We address the question whether there is a fundamental reason why quantum information is more fragile than classical information. We show that some answers can be found by considering the existence of quantum memories and their dimensional dependence.
The astute reader might have formed the impression that quantum in formation science is a rather qualitative discipline because we have not, as yet, explained how to quantify quantum information. There are three good reasons for leaving this important question until the final chapter. Firstly, quantum information theory is technically demanding and to treat it at an earlier stage might have suggested that our subject was more complicated than it is. Secondly, there is the fact that many of the ideas in the field, such as teleportation and quantum circuits, are unfamiliar and it was important to present these as simply as possible. Finally, and most importantly, the theory of quantum information is not yet fully developed. It has not yet reached, in particular, the level of completeness of its classical counterpart. For this reason we can answer only some of the many questions we would like a quantum theory of information to address. Having said this, we can say that however, there are beautiful and useful mathematical results and it seems certain that these will continue to form an important part of the theory as it develops. We noted in the introduction to Chapter 1 that ‘quantum mechanics is a probabilistic theory and so it was inevitable that a quantum information theory would be developed’. A presentation of at least the beginnings of a quantitative theory is the objective of this final chapter. The entropy or information derived from a given probability distribution is, as we have seen, a convenient measure of the uncertainty associated with the distribution. If many of the probabilities are large, so that many of the possible events are comparably likely, then the entropy will be large. If one probability is close to unity, however, then the entropy will be small. It is convenient to introduce entropy in quantum mechanics as a measure of the uncertainty, or lack of knowledge, of the form of the state vector. If we know that our system is in a particular pure state then the associated uncertainty or entropy should be zero. For mixed states, however, it will take a non-zero value.
Although the interpretation of the concept of information is not clear, even in the classical framework, new interpretive problems have arisen with the advent of the so-called quantum information, which combine the difficulties in understanding the concept of information with the well-known foundational puzzles derived from quantum mechanics itself. The aim of this paper is to consider some arguments traditionally put forward to support the idea that quantum information is qualitatively different from classical information. The final conclusion is that there are no reasons to admit the existence of quantum information as qualitatively different from classical information: there is only one kind of information, physically neutral, which can be encoded by means of classical or quantum states.
Building a working quantum computer that is able to perform useful calculations remains a challenge. With this thesis, we are trying to contribute a small piece to this puzzle by addressing three of the many fundamental questions one encounters along the way of reaching that goal. These questions are: (i) What is an easy way to create highly entangled states as a resource for quantum computation? (ii) What can we do to efficiently quantify states of noisy entanglement in systems coupled to the outside world? (iii) How can we protect and store fragile quantum states for arbitrary long times? \n \nThe first two questions are the subject of part one of this thesis, `Entanglement Measures & Highly Entangled States'. We devise a particular proposal for generating entanglement within a solid-state setup, starting first with the tripartite case and continuing with a generalization to four and more qubits. The main idea there is to realize systems with highly entangled ground states in order for entanglement to be created by merely cooling to low enough temperatures. We have addressed the issue of quantifying entanglement in these systems by numerically calculating mixed-state entanglement measures and maximizing the latter as a function of the external magnetic field strength. The research along these lines has led to the development of the numerical library 'libCreme'. \n \nThe second part of the thesis, 'Self-Correcting Quantum Memories', addresses the question how to reliably store quantum states long enough to perform useful calculations. Every computer, be it classical or quantum, needs the information it processes to be protected from corruption caused by faulty gates and perturbations from interactions with its environment. However, quantum states are much more susceptible to these adverse effects than classical states, making the manipulation and storage of quantum information a challenging task. Promising candidates for such 'quantum memories' are systems exhibiting topological order, because they are robust against local perturbations, and information encoded in their ground state can only be manipulated in a non-local fashion. We extend the so-called toric code by repulsive long-range interactions between anyons and show that this makes the code stable against thermal fluctuations. Furthermore, we investigate incoherent effects of quenched disorder in the toric code and similar systems.
The words: determinism, hidden variables, subjectivism, information, objectivism, informational-theoretic axioms,observers have some connection with physical reality? What we mean with "description" of physical reality? When we say that we understand this reality? Certain parameters:position, velocity are sufficient? We will focus only to conceptual considerations regarding the relation between the "questions" and the relative "answers" in general and specifically in quantum mechanics. It is usually believed that the answers are more important of the questions, for this reason we can read many answers everywhere and in different field of knowledge. We need to add and clarify some things: (i) usually an answers require a question, (ii) but, as we know, their relation is not so simple and immediate, (iii) For instance: a)an epistemic questions give us ontic answers? b)the answer has a connection with the question and vice versa? c)we could to infer a question starting from an answer? d)there are answers without questions? These answers could be in some framework considered as ontic answers? The relative scientific works are the same time ontic? Speaking of quantum mechanics we see around many answers in the meantime we do not see the correspondent questions, these answers seem completely independent, and this seem a right road, the road of the independent nature unlinked from human thoughts. We retain instead that questions can affect the possible answers. Exist "something" before the question?
We address the question whether quantum memory is more powerful than classical memory. In particular, we consider a setting where information about a random n-bit string X is stored in s classical or quantum bits, for s<n, i.e., the stored information is bound to be only partial. Later, a randomly chosen predicate F about X has to be guessed using only the stored information. The maximum probability of correctly guessing F(X) is then compared for the cases where the storage device is classical or quantum mechanical, respectively. We show that, despite the fact that the measurement of quantum bits can depend arbitrarily on the predicate F, the quantum advantage is negligible already for small values of the difference n-s. Our setting generalizes the setting of Ambainis et al. who considered the problem of guessing an arbitrary bit (i.e., one of the n bits) of X. An implication for cryptography is that privacy amplification by universal hashing remains essentially equally secure when the adversary's memory is allowed to be quantum rather than only classical. Since privacy amplification is a main ingredient of many quantum key distribution (QKD) protocols, our result can be used to prove the security of QKD in a generic way.