arXiv:0907.1784

Entangled states : Classical versus Quantum

S. Kanmani

Published Jul 10, 2009• 0 citations

Abstract

Quantum mechanics of composite systems, gives rise to certain special states called entangled states. A physical system, that is in an entangled state displays an intricate correlation between its subsystems. There are also some composite quantum states (classically correlated states or separable states) that are not entangled. It is generally claimed, often without a rigorous proof to support, that these intricate correlations of an entangled state cannot occur in a classical system. This expository article, provides an elementary proof that entangled states cannot arise in the setting of classical mechanics. In addition, a detailed description of the origin of entanglement in quantum systems is included. The mathematical concepts that are necessary for this purpose are presented. The absence of entanglement in the classical setting is due to the fact that every pure classical state of a composite system is a product state, that is, a tensor product of two pure states of the subsystems. In contrast, there are pure composite quantum states that cannot be expressed in the form of a product state or even by a convex sum of product states. Roughly speaking, this is because classical states are positive valued functions on the phase-space while quantum states are positive linear operators. The structure of the tensor product between two commutative spaces of scalar valued functions is drastically different from that of the tensor product between two non-commutative spaces of linear operators. In other words, entanglement is a non-commutative phenomenon.

DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.0907.1784

Related papers

Demystification of quantum entanglement

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

One of the crucial differences between mathematical models of classical and quantum mechanics is the use of the tensor product of the state spaces of subsystems as the state space of the corresponding composite system. (To describe an ensemble of classical composite systems one uses random variables taking values in the Cartesian product of the state spaces of subsystems.) We show that, nevertheless, it is possible to establish a natural correspondence between the classical and quantum probabilistic descriptions of composite systems. Quantum averages for composite systems (including entangled) can be represented as averages with respect to classical random fields. It is essentially what Albert Einstein was dreamed of. Quantum mechanics is represented as classical statistical mechanics with infinite-dimensional phase space. While the mathematical construction is completely rigorous, its physical interpretation is a complicated problem (which will not be discussed in this paper).

arXiv:0905.4791May 29, 20095 citations

Introduction

Alisa Bokulich, Gregg S. Jaeger

Entanglement can be understood as an extraordinary degree of correlation between states of quantum systems – a correlation that cannot be given an explanation in terms of something like a common cause. Entanglement can occur between two or more quantum systems, and the most interesting case is when these correlations occur between systems that are space-like separated, meaning that changes made to one system are immediately correlated with changes in a distant system even though there is no time for a signal to travel between them. In this case one says that quantum entanglement leads to non-local correlations, or non-locality. More precisely, entanglement can be defined in the following way. Consider two particles, A and B, whose (pure) states can be represented by the state vectors ψA and ψB. Instead of representing the state of each particle individually, one can represent the composite two-particle system by another wavefunction, Ψ AB. If the two particles are unentangled , then the composite state is just the tensor product of the states of the components: Ψ AB = ψ A ⊗ ψ B; the state is then said to be factorable (or separable). If the particles are entangled, however, then the state of the composite system cannot be written as such a product of a definite state for A and a definite state for B. This is how an entangled state is defined for pure states: a state is entangled if and only if it cannot be factored: Ψ AB ≠ ψ A ⊗ ψ B.

Cambridge University Press eBooksJun 10, 20100 citations

Entangled quantum particles in an infinite square well: knowledge of the whole versus knowledge of the parts

R.Q. Odendaal, Angel Ricardo Plastino

Entangled states of composite quantum systems exhibit one of the most distinct and non-classical features of the quantum mechanical description of Nature, first pointed out by Schroedinger: ‘ Maximal knowledge of a total system does not necessarily imply maximal knowledge of all its parts ’. We provide an elementary illustration of this fundamental aspect of quantum physics by considering a system of two particles in an infinite, one-dimensional square potential well. In contrast to standard introductory presentations of quantum entanglement, our present considerations do not require density matrix formalism, nor explicit use of the tensor product structure for the description of composite quantum systems.

European Journal of PhysicsNov 26, 20095 citations

Operational approach to the entanglement

Marian Kupczyński

In early days of quantum theory it was believed that the results of measurements performed on two distant physical systems should be uncorrelated thus their quantum state should be separable it means described by a simple tensor product of the individual local state vectors or a tensor product of individual local density operators. It was shown many years ago by EPR that two systems which interacted in the past and separated afterwards had to be described in most cases by particular non-separable states which are called entangled. It was noticed by Zanardi et al. that a Hilbert space of possible state vectors of compound physical system could be partitioned in different way by introducing various tensor product structures induced by the experimentally accessible observables (interactions and measurements). Therefore a separable state in one partition could become entangled in different partition. In this sense the entanglement was relative to a particular set of experimental capabilities. Continuing this line of thought Torre et al. claimed to prove that for any separable state there existed strongly correlated physical observables therefore all quantum states were entangled. The same claims one may find in several recent papers. In this paper we will discuss in operational way the differences existing between separable, non-separable and entangled states and we will show that the conclusions of Torre et al. were unjustified. A sufficient condition for entanglement is the violation of BI-CHSH and/or steering inequalities. Since there exist experiments outside the quantum physics violating these inequalities therefore in the operational approach one cannot say that the entanglement is an exclusive quantum phenomenon.

arXiv:1208.6532Aug 31, 20120 citations

Quantum correlations and dynamics from classical random fields valued in complex Hilbert spaces

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

One of the crucial differences between mathematical models of classical and quantum mechanics (QM) is the use of the tensor product of the state spaces of subsystems as the state space of the corresponding composite system. (To describe an ensemble of classical composite systems, one uses random variables taking values in the Cartesian product of the state spaces of subsystems.) We show that, nevertheless, it is possible to establish a natural correspondence between the classical and the quantum probabilistic descriptions of composite systems. Quantum averages for composite systems (including entangled) can be represented as averages with respect to classical random fields. It is essentially what Albert Einstein dreamed of. QM is represented as classical statistical mechanics with infinite-dimensional phase space. While the mathematical construction is completely rigorous, its physical interpretation is a complicated problem. We present the basic physical interpretation of prequantum classical statistical field theory in Sec. II. However, this is only the first step toward real physical theory.

Journal of Mathematical PhysicsAug 1, 201011 citations

Entangled states

Michel Le Bellac

Up to now we have limited ourselves to states of a single particle. In the present chapter we shall introduce the description of two-particle states. Once this case is understood, it will be easy to generalize to any number of particles. States of two (or more) particles lead to very rich configurations called entangled states. A remarkable feature is that two entangled quantum particles, even at arbitrarily large spatial separations, continue to form a single entity and no classical probabilistic model is able to reproduce the correlation between particles. In the first section we shall present the essential mathematical formalism, that of the tensor product. This will permit us in Section 6.2 to describe quantum mixtures using the state operator formalism. Section 6.3 is devoted to the study of important physical consequences like the Bell inequalities and interference experiments involving entangled states, which will lead us to a deeper understanding of quantum physics. Finally, in the last section we shall briefly review applications to measurement theory and quantum information theory. The latter is undergoing rapid development at present and has applications to quantum computing, cryptography, and teleportation. The tensor product of two vector spaces Definition and properties of the tensor product We wish to construct the space of states of two physical systems which we assume initially to be completely independent. Let ℌ N 1 and ℌ M 2 be the spaces of states of the two systems, of dimension N and M , respectively.

Cambridge University Press eBooksMar 23, 20060 citations