Home Page | Overview | Site Map | Index | Appendix | Illustration | About | Contact | Update | FAQ |
![]() |
features unknown to single particle system even though the combined system is derived by merging each one. For example, let's consider two single systems SA and SB (personified by the two computer geeks Alice and Bob respectively) each with a set of basis vectors |a![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Figure 01 Combined System |
![]() where |aibj ![]() |
![]() |
Correlation is about the dependence between two kinds of things labeled as x and y as shown in Figure 02. Some of them pair up randomly showing no discernible pattern (rxy = 0), while the other extreme would display a graph in the form of a straight line. Thus, different system would exhibit different degrees of correlation, which can be computed by formulas such as the Spearman`s Rank Correlation. On the other hand, the Chi Square Test would provide just a "yes" or "no" after running the data with the procedure. The formula in Figure 02 is another way to estimate the degrees of correlation. It can be verified simply with the case of rxy = 1 by taking just 2 points (n = 2) at (0,1), (4,3) and the average (2,2). |
Figure 02 Correlation |
The quantum correlation is defined by the averages of observables which imply no correlation if the average of the products is equal to the product of the averages (Figure 02). |
![]() |
![]() |
Figure 03a Entanglement [view large image] |
![]() |
![]() |
The maximally entangled pair of qubits is monogamy. For example, if A (Alice) and B (Bob) are maximally entangled they cannot be correlated with another partner C (Charlie) as illustrated in Figure 03b. However, if the entanglement is not maximal, polygamy is permitted according to the rules depicted in Figure 03c, in which the "E" stands for |
Figure 03b Monogamy [view large image] |
Figure 03c Entanglement, Degree of [view large image] |
"Entanglement Measure" - a measurement quantifying the degree of entanglement contained in the system. The formula can be generalized to many qubits : |
![]() |
![]() |
A quantum system such as the electron in atom often exists in a superposition state, i.e., it is described by a mixture of many eigen-states (the state with a definite eigen-value such as energy). This is depicted in Figure 03d for an atom in a mixture of excited and ground state. A similar idea is expressed in an example of "Infinite Square Well" and graphically in Figure 05c (in the same section). As shown in Figure 03e, the superposition is dissolved via interaction with the environment. This |
Figure 03d Superposition |
Figure 03e Decoherence |
is called decoherence and can be explained mathematically in the following as transfer of entanglement to all kinds of particles in there. |
![]() |
![]() (See detail of derivation in "Quantum Decoherence, Dirac Notation"). |
Figure 03f Hilbert Space |
That is, the probabilities become additive corresponding to the OR operation. Each term in the summation represents the probability of measuring the state |![]() ![]() |
![]() |
of "Schrodinger's Cat" is ill-conceived by identifying a microscopic property to a macroscopic body. The teleportation so enthralles the public is a fiction trying to extend the concept of entanglement to too many particles. There is no quantum weirdness, which is created only by mis-appropriation of the quantum theory. BTW, according to the reductionist's view, description of the |
Figure 03g Quantum Nature |
world is separated into many different levels. An absurd scenario can often be concocted with the so-called "thought experiment" by mixing up the various levels (see Effective Theories). |
![]() |
![]() |
Figure 03h Entanglement Measure |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]()
|
Figure 03i1 Projection Operator |
Figure 03i2 Density Matrix [view large image] |
![]() |
![]() |
Figure 03j Entanglement of Electrons in Diatomic Molecules |
The von Neumann entropy is the quantum version of "Shannon's Measure of Information" : SMI = - ![]() |
![]() |
Entanglement Measures for the electrons in 5 diatomic molecules has been published in a 2011 paper entitled "Quantum Entanglement and the Dissociation Process of Diatomic Molecules". The post-Hartree–Fock computational method is employed to calculate the wave function ![]() ![]() In the research work above, it states that the single-particle reduced density matrix, necessary for the von Neumann entropy and entanglement measure calculations, was obtained from the correlated molecular wave functions determined according to QCISD and CCSD which are some sorts of post-HF. |
Figure 03k Entanglement Measure @ Dissociation & United Atom |
Figure 03j shows the Entanglement Measures ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
Figure 03l Diatomic Energy Levels [view large image] |
Figure 03m Quantum Dot |
Figure 03m shows that the separation of the quantum dots is about 200 times larger than the dissociation limits shown in Figure 03j for the diatomic molecules under investigation. |
![]() |
|
Figure 03n Entropy Increase with Volume [view large image] |
Thus, the general trend of increasing entanglement measure for large R (as shown in Figure 03j) can be understood as increasing entropy with larger volume (Figure 03n). However, it could not explain the bump near the united atom limit for some of the molecules. |
![]() |
|
Figure 03o Total Spin States [view large image] |
The H2 molecule is again a very good example (Figure 03o). |
![]() |
The entanglement between the 2 particles in the hydrogenic system is calculated via the Fourier transform of the density matrix. It turns out that the entanglement is proportional to 1/n, where n is the principle quantum number, i.e., the entanglement is getting weaker by increasing separation of the 2 particles. There would be no entanglement as n ![]() |
Figure 03p Hydrogenic Entanglement |
See original article "Hydrogenic Entanglement" and a readable version "Investigating Hydrogenic Entanglement". Here's a summary of the mathematics : |
![]() |
![]() |
Figure 03q |
See Figure 03q for a graphical illustration. |
![]() |
In retrospective, the transformation from classical to quantum is related to change of the mathematical formulation from non-linear equation to a linear form, which permits the superposition of its solutions resulting in quantum weirdness such as entanglement. The description of system then changes from space and momentum to an un-familiar entity called "wave function", the interpretation of which is "man-made" - another transformation from mathematical reality to subjective reality. The ultimate reality may be something else called |
Figure 03r Classical / Quantum Domains [view large image] |
"Tao". See Figure 03r for an illustration of the domains including the non-linear clasical formula for Newtonian mechanics and the linearized quantum version in the form of Schrodinger equation. |
![]() |
T + V = mv2/2 + V(r) = p2/2m + V(r) = E and operates on ![]() ![]() The conservation of energy is just the integration of the Newtonian equation of motion F = ma : ![]() What's more, E is the eigenvalue of the operator on the left-hand-side of the Schrodinger equation. Actually, not all linear differential equations are alike, this property is absent in other cases such as the "classical harmonic oscillator", and the "wave equation". As illustrated in Figure 03s, the eigenvalue is a scalar factor denoting the change of length of the eigenvector by an operator. |
Figure 03s Eigenvalue, Definition [view large image] |
It is such special property that allows a lot of different states providing rich variety of features such as superposition in the quantum world. |
![]() |
![]() |
The superposition of 2 quantum states with a constant relative phase is said to be in coherence, i.e., they form a particular pattern that would last until the phase relationship is changed. The pattern can be spatial or temporal. For example, the double-slit interference can be the result of the superpostion of 2 matter waves (Figure 03s2). The interference pattern will gradually disappear as the distance between the slits "d" is getting larger and larger. Another kind involves cyclic variation of its superposition pattern with time as shown in Figure 03s3 for the superposition of 2 quantum states of the "Square Well Potential" with a constant phase ( ![]() ![]() |
Figure 03s2 Coherence, Spatial |
Figure 03s3 Coherence, Temporal |
The entangled state between such systems requires that the phase relationships are maintained, which means the system must be coherent, but there are more constraints; the most notable being that an entangled state cannot be separable. |
![]() |
![]() |
Figure 03s4 Density Matrix, General [view large image] |
![]() |
![]() |
the flip side of each other. As shown in Figure 03s5,b, a coherent system can entangle with another system by the so-called "incoherent operation", which distils quantum coherence from a single copy of a coherent state into entanglement with another incoherent system in this case. Thus, coherence and entanglement are "operationally equivalent", that is, equivalent for all practical purposes, though still conceptually distinct. The idea has been somewhat verified by a 2021 experiment (see "Experimental demonstration of one-shot coherence distillation: realizing N-dimensional strictly incoherent operations"); |
Figure 03s5 |
See a readable version in "Physicists find quantum coherence and quantum entanglement are two sides of the same coin". |
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
Figure 03t Coherence Time [view large image] |
![]() |
The "transition Metal Phthalo-cyanine" (MPc) is organic molecule, its uses were primarily limited to dyes and pigments. It has a central metal atom surrounded by phthalocyanine ring - the 4 ligands (see Figure 03v). Its magnetic and electronic properties are determined by the transition metal's 3d orbitals incorporated in the center. Lately in 2012, it is found that the unpaired electron in copper atom at the center can act as a qubit (see Figure 03u, and "Introducing copper phthalocyanine as a qubit"). A 2016 article on "Tuning of Molecular Qubits" investigates further the influences of various factors on the coherence times of the qubits in some "transition Metal Phthalo-cyanines" |
Figure 03u Cu Electronic Configuration [view large image] |
(MPc's), the structure of which has been found to be tunable easily. The MPc's tend to aggregate and, thus, have low solubility in common solvents. However, it is found that CuPc can dissolve easily in sulfuric acid (H2SO4). |
![]() |
interpreted as the coherence time for the entanglement.
(e) The molecular structure and the EPR spectrum is irreverent in measuring the coherence time. An additional process called "Spin Echo" is used to remove the clutter of the surrounding environment. The coherence time is determined from the decaying curve of the resulting echo in the form exp(-2t/T2) as shown in Figure 03v,e and the "Spin Echo Animation" below. |
Figure 03v Coherence Time by EPR [view large image] click me |
![]() |
![]() |
solutions of CuPc (0.5 mM, M=mol/L) in H2SO4 and D2SO4 were employed to probe the interaction between solvent matrix (a compound that promotes the formation of ions) and molecular qubit at 7o K. As shown in Figure 03w, the derivated value of T2 ~ 41 ![]() |
Figure 03w Coherence Time in Solvents [view large image] |
![]() |
![]() |
Furthermore the compounds possess only one unpaired electron except Mn2+ (S = 3/2). Finally, different coordination geometries can be compared, as VOPc exhibits square-pyramidal shape whereas the others possess square-planar ones. The spin–spin relaxation time T2 of CuPc and VOPc are significantly longer than those of MnPc and CoPc (Figure 03y). This is attributed to the influence of the SOMO (Singly Occupied Molecular Orbital) on the spin dynamics. |
Figure 03x Coherence Time by Ligands [view large image] |
Figure 03y Coherence Time |
After all is said and done, longer coherence time can be achieved when the molecular orbital bearing the electron spin qubit exhibits minimal contact with the environment. |
![]() |
![]() |
Although it is not an entry in most dictionaries, teleportation is very popular in science fictions. One scheme uses a transporter in which persons or non-living items are placed on the pad and dismantled particle by particle by a beam, with their atoms being patterned in a computer buffer and converted into another beam that is directed toward the destination where the things would be reassembled back into their original form (usually with no mistakes, Figure 04). |
Figure 04 Teleportation, Fictional |
Figure 05 Teleportation, Quantum |
Quantum teleportation is possible in theory and lately (up to 2015) in practice with photons and partial atom, i.e., transporting only the electron shells without the nucleus. |
![]() |
![]() In principle, Alice can pick any one of the |S ![]() ![]() |T2 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Figure 06 Teleportation [view large image] |
Actually, there is no transfer of matter involved. The object of system C has not been physically moved to the location of system B; only its state has been conveyed over. |
![]() |
|
Figure 07 Teleportation over River Danube [view large image] |
![]() |
|
Figure 08 Teleportation of Light to Atom |
Note : The interaction between electron and nuclear spins splits the energy level by a small amount (~ 10-6 ev) forming the hyperfine structure (Figure 09). |
![]() |
In essence, the polarization state of the photons is conveyed from Alice to Bob's location, where it is converted to the spin state of the electron (in the atoms, Figure 09). There is no teleportation of matter. The experiment was performed with 1012 caesium atoms in coherent spin state. It demonstrates the possibility of teleporting the state in moving carrier to stationary object for storage. |
Figure 09 Hyperfine Sturcture |
See original paper "Quantum teleportation between light and matter" for detail. |
![]() |
states |1![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Figure 10 Atomic Teleportation [view large image] |
See original paper "Deterministic quantum teleportation with atoms" for detail. |
![]() |
to high energy particles on the boundary. Since then many examples have been discovered to have such correspondence. The most famous one is the equivalence of "Type II String Theory" on the product space AdS5XS5, (i.e., 5 macroscopic AdS dimensions combines to 5 compactified microscopic dimensions), to the "Supersymmetric Yang-Mills Theory" on the 4-D boundary. A mathematical dictionary has been compiled to link the two perspectives. It is similar to the laser, which transforms a 2-D scrambled pattern into a recognizable 3-D image (see Figure 22). This bulk to boundary correspondence as demonstrated by the holography invented in 1947, now becomes the "Holographic Principle" embraced by some physicists, who claim that it will become part of the foundations of new physics. |
Figure 11 Branes Bulk Correspondence |
Since the AdS space has played such a prominent role in the correspondence and its ramification, some of its properties are described briefly in the following. |
![]() |
The Robertson-Walker metric for the AdS universe is in the form : ds2 = c2dt2 - R(t)2 [dr2 + w2 (d ![]() ![]() ![]() where w = sinh(r) has the unit of length as the curvature k = -1 (in unit of cm-2) is hidden in the formalism. It can be shown readily that the scale factor : |
Figure 12 Hyperbolic 2-D Slice |
R(t) = (c/H) sin(Ht), where H = (|![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
One research recently considers entangled quantum particles in different regions at the boundary. It claims that the AdS sapce within would be split in two as the entanglement is reduced to zero. Thus, there is a link between space and entanglement (Figure 14). Such effect of entanglement dependence can also be applied to the wormhole (in the bulk) linking two black hole in the D3-brane. It is in the same vein on ER = EPR or wormhole = entanglement |
Figure 14 Entanglement and Spacetime [view large image] |
Figure 15 Entanglement and Wormhole [view large image] |
(Figure 15). See original articles in "The Quantum Source of Space-time" and "Entangled Universe". Figure 16 is a summary of this novel Quantum-Gravity paradigm. |
![]() |
|
Figure 16 Quantum Gravity, |
![]() |
the speed of light) in special relativity (see Figure 17). They argued that "elements of reality" such as momentum and position are deterministic properties of particles although it is hidden in quantum theory which endows them with probability only. Hence quantum theory is an incomplete theory, there is no need to invoke "non-locality" and also can do away with the "uncertainty principle" if the hidden cause is included in the theory. |
Figure 17 EPR Paradox [view large image] |
The thought experiment became real with the discovery of entanglement in 1967 (see previous section for details). |
![]() |
It turns out that the black holes these scientists talk about are not the kind from the collapse of massive star or the one at the center of most galaxies. It is the full-fledged static, spherically symmetric, vacuum solution to Einstein's gravitational field equations. There is no matter to collapse to in this solution. It exists forever from the beginning of the universe, hence dubbed Eternal Black Hole. It is more suitable to have it portrayed with the KS coordinates as shown in Figure 18,a (Figure 18,b is a more conventional view). The whole thing includes black hole 1, and 2 (a white hole), a wormhole and 2 exterior regions. The left exterior is normal but forever inaccessible to us. Now, it is suggested that it can be accessible in the form of entanglement interchangeable with the wormhole. |
Figure 18 Eternal Black Hole |
*** At first glance, the ER = EPR hypothesis would mean quantum systems that become entangled, and therefore enter a superposition, suddenly gain a wormhole - a conjuring trick the superposition principle doesn't obviously allow. |
![]() |
Regradless of the problem, the novel concept generalizes the black hole 2 (the white hole) by scrambled cloud of Hawking radiation (Figure 19) and the wormhole (ER) becomes a whole bunch of entanglement (EPR). Anyway, it is admitted that the cartoon is speculative, and is based on the assumption that the wormhole has a geometric description. They say that understanding the ER connecting the black hole to the radiation is the key to determining whether the horizons of evaporating black holes are smooth. |
Figure 19 Black Hole and Hawking Radiation |
An even further conjecture would replace the 2 black holes by 2 particles (see Figure 16). |
![]() |
![]() ![]() where ß = 1/kT is the inverse temperature of the environment, k = 1.38x10-16 erg/K the Boltzmann constant. The density matrix of each side is a pure thermal density matrix. |
Figure 20 Thermofield |
Note that the entangled state vector ![]() T = 0, i.e., when the exteriors are empty - no particles. |
![]() |
![]() |
|
Figure 21 |
Figure 22 |
![]() |
|
Figure 23 AdS/CFT correspondence, 1997 |
![]() |
|
Figure 24 Wormhole Experiment |
![]() |
models, i.e., the L and the R systems (see Figure 24,a). Each fermion in the MZM pair is identified to a qubit in this experiment out of necessity because the existence of MZM is still in the verification stage (not yet available for running the experiment). BTW, the experiment was implemented by the Google Sycamore processor based on superconducting qubits (as shown in Figure 25, not MZM). See "Type of Qubit". |
Figure 25 [view large image] Superconducting Qubit |
| ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
For ![]() ![]() |
Figure 26 Quantum Teleportation |
which is an Alice/Bob cartoon emulating the said process for ![]() |
![]() |
The coupling is expressed in terms of the tensor product of the energy eigen-states |n>L,R :![]() where ß = 1/kT is the inverse temperature of the environment, k = 1.38x10-16 erg/K the Boltzmann constant (see Figure 27,a) and TFD stands for Thermo-Quantum Field Double. |
Figure 27 Wormhole Experiment 2 |
![]() |
|
Figure 29 Other Observables |
![]() |
|
Figure 30 Holography ~ EPR/ER [view large image] |
|