Quantum Physics

Ideal measurements are described in quantum mechanics textbooks by two postulates: the collapse of the wave packet and Born’s rule for the probabilities of outcomes. The quantum evolution of a system then has two components: a unitary (Hamiltonian) evolution in between measurements and non-unitary one when a measurement is performed. This situation was considered to be unsatisfactory by many people, including Einstein, Bohr, de Broglie, von Neumann and Wigner, but has remained unsolved to date. The quantum measurement problem, that is, understanding why a unique outcome is obtained in each individual run of an experiment, is tackled by solving a Hamiltonian model within standard quantum statistical mechanics. The model describes the measurement of the z-component of a spin through interaction with a magnetic memory. The latter apparatus is modeled by a Curie–Weiss magnet having N ≫ 1 spins weakly coupled to a phonon bath. The Hamiltonian evolution exhibits several time scales. The reduction, a rapid decay of the off-diagonal blocks of the system–apparatus density matrix, arises from the many degrees of freedom of the pointer (the magnetization). The registration occurs due to a phase transition from the initial metastable state to one of the final stable states triggered by the tested system. It yields a stationary state in which the apparatus and the system are correlated. Under proper conditions the process satisfies all the features of ideal measurements, including collapse and Born’s rule. As usual, irreversibility is ensured by the macroscopic size of the apparatus, in particular by the large value of N. Nothing else than the usual quantum statistical mechanics and Schro ̈dinger equation is needed, and the results support a specified version of the statistical interpretation. The solution of the quantum measurement problem requires a combination of the reduction and the registration, the properties of which arise from the irreversible dynamics.

I consider systems that consist of a few hot and a few cold two-level systems and define heat engines as unitaries that extract energy. These unitaries perform logical operations whose complexity depends on both the desired efficiency and the temperature quotient. I show cases where the optimal heat engine solves a hard computational task (e.g. an NP-hard problem) [2]. Heat engines can also drive refrigerators and use the temperature difference between two systems for cooling a third one. I argue that these triples of systems define a classification of thermodynamic resources [1]. All the above assumes that unitaries are implemented by an external controller. To get a thermodynamically reversible process, the joint process on system and controller must be reversible. Then, the implementation of the joint process requires a "meta-controller", and so on. To study thermodynamic limits without such an infinite sequence of controllers, I introduce the model of "physically universal cellular automata", in which the boundary between system and controller can be shifted (in analogy to the Heisenberg-cut for the quantum measurement problem). I show that this model raises a lot of fundamental questions [3]. Literature: [1] Janzing et al: Thermodynamic cost of reliability and low temperatures: Tightening Landauer's principle and the second law, J. Stat. Phys. 2000 [2] Janzing: On the computation power of molecular heat engines, J. Stat. Phys. 2006 [3] Janzing: Is there a physically universal cellular automaton or Hamiltonian? arXiv:1009.1720

Two-party Bell correlation inequalities (that is, inequalities involving only correlations between dichotomic observables at each site, such as the CHSH inequality) are well-understood: Grothendieck's inequality stipulates that the quantum bias can only be a constant factor larger than the classical bias, and the maximally entangled state is always the most nonlocal resource. In part due to the complex nature of multipartite entanglement, tripartite inequalities are much more unwieldy. In a recent breakthrough result, Perez-Garcia et. al. (quant-ph/0702189) showed using tools originating from the study of operator algebras that in this setting the quantum-classical violation could be arbitrarily large. Moreover, they showed that GHZ states could only lead to bounded violations, so that they were not the most non-local states. We extend and simplify their results in a number of ways: - We show that large families of states, including generalizations of GHZ states and stabilizer states, can only lead to bounded violations. - We prove bounds on the maximal quantum-classical violation as a function both of the local dimension (this was already shown in Perez-Garcia et. al., but we give a much simpler proof), and of the number of settings per site. - We provide a simple probabilistic construction of an inequality for which there is an unbounded quantum-classical gap. Our construction is simpler, and has better parameters, than the one in Perez-Garcia et.al. It is essentially optimal in terms of the local dimension of one of the parties, and off by a quadratic factor in terms of the number of settings. In this talk I will survey some of these results, focusing on the tools that have so far been useful for their analysis (and do not involve operator algebras!). Based on joint works with Jop Briet, Harry Buhrman, and Troy Lee. Some of this work is available at arXiv:0911.4007.

Many fundamental results in quantum foundations and quantum information theory can be framed in terms of information-theoretic tasks that are provably (im)possible in quantum mechanics but not in classical mechanics. For example, Bell's theorem, the no-cloning and no-broadcasting theorems, quantum key distribution and quantum teleportation can all naturally be described in this way. More generally, quantum cryptography, quantum communication and quantum computing all rely on intrinsically quantum information-theoretic advantages. Much less attention has been paid to the information-theoretic power of relativistic quantum theory, although it appears to describe nature better than quantum mechanics. This talk describes some simple information-theoretic tasks that distinguish relativistic quantum theory from quantum mechanics and relativistic classical physics, and a general framework for defining tasks that includes all previously known (im)possibility theorems and raises many open questions. This suggests a new way of thinking about relativistic quantum theory, and a possible new approach to defining non-trivial relativistic quantum theories rigorously. I also describe some simple and surprisingly powerful applications of these ideas to cryptography, including a new secure scheme for simultaneously committing to and encrypting a prediction and ways of securely "tagging" an inaccessible object so as to guarantee its position.

Usually, quantum theory (QT) is introduced by giving a list of abstract mathematical postulates, including the Hilbert space formalism and the Born rule. Even though the result is mathematically sound and in perfect agreement with experiment, there remains the question of why this formalism is a natural choice, and how QT could possibly be modified in a consistent way. My talk is on recent work with Lluis Masanes, where we show that five simple operational axioms actually determine the formalism of QT uniquely. This is based to a large extent on Lucien Hardy's seminal work. We start with the framework of "general probabilistic theories", a simple, minimal mathematical description for outcome probabilities of measurements. Then, we use group theory and convex geometry to show that the state space of a bit must be a 3D (Bloch) ball, finally recovering the Hilbert space formalism. There will also be some speculation on how to find natural post-quantum theories by dropping one of the axioms.

We present a new formulation of quantum mechanics for closed systems like the universe using an extension of familiar probability theory that incorporates negative probabilities. Probabilities must be positive for alternative histories that are the basis of settleable bets. However, quantum mechanics describes alternative histories are not the basis for settleable bets as in the two-slit experiment. These alternatives can be assigned extended probabilities that are sometimes negative. We will compare this with the decoherent (consistent) histories formulation of quantum theory. The prospects for using this formulation as a starting point for testable alternatives to quantum theory or further generalizations of it will be briefly discussed.

For quantum fields with m=0, it is pointed out that timelike separated fields are quantized as independent subsystems. This allows us to ask the question of whether the field in the future region is entangled with the field in the past region of Minkowski space, in the Minkowski vacuum state. I will show that the answer is "yes," and then explore some consequences, including a thermal effect and a procedure for extracting the timelike entanglement with two inertial Unruh-DeWitt detectors.

The nature of antimatter is examined in the context of algebraic quantum field theory. It is shown that the notion of antimatter is more general than that of antiparticles. Properly speaking, then, antimatter is not matter made up of antiparticles --- rather, antiparticles are particles made up of antimatter. We go on to discuss whether the notion of antimatter is itself completely general in quantum field theory. Does the matter-antimatter distinction apply to all field theoretic systems? The answer depends on which of several possible criteria we should impose on the space of physical states.

It is well known that the ground state energy of many-particle Hamiltonians involving only 2- body interactions can be obtained using constrained optimizations over density matrices which arise from reducing an N-particle state. While determining which 2-particle density matrices are 'N-representable' is a computationally hard problem, all known extreme N-representable 2-particle reduced density matrices arise from a unique N-particle pre-image, satisfying a conjecture established in 1972. We present explicit counterexamples to this conjecture through giving Hamiltonians with 2-body interactions which have degenerate ground states that cannot be distinguished by any 2-body operator. We relate the existence of such counterexamples to quantum error correction codes and topologically ordered spin systems.

Recently rediscovered results in the theory of partial differential equations show that for free fields, the properties of the field in an arbitrarily small volume of space, traced through eternity, determine completely the field everywhere at all times. Over finite times, the field is determined in the entire region spanned by the intersection of the future null cone of the earliest event and the past null cone of the latest event. Thus this paradigm of classical field theory exhibits a fascinating form of nonlocality. I'll discuss this result and what it tells us about the possibility of constructing a classical, nonlocal theory which accommodates all the phenomena we observe.

Quantum Mechanics has been shown to provide a rigorous foundation for Statistical Mechanics. Concentration of measure, or typicality, is the main tool to construct a purely quantum derivation for the methods of Statistical Mechanics. From this point of view statistical ensembles are effective description for isolated quantum systems, since typically a random pure state of the system will have properties similar to those of the ensemble. Nevertheless, it is often argued that most of the states of the Hilbert space are not relevant for realistic systems. This talk will address this issue, presenting recent results on the emergence of typicality in the context of matrix product states, a set of physically and computationally relevant states associated to many-body Hamiltonians.

Symmetric monoidal categories provide a convenient and enlightening framework within which to compare and contrast physical theories on a common mathematical footing. In this talk we consider two theories: stabiliser qubit quantum mechanics and the toy bit theory proposed by Rob Spekkens. Expressed in the categorical framework the two theories look very similar mathematically, reflecting their common physical features. There are differences though: in particular a finite Abelian group emerges naturally in the categorical framework, and this group is different in each case ($Z_4$ for the stabiliser theory and $Z_2 \times Z_2$ for the toy bit theory). It turns out that this mathematical difference corresponds directly with a key physical difference between the theories: the stabiliser theory cannot be modelled by local hidden variables, while the toy bit theory can. This analysis can be extended to other Abelian groups yielding a group-theoretic criterion for determining the possibility of local hidden variable interpretations for other physical theories.