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

Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General

Non-cyclic geometric phases in a proposed two-photon interferometric experiment

Joy Christian, Abner Shimony

Published Oct 21, 1993• 7 citations
Publisher

Abstract

An experimental arrangement is proposed which combines the idea of two-photon interferometry with that of geometric phases. A pair of photons generated by parametric down-conversion is fed into a pair of Mach-Zehnder interferometers, in each of which there is phase shift produced by the helically wound optical fibre in the manner of Tomita and Chiao(1986). If the winding angle is a multiple of 2 pi there is a closed path in parameter space, in accordance with the pioneering analysis of Berry(1984). More general windings are also considered in which the path in parameter space is not closed, and the geometric phase for such open paths is calculated in accordance with the gauge-invariant prescription of Aitchison and Wanelik. If the proposed experiment is realized, it will provide a test for the noncyclic geometric phase for photons and for the set of prescriptions equivalent to that of Aitchison and Wanelik(1992). Furthermore, the geometric phase in this arrangement will be unequivocally quantum mechanical because of the non-classical character of two-photon interferometry.

DOI
10.1088/0305-4470/26/20/036

Related papers

Spatial non-cyclic geometric phase in neutron interferometry

Stefan Filipp, Yuji Hasegawa, Rudolf Loidl +1 more

We present a split-beam neutron interferometric experiment to test the non-cyclic geometric phase tied to the spatial evolution of the system: the subjacent two-dimensional Hilbert space is spanned by the two possible paths in the interferometer and the evolution of the state is controlled by phase shifters and absorbers. A related experiment was reported previously by some of the authors to verify the cyclic spatial geometric phase. The interpretation of this experiment, namely to ascribe a geometric phase to this particular state evolution, has met severe criticism. The extension to non-cyclic evolution manifests the correctness of the interpretation of the previous experiment by means of an explicit calculation of the non-cyclic geometric phase in terms of paths on the Bloch-sphere. The theoretical treatment comprises the cyclic geometric phase as a special case, which is confirmed by experiment.

arXiv:quant-ph/0408144•Journal of Research of the National Institute of Standards and Technology•May 1, 2005•3 citations

Noncyclic geometric phase due to spatial evolution in a neutron interferometer

Stefan Filipp, Yuji Hasegawa, Rudolf Loidl +1 more

We present a split-beam neutron interferometric experiment to test the noncyclic geometric phase tied to the spatial evolution of the system: The subjacent two-dimensional Hilbert space is spanned by the two possible paths in the interferometer, and the evolution of the state is controlled by phase shifters and absorbers. A related experiment was reported previously by Hasegawa et al. [Phys Rev A 53, 2486 (1996)] to verify the cyclic spatial geometric phase. The interpretation of this experiment, namely to ascribe a geometric phase to this particular state evolution, has met with severe criticism from Wagh [Phys. Rev A 59, 1715 (1999)]. The extension to a noncyclic evolution manifests the correctness of the interpretation of the previous experiment by means of an explicit calculation of the noncyclic geometric phase in terms of paths on the Bloch-sphere.

arXiv:quant-ph/0412038•Physical Review A•Aug 10, 2005•42 citations

The Pancharatnam-Berry Phase: Theoretical and Experimental Aspects

Francisco De

In 1984 Berry addressed a quantum system undergoing a unitary and cyclic evolution under the action of a time-dependent Hamiltonian (M. V. Berry, 1984). The process was supposed to be adiabatic, meaning that the time scale of the system’s evolution was much shorter than the time scale of the changing Hamiltonian. Until Berry’s study, it was assumed that for a cyclic Hamiltonian the quantum state would acquire only so-called dynamical phases, deprived of physical meaning. Such phases could be eliminated by redefining the quantum state through a “gauge” transformation of the form |ψ〉 → eiα |ψ〉. However, Berry discovered that besides the dynamical, there was an additional phase that could not be “gauged away” and whose origin was geometric or topological. It depended on the path that |ψ〉 describes in the parameter space spanned by those parameters to which the Hamiltonian owed its time dependence. Berry’s discovery was the starting point for a great amount of investigations that brought to light topological aspects of both quantum and classical systems. Berry’s phase was soon recognized as a special case of more general phases that showed up when dealing with topological aspects of different systems. For example, the Aharonov-Bohm phase could be understood as a geometric phase. The rotation angle acquired by a parallel-transported vector after completing a closed loop in a gravitationally curved space-time region, is also a geometric, Berry-like phase. Another example is the precession of the plane of oscillation of a Foucault pendulum. Berry’s original formulation was directly applicable to the case of a spin-1/2 system evolving under the action of a slowly varying magnetic field that undergoes cyclic changes. A spin-1/2 system is a special case of a two-level system. Another instances are two-level atoms and polarized light, so that also in these cases we should expect to find geometric phases. In fact, the first experimental test of Berry’s phase was done using polarized, classical light (A. Tomita, 1986). Pancharatnam (S. Pancharatnam, 1956) anticipated Berry’s phase when he proposed, back in 1956, how to decide whether two polarization states are “in phase”. Pancharatnam’s prescription is an operational one, based upon observing whether the intensity of the interferogram formed by two polarized beams has maximal intensity. In that case, the two polarized beams are said to be “in phase”. Such a definition is analogous to the definition of distant parallelism in differential geometry. Polarized states can be subjected to different transformations which could be cyclic or not, adiabatic or not, unitary or not. The Pancharatnam-Berry Phase: Theoretical and Experimental Aspects

InTech eBooks•Feb 24, 2012•16 citations

MANIFESTATIONS OF GEOMETRICAL AND DYNAMIC PHASES FOR THE PHOTON UNDER CYCLIC AND NONCYCLIC EVOLUTIONS

M. Grether, A. Góngora-T, Eugenio Samuel López-Moreno

Ve review the gcometrical phases in a non planar Mach-Zehnder interferometer as a non adiabatic Aharonov-Anandan phase shift. Light traveled interferometer's arms along paths twisted in the three spatial dimensions. 80th arms were arranged symmetrically, having opposite senses of handedness. By considering the light at the asymmetrical second exit of the interferometer, we prove that the process needs not to be cyclic to exhibit geometrical phases. We also prove that a purely dynamical phase shift does not atTect the relative fringe shifts associated with geometrical phases. The method of distinguishing geometrical and dynamical phases is to perform the same experiment with opposite helicities. RESUMEN. Presentamos una revision de las fases geometricas dentro de un interferometro Mach- Zehnder no-plano contempladas como desfases no-adiabaticos del tipo Aharonov-Anandan. La luz recorrio los brazos del interferometro en caminos que incluyen torceduras dirigidas en las tres dimensiones del espacio. Los brazos fueron dispuestos simetricamente, con sentidos opuestos en su simetria izquierda-derecha. Considerando la luz en la salida asimetrica del interferometro, probamos que el proceso no necesita ser ciclico para exhibir fases geometricas. Tambien probamos que un desfase puramente dinamico no afecta los corrimientos relativos de las franjas asociados con las fases geometricas. El metodo de distinguir las fases geometricas de las dinamicas consistio en realizar el mismo experimento con helicidades opuestas.

•Jan 1, 1993•0 citations

The geometric phase in optics: observations at the classical and quantum limits

P. Hariharan

The wave function of a quantum system may acquire an additional phase factor (the geometric phase), when its parameters undergo a cyclic change. An optical manifestation of the geometric phase is the change in the phase of a light wave produced when its state of polarization is taken around a circuit on the Poincare sphere. This phase change can be verified by interferometric measurements. We describe an interferometer in which the two beams traverse the same path in opposite directions, so that their optical paths are always equal, and the phase difference between them is varied by operating on the geometric phase. Measurements made with this interferometer, at a light level at which the probability of more than one photon being present simultaneously in the interferometer was negligibly small, confirmed that the interference effects observed due to the geometric phase persist down to the single photon level.

16th Congress of the International Commission for Optics: Optics as a Key to High Technology•Jul 26, 1993•0 citations

Measurement of Geometric Phase for Mixed States Using Single Photon Interferometry

Marie Ericsson, Daryl Achilles, Julio T. Barreiro +3 more

Geometric phase may enable inherently fault-tolerant quantum computation. However, due to potential decoherence effects, it is important to understand how such phases arise for mixed input states. We report the first experiment to measure mixed-state geometric phases in optics, using a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, and polarization mixed states that are produced in two different ways: decohering pure states with birefringent elements; and producing a nonmaximally entangled state of two photons and tracing over one of them, a form of remote state preparation.

arXiv:quant-ph/0412216•Physical Review Letters•Feb 7, 2005•92 citations
An experimental arrangement is proposed which combines the idea of two-photon interferometry with that of geometric phases. A pair of photons generated by parametric down-conversion is fed into a pair of Mach-Zehnder interferometers, in each of which there is phase shift produced by the helically wound optical fibre in the manner of Tomita and Chiao(1986). If the winding angle is a multiple of 2 pi there is a closed path in parameter space, in accordance with the pioneering analysis of Berry(1984). More general windings are also considered in which the path in parameter space is not closed, and the geometric phase for such open paths is calculated in accordance with the gauge-invariant prescription of Aitchison and Wanelik. If the proposed experiment is realized, it will provide a test for the noncyclic geometric phase for photons and for the set of prescriptions equivalent to that of Aitchison and Wanelik(1992). Furthermore, the geometric phase in this arrangement will be unequivocally quantum mechanical because of the non-classical character of two-photon interferometry.
We present a split-beam neutron interferometric experiment to test the non-cyclic geometric phase tied to the spatial evolution of the system: the subjacent two-dimensional Hilbert space is spanned by the two possible paths in the interferometer and the evolution of the state is controlled by phase shifters and absorbers. A related experiment was reported previously by some of the authors to verify the cyclic spatial geometric phase. The interpretation of this experiment, namely to ascribe a geometric phase to this particular state evolution, has met severe criticism. The extension to non-cyclic evolution manifests the correctness of the interpretation of the previous experiment by means of an explicit calculation of the non-cyclic geometric phase in terms of paths on the Bloch-sphere. The theoretical treatment comprises the cyclic geometric phase as a special case, which is confirmed by experiment.
We present a split-beam neutron interferometric experiment to test the noncyclic geometric phase tied to the spatial evolution of the system: The subjacent two-dimensional Hilbert space is spanned by the two possible paths in the interferometer, and the evolution of the state is controlled by phase shifters and absorbers. A related experiment was reported previously by Hasegawa et al. [Phys Rev A 53, 2486 (1996)] to verify the cyclic spatial geometric phase. The interpretation of this experiment, namely to ascribe a geometric phase to this particular state evolution, has met with severe criticism from Wagh [Phys. Rev A 59, 1715 (1999)]. The extension to a noncyclic evolution manifests the correctness of the interpretation of the previous experiment by means of an explicit calculation of the noncyclic geometric phase in terms of paths on the Bloch-sphere.
In 1984 Berry addressed a quantum system undergoing a unitary and cyclic evolution under the action of a time-dependent Hamiltonian (M. V. Berry, 1984). The process was supposed to be adiabatic, meaning that the time scale of the system’s evolution was much shorter than the time scale of the changing Hamiltonian. Until Berry’s study, it was assumed that for a cyclic Hamiltonian the quantum state would acquire only so-called dynamical phases, deprived of physical meaning. Such phases could be eliminated by redefining the quantum state through a “gauge” transformation of the form |ψ〉 → eiα |ψ〉. However, Berry discovered that besides the dynamical, there was an additional phase that could not be “gauged away” and whose origin was geometric or topological. It depended on the path that |ψ〉 describes in the parameter space spanned by those parameters to which the Hamiltonian owed its time dependence. Berry’s discovery was the starting point for a great amount of investigations that brought to light topological aspects of both quantum and classical systems. Berry’s phase was soon recognized as a special case of more general phases that showed up when dealing with topological aspects of different systems. For example, the Aharonov-Bohm phase could be understood as a geometric phase. The rotation angle acquired by a parallel-transported vector after completing a closed loop in a gravitationally curved space-time region, is also a geometric, Berry-like phase. Another example is the precession of the plane of oscillation of a Foucault pendulum. Berry’s original formulation was directly applicable to the case of a spin-1/2 system evolving under the action of a slowly varying magnetic field that undergoes cyclic changes. A spin-1/2 system is a special case of a two-level system. Another instances are two-level atoms and polarized light, so that also in these cases we should expect to find geometric phases. In fact, the first experimental test of Berry’s phase was done using polarized, classical light (A. Tomita, 1986). Pancharatnam (S. Pancharatnam, 1956) anticipated Berry’s phase when he proposed, back in 1956, how to decide whether two polarization states are “in phase”. Pancharatnam’s prescription is an operational one, based upon observing whether the intensity of the interferogram formed by two polarized beams has maximal intensity. In that case, the two polarized beams are said to be “in phase”. Such a definition is analogous to the definition of distant parallelism in differential geometry. Polarized states can be subjected to different transformations which could be cyclic or not, adiabatic or not, unitary or not. The Pancharatnam-Berry Phase: Theoretical and Experimental Aspects
Ve review the gcometrical phases in a non planar Mach-Zehnder interferometer as a non adiabatic Aharonov-Anandan phase shift. Light traveled interferometer's arms along paths twisted in the three spatial dimensions. 80th arms were arranged symmetrically, having opposite senses of handedness. By considering the light at the asymmetrical second exit of the interferometer, we prove that the process needs not to be cyclic to exhibit geometrical phases. We also prove that a purely dynamical phase shift does not atTect the relative fringe shifts associated with geometrical phases. The method of distinguishing geometrical and dynamical phases is to perform the same experiment with opposite helicities. RESUMEN. Presentamos una revision de las fases geometricas dentro de un interferometro Mach- Zehnder no-plano contempladas como desfases no-adiabaticos del tipo Aharonov-Anandan. La luz recorrio los brazos del interferometro en caminos que incluyen torceduras dirigidas en las tres dimensiones del espacio. Los brazos fueron dispuestos simetricamente, con sentidos opuestos en su simetria izquierda-derecha. Considerando la luz en la salida asimetrica del interferometro, probamos que el proceso no necesita ser ciclico para exhibir fases geometricas. Tambien probamos que un desfase puramente dinamico no afecta los corrimientos relativos de las franjas asociados con las fases geometricas. El metodo de distinguir las fases geometricas de las dinamicas consistio en realizar el mismo experimento con helicidades opuestas.
The wave function of a quantum system may acquire an additional phase factor (the geometric phase), when its parameters undergo a cyclic change. An optical manifestation of the geometric phase is the change in the phase of a light wave produced when its state of polarization is taken around a circuit on the Poincare sphere. This phase change can be verified by interferometric measurements. We describe an interferometer in which the two beams traverse the same path in opposite directions, so that their optical paths are always equal, and the phase difference between them is varied by operating on the geometric phase. Measurements made with this interferometer, at a light level at which the probability of more than one photon being present simultaneously in the interferometer was negligibly small, confirmed that the interference effects observed due to the geometric phase persist down to the single photon level.
Geometric phase may enable inherently fault-tolerant quantum computation. However, due to potential decoherence effects, it is important to understand how such phases arise for mixed input states. We report the first experiment to measure mixed-state geometric phases in optics, using a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, and polarization mixed states that are produced in two different ways: decohering pure states with birefringent elements; and producing a nonmaximally entangled state of two photons and tracing over one of them, a form of remote state preparation.