Quantum Physics

Removing the mystery from quantum mechanics, the Bohmian perspective – a way of describing the motion of quantum particles, and applying this to spacetime singularities (where gravity becomes infinite) like those inside a black hole.

The nature of time, probability and quantum mechanics, philosophy of physics and metaphysics, especially issues involving the role of mathematical tools like symmetry in physics, and applying this formal apparatus to the philosophy of mind.

Black holes are regions of space with gravity so strong that nothing can escape from them, not even light. This isn't science fiction - there's even a gigantic black hole at the center of our galaxy. It's hard to imagine a more effective way to irrevocably erase and destroy a computer's hard drive than to drop it into a nice big black hole. But is the information on that drive really gone forever? Paradoxically, there's a good chance that not only does the information come back, it comes back in the blink of an eye. This surprise return of the information is based on the same principles that might someday make reliable quantum computers a reality. In fact, engineers are already exploiting these principles to help distribute software and stream video over the internet. And that's where the tornadoes come in...

We know the mathematical laws of quantum mechanics, but as yet we are not so sure why those laws should be inevitable. In the simpler but related environment of classical inference, we also know the laws (of probability). With better understanding of quantum mechanics as the eventual goal, Kevin Knuth and I have been probing the foundations of inference. The world we wish to infer is a partially-ordered set ('poset') of states, which may as often supposed be exclusive, but need not be (e.g. A might be a requirement for B). In inference, a state of mind about the world degrades from perfect knowledge through logical OR, which allows for uncertain alternatives. We don't need AND, and we don't need NOT; we just need OR. This display of acceptable states of mind is [close to] a mathematical 'lattice'. We find that the OR structure by itself (!) forces the ordinary rules of probability calculus. No other rules are compatible with the structure of a lattice, so the ordinary rules are inevitable. The standard Shannon information/entropy is likewise inevitable. Taking this idea further, the OR of states of mind gives a lattice of 'Questions' that might be useful for automated learning. Disconcertingly, this lattice is very much larger (in class aleph-2), and the natural valuations on it exhibit large range. I will present this extension, and ask whether we can rationally foresee its use in practical application.

We study the entanglement dynamics and relaxation properties of a system of two interacting qubits in the two cases (I) two independent bosonic baths and (II) one common bath, at temperature $T$. The entanglement dynamics is studied in terms of the concurrence C(t) between the two spins and of the von Neumann entropy S(t) with respect to the bath, as a function of time. We prove that the system does thermalize. In the case (II) of a single bath, the existence of a decoherence-free (DFS) subspace makes entanglement dynamics very rich. We show that when the system is initially in a state with a component in the DFS the relaxation time is surprisingly long, showing the existence of semi-decoherence free subspaces. The equilibrium state in this case is not the Gibbs state. The entanglement dynamics for the single bath case is also studied as a function of temperature, coupling strength with the environment and strength of tunneling coupling. The case of the mixed state is finally shown and discussed.

Quantum foundations in the light of gauge theories We will present the conjecture according to which the fact that q and p cannot be both ``observables'' of the same quantum system indicates that there is a remnant universal symmetry acting on classical states. In order to unpack this claim we will generalize to unconstrained systems the gauge correspondence between properties defined by first-class constraints and gauge symmetries generated by these constraints. As we shall see, this means that the uncertainty principle might be encoded in the very definition of the canonical variables q and p. According to the ontology of quantum objects that stems from this analysis, the quantum-mechanical description of physical objects is complete.

In topological quantum computation the geometric details of a particle trajectory become irrelevant; only the topology matters. This is one reason for the inherent fault tolerance of topological quantum computation. I will speak about a model in which this idea is taken one step further. Even the topology is irrelevant. The computation is determined solely by the permutation of the particles. Unlike topological quantum computation, which requires anyons confined to two dimensions, permutational quantum computations can in principle be performed by permuting a set of ordinary spin-1/2 particles with definite total angular momentum in three dimensions. The resulting model of computation appears to be intermediate in power between classical computation (P) and standard quantum computation (BQP). The model may be equivalently defined in terms of spin networks, which are an important concept in loop quantum gravity.

Quantum mechanics is a non-classical probability theory, but hardly the most general one imaginable: any compact convex set can serve as the state space for an abstract probabilistic model (classical models corresponding to simplices). From this altitude, one sees that many phenomena commonly regarded as ``characteristically quantum' are in fact generically ``non-classical'. In this talk, I'll show that almost any non-classical probabilistic theory shares with quantum mechanics a notion of entanglement and, with this, a version of the so-called measurement problem. I'll then discuss what's required for an abstract probabilistic theory to admit a somewhat simplified version of Everett's response to this problem -- an exercise that turns out to be instructive in several ways.

Suppose we are given two probability distributions on some N-element set. How many samples do we need to test whether the two distributions are close or far from each other in the L_1 norm? This problem known as Statistical Difference has been extensively studied during the last years in the field of property testing. I will describe quantum algorithms for Statistical Difference problem that provide a polynomial speed up in terms of the query complexity compared to the known classical lower bounds. Specifically, I will assume that each distribution can be generated by querying an oracle function on a random uniformly distributed input string. It will be shown that testing whether distributions are orthogonal requires approximately N^{1/2} queries classically and approximately N^{1/3} queries quantumly. Testing whether distributions are close requires approximately N^{2/3} queries classically and O(N^{1/2}) queries quantumly. This is a joint work with Aram Harrow (University of Bristol) and Avinatan Hassidim (The Hebrew University).

Our universe is unquestionably quantum in nature. What does this mean? Why does it matter? What’s in it for me? Join us for a fun and fascinating session on “what you need to know about the quantum.” Find out why we can’t live without it. Discover what’s so unbelievably quirky about it. And learn how it empowers amazing technologies, from present day (e.g. every electronic device on the planet) to future possibilities including quantum computing and global quantum communication. The half hour multimedia presentation will be followed by a half hour question and answer session with a leading scientist in the field. The future is quantum. Find out why.