Henry and Eve try to outrace each other, so as to get first to the unique quantum crystals deposited in an underground mine. In his descent into the mine, Henry resorts to coherent transfer. When he tries to return the same way, he gets stuck halfway up, because his entanglement to Eve’s sensors decoheres him. This scenario represents any environment where the interaction of each constituent with the quantum system is weak. Yet, together these many constituents and the system become completely entangled, causing environment-induced decoherence. This consensual narrative on decoherence conceals conceptual hurdles. Where does one draw the line between the system and the environment? How can the unitarity of QM be reconciled, whereby our past and future are interchangeable, with the irreversible evolution of quantum systems under decoherence, culminating in death? The appendix to this chapter describes coherent oscillations in a quantum system and their decay by decoherence.
Henry and Eve try to outrace each other, so as to get first to the unique quantum crystals deposited in an underground mine. In his descent into the mine, Henry resorts to coherent transfer. When he tries to return the same way, he gets stuck halfway up, because his entanglement to Eve’s sensors decoheres him. This scenario represents any environment where the interaction of each constituent with the quantum system is weak. Yet, together these many constituents and the system become completely entangled, causing environment-induced decoherence. This consensual narrative on decoherence conceals conceptual hurdles. Where does one draw the line between the system and the environment? How can the unitarity of QM be reconciled, whereby our past and future are interchangeable, with the irreversible evolution of quantum systems under decoherence, culminating in death? The appendix to this chapter describes coherent oscillations in a quantum system and their decay by decoherence.
Henry attempts to sneak into Eve’s residence undetected by taking advantage of his quantum coherence, but his quantum entanglement with Schred puts him in peril: Henry can no longer interfere with himself, he decoheres, since his two versions are differently tagged by correlations with different versions of Schred. Entanglement in composite systems is not only the hallmark of quantumness but also the key to its demise, alias decoherence. Decoherence, by transforming quantum information into classical information, is the biggest obstacle towards controlling complex quantum systems, particularly quantum computers. Information is collected and processed by “observers”: all life forms and their artificial (computerized) extensions. The question that reflects the millennia-long controversy on free will is: do observers have the freedom to choose the mode of their observation? The appendix to this chapechapter investigates the interference of two quantum systems as a function of their entanglement.
Entanglement and decoherence arguably define the central issues of concern in present day quantum information theory. Decoherence occurs when a system interacts with its environment in an irreversible way; this prevents the quantum superposition of the system + environment's wavefunction from interfering with each other. A better understanding of environment-induced destruction of coherent superposition states is needed, as well as a clear description of the degree of entanglement between the quantum system and its environment. We quantitatively establish a correspondence between entanglement, decoherence, and spin dynamics for a two-state system coupled to a bath of harmonic oscillators, resulting in the celebrated spin-boson model. Applications to solid-state and cold atomic systems are also discussed.
Theory and experiment have not fully resolved the apparent dichotomy , which has agonized physics for the past eighty years: on the one hand, the description of microsystems by quantum mechanics and, on the other, the description of macrosystems by classical dynamics or statistical mechanics. Derivations of the time-irreversible Liouville equation for an open quantum system, based on projecting out its environment, have narrowed the gap between the quantum and classical descriptions. Yet our `classical' intuition continues to be confronted by quantum-mechanical results like the Einstein--Podolsky--Rosen paradox that challenges the classical notion of locality, or the quantum Zeno effect which suggests that the isolation of a system is not the only way to preserve its quantum state. There are two key concepts in any discussion of such issues. The first, which is responsible for the most salient nonclassical properties, is entanglement , that is partial or complete correlation or, more generally, inseparability of the elements comprising a quantum ensemble . Even after their interaction has ceased, this inseparability, originating from their past interaction, can affect the state of one element when another element is subject to a nonunitary action, such as its measurement, tracing- out, or thermalization. The second key concept is decoherence of open quantum systems, which is the consequence of their entanglement with their environment, a `meter' or a thermal `reservoir', followed by the tracing-out of the latter. Despite new insights into entanglement and decoherence, there are still no complete, unequivocal answers to the fundamental questions of the transition from quantal to classical behaviour: how do irreversibility and classicality emerge from unitarity as systems and their environments become increasingly complex ? At what stage does system--meter entanglement give rise to a classical readout of the meter? Is there an upper limit on the size or complexity of systems displaying entanglement? Major developments have opened new vistas into controlled entanglement , which is the resource of quantum information processing. However, these developments have mainly focused on ensembles of simple two- and three-level systems that are thoroughly isolated from their environments. Treatments of coherence in quantum computing have mostly assumed that only a single or a few the elements of the quantum ensemble may simultaneously undergo an uncontrolled intervention---a quantum error. Decoherence-control protocols for more general types of errors are still incomplete. In order to resolve the outstanding issues of the quantum--classical transition, and study the control of entanglement and decoherence without the foregoing restrictions, we must venture into the domain of Quantum Complex Systems (QUACS), either consisting of a large number of inseparable elements or having many coupled degrees of freedom. Our conviction is that fundamental understanding and manipulation of entanglement within QUACS or their entanglement with the environment or a meter, call for the creation of a new conceptual framework or paradigm, that would encompass phenomena common to cold atoms in laser fields, large molecules, Josephson junctions, quantum gases and solids, with the view of employing these systems for quantum information processing and computing. Progress within this paradigm should allow us to answer the questions: does entanglement play an essential role in the evolution of large collections of complex systems? What are the size and complexity limits of systems and ensembles still controllable by an external intervention? What are the most appropriate decoherence protection schemes and control algorithms? This special issue addresses the challenge of understanding in depth and manipulating the basic quantum properties of optical, atomic, molecular and condensed-matter QUACS, and large ensembles thereof. In view of the interdisciplinary character of this issue, we find it expedient to look at the presented articles not only according to the physical objects they describe, but also from a unifying standpoint. Several unifying themes may be discerned: memory effects in dephasing and relaxation; protection of quantum information by its distribution throughout the ensemble; control of decoherence and entanglement by time-dependent interventions or measurements; manifestations of entanglement in scattering off statistical ensembles; measurment-induced dynamics. The concerted discussion of the topics outlined above should help us advance the new paradigm that addresses our abilities to diagnose and manipulate the entangled states of complex quantum objects and their robustness against decoherence. These abilities are required for quantum information (QI) applications in matter--wave interferometry in molecular, semiconducting or superconducting systems. On the fundamental level, this book may help establish the notion of dynamical information exchange between quantum systems and chart in detail the route from unitarity to classicality. Further developments within the outlined paradigm should yield novel, advantageous QI processing schemes and high-sensitivity interferometers, owing to decoherence suppression and effective control of many degrees of freedom. In the long run, these strategies may prove to be the first step towards the (hitherto unattempted) use of entanglement in nanotechnology, metrology and chemistry, with potentially remarkable novel applications.
The title of the present dissertation Decoherence in Quantum Network sounds very general and all-inclusive. Indeed it embraces two topics (decoherence and quantum network) from the area of Quantum Mechanics each of which is described in all respects by a huge literature developed in the last three decades [...]. Quantum decoherence, as the name lets it mean, is the mechanism that makes a quantum system loose its coherence properties, and with them the capability of giving rise to interference phenomena or to other interesting quantum effects [...]. The key idea promoted by decoherence is the insight that realistic quantum systems are never isolated, but are immersed in the surrounding environment and interact continuously with it [...]. As an example one may consider a two-level quantum system (i.e. a quantum bit, usually shortened with a terminology from information science to \\qubit" ) in contact with a wide environment. Hence, quantum systems are open systems, and continuously interact or exchange information with an external environment whose degrees of freedom are too numerous to be monitored. The resulting correlation between the system and the environment spoils quantum coherence and brings about the transition from a pure quantum state to a mixture of quantum state resulting a classical state. To describe decoherence different kind of approaches can be used (for example Master equation, random matrix, etc). A quantum network typically consists of a number of quantum objects (e.g., atoms, ions, quantum dots, cavities, etc.), to be referred to hereafter as the sites or the nodes of the network. They can interact and the interactions (or their correlations) will be usually described by the edges of a graph. Quantum networks can address different information processing tasks. For instance a quantum state can be transferred from qubit to qubit down a chain solely due to the interactions, that is according to the laws of quantum physics [...]. Quantum networks offer us new opportunities and phenomena as compared to classical networks. An extension to large scale of the idea of a quantum network could lead to a futurible quantum internet [...]. The study of networks has traditionally been the territory of graph theory [...], also with the advent of their quantum versions. Within simple quantum network model information processing is usually described by assuming perfect control of the underlying graph. However, this is not much realistic since randomness is often present and it leads to decoherence effects [...]. In contrast, the conservation of coherence is essential for any quantum information process [...], hence there is a persistent interest in decoherence effects in quantum networks, which motivate us to study models for describing such noisy effects. We consider a simple model of quantum network, employing qubits (spin-1/2 particles) attached to the nodes of an underlying graph and we study the simplest task, namely information storage (on a single and two qubits), when the graph randomly changes in time. Actually we randomly add edges to an initially disconnected graph according to the Gilbert model characterized by a weighting parameter ex [...] and in an identically and independent way at each time step. We find that by increasing ex the dynamics of relevant quantities like fidelity, entropy or concurrence, gradually transforms from damped to damped oscillatory and finally to purely oscillatory. That leads to the paper [see, Information dissipation in random quantum networks, by U. Farooq and S. Mancini, OSID 21(3), 1450004, 2014]. We also study a system composed by pairs of qubits attached to each node of a linear chain, a model that stems from quantum dot arrays. Here we use the approach of evolution with a stochastic Hamiltonian to describe the noisy effects. We then evaluate the effect of two most common disorders, namely exchange coupling and hyperfine interaction fluctuations, in adiabatic preparation of ground state in such model. We show that the adiabatic ground state preparation is highly robust against these disorders making the chain a good analog simulator. Moreover, we also study the adiabatic information transfer, using singlet-triplet states, across the chain. In contrast to ground state preparation the transfer mechanism is highly affected by disorders. This suggested that for communication tasks across such chains adiabatic evolution is not as effective and quantum quenches would be preferable. That leads to the paper [see, Adiabatic many-body state preparation and information transfer in quantum dot arrays, by U. Farooq, A. Bayat, S. Mancini and S. Bose Phys. Rev. B 91, 134303, 2015]. The present work is organized as follows. In chapter 1, we shall give a survey of the various types of approach which can be employed to analyse the dynamics of open quantum systems that leads to decoherence effects. In chapter 2, we shall give a general description about quantum network and its possible applications. In chapter 3, we shall discuss the problem of quantum state transfer in qubit network and shall give a brief overview of some scheme that enable nearly prefect state transfer. In chapter 4, we shall discuss singlet-triplet networks, that is networks having on each site a pair of (generally entangled) qubit. Then within this framework we propose a model stemming from quantum dot array. There we shall address the problem of ground state preparation and state transfer. Finally we shall describe the inherent entanglement of the ground state of strongly correlated systems can be exploited for both classical and quantum communications. In chapter 5, we shall propose a decoherence model for qubit networks based on edges representing XY interactions randomly added to a disconnected graph accordingly to a suitable probability distribution. In this way we shall describe dissipation of information initially localize in single or two qubits all over the network. In chapter 6 we shall model the noisy effects in the quantum dot array introduced in chapter 4 and investigate their consequences on the preparation of ground state and quantum state transfer mechanism. Finally we shall draw conclusions.
Quantum decoherence in all its locus of essence, and expression is the loss of coherence or ordering of the phase angles between the components of a system in a quantum superposition. Detrimental ramifications, and pernicious implications of this dephasing leads to classical or probabilistically additive behavior. Quantum decoherence gives the appearance of wave function collapse (the reduction of the physical possibilities into a single possibility as seen by an observer. Here it is to be noted that perception is not the reality and what you see is not what you see ;what you do not see is what you do not see; what you see is what you do not see ;and what you do not see is what you see.)… Thus in all its wide ranging manifestations, it justifies the propositional subsistence and corporeal reality that justifies the framework and intuition of classical physics as an acceptable approximation: decoherence is the mechanism by which the classical limit emerges out of a perceptual field of quantum starting point and it determines the location of the quantum-classical boundary. Decoherence occurs when a system interacts with its environment in a thermodynamically irreversible way. This prevents transitive states, substantive sub states and determinate orientation different elements in the quantum superposition of the system and environment's wavefunction from interfering with each other. Decoherence has been a subject of active research since the 1980s. Decoherence can be viewed as the principal frontier of diurnal dynamics that results in loss of information from a system into the environment (often modeled as a heat bath), since every system is loosely coupled with the energetic state of its surroundings, with particularistic predicational pronouncements. . Viewed in isolation, the system's dynamics are non-unitary (although the combined system plus environment evolves in a unitary fashion). Thus, the dynamics of the system aphorism and anecdote of the system alone are irreversible. As with any coupling, entanglements are generated in its theme and potentialities between the system and environment, which have the effect of sharing quantum information with—or transferring it to—the surroundings. It is a blatant and flagrant misconception that collapse of wave function is attributable and ascribable to wave function collapse; Decoherence does not generate actual wave function collapse. It only provides an explanation for the appearance of the wavefunction collapse, as the quantum nature of the system leaks into the environment. So, the wave function collapse is the figment of the observer’s imagination, product of puerile prognostication and resultant orientationality of his phantasmagoria. One cannot have the apodictic knowledge of reality that is; components of the wavefunction are decoupled from a coherent system, and acquire phases from their immediate surroundings. A total superposition of the global or universal wavefunction still exists (and remains coherent at the global level), but its ultimate fate remains an interpretational issue. This is a very important pharisaical provenience and plagenetious precocity with all the disembodied resemblances of the system in total form; specifically, decoherence does not attempt to explain the measurement problem. Rather, decoherence provides an explanation for the transition of the system to a mixture of states that seem to correspond to those states observers perceive. Moreover, our observation tells us that this mixture looks like a proper quantum ensemble in a measurement situation, as we observe that measurements lead to the of precisely one state in the ensemble.Decoherence represents a challenge for the practical realization of quantum computers, since they are expected to rely heavily on the undisturbed evolution of quantum coherences. Simply put; they require that coherent states be preserved and that decoherence is managed, in order to actually perform quantum computation. In the following we give a model for decoherence of the environment, coupled quantum states, at determinate and differential levels ,internal resonance in coupled spin systems, and the conflict in the Quantum state operations and decoupling. KEY WORDS Coupled quantum states, Quantum mechanics
We are in the midst of a renaissance in the study and interpretation of fundamental quantum mechanics, from quantum coherence and quantum entanglement to the quantum measurement process. This stems partly from the impressive advances in experimental techniques that are making yesterday's gedanken experiment today's reality. Another reason quantum coherence and entanglement have come to the forefront is the emerging and tantalizing field of quantum information science. The ability to store information in quantum systems may someday yield devices that process quantum superpositions of inputs in parallel or improve communication through the `wiring' implicit in quantum entanglement. Indeed, quantum computing has the remote prospect of revolutionizing the way we store and process information. This has become particularly important in the face of impending limits on the miniaturization of conventional computers due to quantum effects. Of course, all real systems face limits imposed by decoherence, or the environmentally-induced destruction of quantum coherence. Here, superpositions of quantum states suddenly become probabilistic mixtures of states when they interact with the environment or when the system parameters are fluctuating. Decoherence theory is commonly interpreted as a way to quantify the elusive boundary between quantum and classical worlds and almost always precludes the existence of complex quantum superpositions, except at extremely short time scales. In practice, it is very important to study how decoherence appears in particular quantum systems and try to fight against it. In this special issue of Journal of Optics B: Quantum and Semiclassical Optics , we highlight recent results in the exciting area of quantum coherence and entanglement, including generating interesting and complex quantum states, characterizing coherence and entanglement in these systems, and triumphing over relevant decoherence processes. We hope this issue will not only act as a bookmark in the ongoing study of fundamental quantum mechanics, but will also help guide the rapid developments in quantum information science.