_{ud} |u\rangle |d\rangle + C_{du} |d\rangle |u\rangle + C_{dd} |d\rangle |d\rangle[/itex]

where [itex]|u\rangle |u\rangle[/itex] means both particles are spin-up in the z-direction, [itex]|u\rangle |d\rangle[/itex] means the first is spin-up, the second is spin-down, etc.

The composite state is "entangled" if it cannot be written as a product [itex]|\psi\rangle |\phi\rangle[/itex]. If I did the calculation correctly, the state above is "entangled" unless [itex]C_{uu} C_{dd} = C_{ud} C_{du}[/itex]. For example, the following is a maximally entangled state:
[itex]\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (|u\rangle |d\rangle - |d\rangle |u\rangle)[/itex]

A density matrix [itex]\rho[/itex] is "pure" if it can be written in the form [itex]|\psi\rangle \langle \psi\rangle[/itex] for some state [itex]|\psi\rangle[/itex]. Otherwise, it is mixed.

So the connection between mixed states and entanglement is this:
  • Start with an entangled pure state [itex]|\Psi\rangle[/itex]
  • Form the corresponding density matrix.
  • "Trace out" the degrees of freedom of one of the particles.
  • Then what is left will be a mixed reduced density matrix.
So tracing out turns a pure state into a mixed state, if the original pure state is entangled.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Ok, great! Thanks for the help kith and stevendaryl. I've created a couple of simple states for examples and played around with them and I think I'm getting to grips with it.

I understand then that the trace of the square of the density operator tells us about how "pure" the state is - ie if it's 1 then it's a pure state, otherwise it's mixed.
So returning to the Bell states again, I can see that if I calculate the the reduced density operator I get one half of the identity. If I further calculate the purity, I get a value of one half. Since the Bell states are "maximally entangled" does this mean the smallest possible value I can get for the purity (of any density matrix) is one half?

Thanks
 
Sharkey4123 said:
So returning to the Bell states again, I can see that if I calculate the the reduced density operator I get one half of the identity. If I further calculate the purity, I get a value of one half. Since the Bell states are "maximally entangled" does this mean the smallest possible value I can get for the purity (of any density matrix) is one half?
For a two-level system, yes. In general, the lowest purity is [itex]1/d[/itex] where [itex]d[/itex] is the number of degrees of freedom of the system.

The purity isn't necessarily associated with subsystems. You can also look at a single system. Let's say we have a system with two possible energies. If you have the system in a well-prepared state (one of the energy eigenstates or a superposition of them), the purity is zero. If you have a thermal state at a given temperature, the density matrix is given by the Boltzmann distribution and the purity depends on the temperature. In the high-temeperature limit, the density matrix approaches one half times the identity and the purity is minimal.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K