Which operator is suitable to define a qubit?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lojzek
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Operator Qubit
Lojzek
Messages
246
Reaction score
1
What requirements must an observable A meet to be usefull as a qubit for
quantum computers?

I think that the wave function must have time independent coefficients in the base
of A (when we are not applying quantum gates). This means that expected value <A> must be constant, so the necessary condition is [A,H]=0.

But is this enough? What if the eigenstates of A have different energies (eigenvalues of H)? Then the phase of the two states is changing with different frequencies. Is quantum computing possible anyway or must both eigenstates have the same energy?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I suppose you mean: for what A are two eigenstates of A useful as basis states for a qubit?

So yes, preferably you have [H,A]=0.

And indeed, that's not quite enough, as you observe, but almost: as long as you know the energy difference precisely enough, then it's okay. In practice, the energy difference (divided by \hbar) is often matched to the difference between two laser frequencies which are stabilized.
 
Thanks for the reply. I suppose a precisely known energy difference would not be a big problem, since we could correct the phase with phase shifter gates. Or maybe we could even
use controlled energy difference to create phase shifter gates?
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In her YouTube video Bell’s Theorem Experiments on Entangled Photons, Dr. Fugate shows how polarization-entangled photons violate Bell’s inequality. In this Insight, I will use quantum information theory to explain why such entangled photon-polarization qubits violate the version of Bell’s inequality due to John Clauser, Michael Horne, Abner Shimony, and Richard Holt known as the...
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
I asked a question related to a table levitating but I am going to try to be specific about my question after one of the forum mentors stated I should make my question more specific (although I'm still not sure why one couldn't have asked if a table levitating is possible according to physics). Specifically, I am interested in knowing how much justification we have for an extreme low probability thermal fluctuation that results in a "miraculous" event compared to, say, a dice roll. Does a...
Back
Top