Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

数理解析研究所講究録

Phase operator problem and infinitesimal analysis

Masanao Ozawa

Published Mar 1, 1994• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

To find an operator representation of the phase variable of a single-mode electromagnetic field, the Schrodinger representation is extended to a larger Hilbert space including states with infinite excitation by nonstandard analy- sis, so that the self-adjoint phase operator is acting on the extended Hilbert space.It is shown that this phase operator is a Naimark extension of the optimal probability operator-valued measure for the phase parameter already known in the quantum estimation theory, and is naturally considered as the controversial limit of the phase operators on finite dimensional spaces recently proposed by Pegg and Barnett.Eventually, two of recent promising attempts to obtain the correct statistics of the phase variable in quantum mechanics is synthesized in the present framework based on new mathematical ideas concerning the number system including infinite and infinitesimal numbers.

Related papers

Phase operators on Hilbert space

John A. Vaccaro

A simple formalism is introduced for describing the quantum phase of a single-mode field (or, equivalently, a harmonic oscillator) using a particular infinite-dimensional Hilbert space ${\mathit{H}}_{\mathit{s}\mathit{y}\mathit{m}}$. This space is spanned by vectors which represent states of the single field mode containing non-negative numbers of photons. It has a symmetry in the sense that it contains vectors in the neighborhood of both the vacuum state and the infinite photon number state. A striking property of ${\mathit{H}}_{\mathit{s}\mathit{y}\mathit{m}}$ is that it supports Hermitian and unitary phase operators. Indeed the Pegg-Barnett unitary phase operators are shown to converge strongly on the Hilbert space ${\mathit{H}}_{\mathit{s}\mathit{y}\mathit{m}}$ and so the correponding limit points are ordinary operators on ${\mathit{H}}_{\mathit{s}\mathit{y}\mathit{m}}$. This can be compared with the situation for the infinite-dimensional Hilbert space H conventionally used in quantum optics on which the Pegg-Barnett unitary phase operators converge weakly, in general.

Physical Review A•Apr 1, 1995•25 citations

Quantum optical phase

David Thomas Pegg, Stephen Mark Barnett

The phase associated with a single mode of the electromagnetic field is complementary to the photon number. This simple idea leads us to construct a probability density for the phase. The phase operator cannot be represented exactly in the usual-infinite Hilbert space but can be constructed in a subspace of it and provides a valid representation of phase if used together with a suitable limiting procedure. We introduce the Hermitian optical phase operator and describe some of its most important properties. We also provide brief discussions of some alternative approaches to the phase problem and to the question of phase measurements. The paper concludes with an extensive bibliography.

Journal of Modern Optics•Feb 1, 1997•63 citations

Approximations to the quantum phase operator

Mark A. Hennings, T B Smith, Daniel A. Dubin

In a series of papers, Barnett, Pegg (1986, 1988, 1989, 1992) and various co-authors have proposed a description of quantum phase by means of a collection of s-dimensional states and operators, s>or=1. We analyse the limiting procedure they employ for large s, which is known not to be compatible with quantum mechanics in the usual sense. Further, we supply a rigorous demonstration of the asymptotic limits of the `mean` and `variance` of their system of operators in coherent states. These values had previously been given but not justified mathematically. Our analysis, based on the asymptotic analysis of certain random variables, shows that the physical deductions that can be drawn from these limits are limited. We also prove that the (s+1)-dimensional `pure phase` LHW-states they consider form a sequence of approximate eigenvectors for the Weyl-quantized angle operator Delta ( phi ) and the Toeplitz phase operator X proposed by Garrison and Wong (1970), Popov and Yarunin (1992), and others. These states X s ( theta ), to our knowledge first introduced by Lerner, Huang and Waiters (1970), can be used to construct a system of measurement as in the usual quantum theory, sensitive to certain qualities of phase, but not all. Indeed, a feature of the Barnett-Pegg method, when it gives finite answers, is the construction of associated measurement systems for different observables. We give examples of sequences of (s+1)-dimensional devices which represent measurements significantly closer to ideal for X. This serves as a model for corresponding devices for Delta ( phi ), or indeed, any observable with a continuous spectrum, contingent on its spectral decomposition being obtained explicitly.

Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General•Dec 7, 1995•10 citations

Limiting Procedures for the Optical Phase Operator

Stephen Mark Barnett, David Thomas Pegg

We examine some of the attempts to describe the phase of a single field mode by a quantum operator acting in the conventional infinite Hilbert space. These operators lead to bizarre properties such as non-random phases for the number states and experience consistency difficulties when used to obtain a phase probability density. Moreover, in these approaches operator functions of phase are not simply functions of a phase operator. We show that these peculiarities do not arise when the Hermitian optical phase operator is employed. In our opinion, the problems associated with the descriptions of phase in conventional infinite Hilbert space arise from the nature of the limiting process.

Journal of Modern Optics•Oct 1, 1992•39 citations

Unitary and Hermitian phase operators for the electromagnetic field

Yee Kin Tsui, Michael F. Reid

Pegg and Barnett [Phys. Rev. A 39, 1665 (1989)] have proposed a formalism for a Hermitian optical phase operator, constructed from the so-called phase states. In this paper we give an alternative derivation. We begin by defining a unitary phase operator ${e}^{i\stackrel{^}{\ensuremath{\varphi}}}$ from the relationship $\stackrel{^}{a}={e}^{i\stackrel{^}{\ensuremath{\varphi}}}R(\stackrel{^}{N})$ ($\stackrel{^}{a}$ is an annihilation operator for a single-mode boson field), but borrow the idea of a finite- (but arbitrarily large) dimensional space from Pegg and Barnett. Finally, we comment on an experiment to determine quantum phase uncertainty. Our analysis uses the operator ${e}^{i\stackrel{^}{\ensuremath{\varphi}}}$, which we feel is a more natural choice than $\stackrel{^}{\ensuremath{\varphi}}$. The use of ${e}^{i\stackrel{^}{\ensuremath{\varphi}}}$ also avoids the multivalued problems associated with $\stackrel{^}{\ensuremath{\varphi}}$.

Physical Review A•Jul 1, 1992•11 citations

Quantum phase and phase dependent measurements

W. P. Schleich, Stephen Mark Barnett

The correct description of the phase variable in quantum mechanics is a question rooted in its earliest formulations. The atom mechanics [1] of Bohr and Sommerfeld—the precursor of modern quantum mechanics—ascribes a central role to action-angle variables. However, Heisenberg's matrix mechanics and Schrödinger's wave mechanics are formulated [2] in terms of the canonical variables representing cartesian coordinates and momenta. Stimulated by this work London [3] attempted a reformulation of these theories in the previously favored action-angle variables. However, this attempt failed due to the difficulty in ascribing quantum operators to the angle variables of classical theory. Despite these difficulties London found [4] an operator representation of the complex exponential of these angle variables. The quantum phase of light made its first appearance in Dirac's classic paper [5] on the quantization of the radiation field. In contrast to modern methods, he constructed the annihilation and creation operators for each field mode from the corresponding amplitude and phase operators. Phase and its quantum nature acquired new significance with the development of lasers in the early sixties: theoretical investigations highlighted significant problems with Dirac's original proposal for the phase operator. A particularly elegant illustration of the difficulty was given by Louisell [6] in 1963. The advent of phase sensitive quantum noise as demonstrated experimentally in the production and detection of squeezed light [7] has created a new wave of interest in the nature of quantum optical phase leading to the discovery of the hermitian optical phase operator [8]. There has followed an explosion of theoretical activity in this area stimulating fresh experimental investigations. In preparing this special issue we have attempted to present the current state of this active and rapidly moving field. We have arranged the papers into what we hope is a coherent representation of the field. The first papers give a historical perspective and overview of current thinking. The two recent experimental investigations which follow are intimately connected to the phase space description of quantum mechanics based on quasi-probability distributions. The representa tion of phase via phase space and its connection with phase-dependent measurements and the phase operator are addressed in the next section. Some more formal considerations pertinent to phase are presented in the following section. Gravitational wave detection and optical communication have motivated the study of the limits of phase noise. Some recent investigations on such optimal phase states are presented. The issue concludes with two papers discussing the significance of phase in light-matter interactions. In concluding we express our gratitude to the authors of the papers in this volume for their efforts in preparing their high quality presentations.

Physica Scripta•Jan 1, 1993•74 citations
To find an operator representation of the phase variable of a single-mode electromagnetic field, the Schrodinger representation is extended to a larger Hilbert space including states with infinite excitation by nonstandard analy- sis, so that the self-adjoint phase operator is acting on the extended Hilbert space.It is shown that this phase operator is a Naimark extension of the optimal probability operator-valued measure for the phase parameter already known in the quantum estimation theory, and is naturally considered as the controversial limit of the phase operators on finite dimensional spaces recently proposed by Pegg and Barnett.Eventually, two of recent promising attempts to obtain the correct statistics of the phase variable in quantum mechanics is synthesized in the present framework based on new mathematical ideas concerning the number system including infinite and infinitesimal numbers.
A simple formalism is introduced for describing the quantum phase of a single-mode field (or, equivalently, a harmonic oscillator) using a particular infinite-dimensional Hilbert space Hsym{\mathit{H}}_{\mathit{s}\mathit{y}\mathit{m}}Hsym​. This space is spanned by vectors which represent states of the single field mode containing non-negative numbers of photons. It has a symmetry in the sense that it contains vectors in the neighborhood of both the vacuum state and the infinite photon number state. A striking property of Hsym{\mathit{H}}_{\mathit{s}\mathit{y}\mathit{m}}Hsym​ is that it supports Hermitian and unitary phase operators. Indeed the Pegg-Barnett unitary phase operators are shown to converge strongly on the Hilbert space Hsym{\mathit{H}}_{\mathit{s}\mathit{y}\mathit{m}}Hsym​ and so the correponding limit points are ordinary operators on Hsym{\mathit{H}}_{\mathit{s}\mathit{y}\mathit{m}}Hsym​. This can be compared with the situation for the infinite-dimensional Hilbert space H conventionally used in quantum optics on which the Pegg-Barnett unitary phase operators converge weakly, in general.
The phase associated with a single mode of the electromagnetic field is complementary to the photon number. This simple idea leads us to construct a probability density for the phase. The phase operator cannot be represented exactly in the usual-infinite Hilbert space but can be constructed in a subspace of it and provides a valid representation of phase if used together with a suitable limiting procedure. We introduce the Hermitian optical phase operator and describe some of its most important properties. We also provide brief discussions of some alternative approaches to the phase problem and to the question of phase measurements. The paper concludes with an extensive bibliography.
In a series of papers, Barnett, Pegg (1986, 1988, 1989, 1992) and various co-authors have proposed a description of quantum phase by means of a collection of s-dimensional states and operators, s>or=1. We analyse the limiting procedure they employ for large s, which is known not to be compatible with quantum mechanics in the usual sense. Further, we supply a rigorous demonstration of the asymptotic limits of the `mean` and `variance` of their system of operators in coherent states. These values had previously been given but not justified mathematically. Our analysis, based on the asymptotic analysis of certain random variables, shows that the physical deductions that can be drawn from these limits are limited. We also prove that the (s+1)-dimensional `pure phase` LHW-states they consider form a sequence of approximate eigenvectors for the Weyl-quantized angle operator Delta ( phi ) and the Toeplitz phase operator X proposed by Garrison and Wong (1970), Popov and Yarunin (1992), and others. These states X s ( theta ), to our knowledge first introduced by Lerner, Huang and Waiters (1970), can be used to construct a system of measurement as in the usual quantum theory, sensitive to certain qualities of phase, but not all. Indeed, a feature of the Barnett-Pegg method, when it gives finite answers, is the construction of associated measurement systems for different observables. We give examples of sequences of (s+1)-dimensional devices which represent measurements significantly closer to ideal for X. This serves as a model for corresponding devices for Delta ( phi ), or indeed, any observable with a continuous spectrum, contingent on its spectral decomposition being obtained explicitly.
We examine some of the attempts to describe the phase of a single field mode by a quantum operator acting in the conventional infinite Hilbert space. These operators lead to bizarre properties such as non-random phases for the number states and experience consistency difficulties when used to obtain a phase probability density. Moreover, in these approaches operator functions of phase are not simply functions of a phase operator. We show that these peculiarities do not arise when the Hermitian optical phase operator is employed. In our opinion, the problems associated with the descriptions of phase in conventional infinite Hilbert space arise from the nature of the limiting process.
Pegg and Barnett [Phys. Rev. A 39, 1665 (1989)] have proposed a formalism for a Hermitian optical phase operator, constructed from the so-called phase states. In this paper we give an alternative derivation. We begin by defining a unitary phase operator ${e}^{i\stackrel{^}{\ensuremath{\varphi}}}$ from the relationship $\stackrel{^}{a}={e}^{i\stackrel{^}{\ensuremath{\varphi}}}R(\stackrel{^}{N})$ ($\stackrel{^}{a}$ is an annihilation operator for a single-mode boson field), but borrow the idea of a finite- (but arbitrarily large) dimensional space from Pegg and Barnett. Finally, we comment on an experiment to determine quantum phase uncertainty. Our analysis uses the operator ${e}^{i\stackrel{^}{\ensuremath{\varphi}}}$, which we feel is a more natural choice than $\stackrel{^}{\ensuremath{\varphi}}$. The use of ${e}^{i\stackrel{^}{\ensuremath{\varphi}}}$ also avoids the multivalued problems associated with $\stackrel{^}{\ensuremath{\varphi}}$.
The correct description of the phase variable in quantum mechanics is a question rooted in its earliest formulations. The atom mechanics [1] of Bohr and Sommerfeld—the precursor of modern quantum mechanics—ascribes a central role to action-angle variables. However, Heisenberg's matrix mechanics and Schrödinger's wave mechanics are formulated [2] in terms of the canonical variables representing cartesian coordinates and momenta. Stimulated by this work London [3] attempted a reformulation of these theories in the previously favored action-angle variables. However, this attempt failed due to the difficulty in ascribing quantum operators to the angle variables of classical theory. Despite these difficulties London found [4] an operator representation of the complex exponential of these angle variables. The quantum phase of light made its first appearance in Dirac's classic paper [5] on the quantization of the radiation field. In contrast to modern methods, he constructed the annihilation and creation operators for each field mode from the corresponding amplitude and phase operators. Phase and its quantum nature acquired new significance with the development of lasers in the early sixties: theoretical investigations highlighted significant problems with Dirac's original proposal for the phase operator. A particularly elegant illustration of the difficulty was given by Louisell [6] in 1963. The advent of phase sensitive quantum noise as demonstrated experimentally in the production and detection of squeezed light [7] has created a new wave of interest in the nature of quantum optical phase leading to the discovery of the hermitian optical phase operator [8]. There has followed an explosion of theoretical activity in this area stimulating fresh experimental investigations. In preparing this special issue we have attempted to present the current state of this active and rapidly moving field. We have arranged the papers into what we hope is a coherent representation of the field. The first papers give a historical perspective and overview of current thinking. The two recent experimental investigations which follow are intimately connected to the phase space description of quantum mechanics based on quasi-probability distributions. The representa tion of phase via phase space and its connection with phase-dependent measurements and the phase operator are addressed in the next section. Some more formal considerations pertinent to phase are presented in the following section. Gravitational wave detection and optical communication have motivated the study of the limits of phase noise. Some recent investigations on such optimal phase states are presented. The issue concludes with two papers discussing the significance of phase in light-matter interactions. In concluding we express our gratitude to the authors of the papers in this volume for their efforts in preparing their high quality presentations.