Optical Implementations of QIP Kevin Resch IQC, Department of Physics University of Waterloo Quantum optics and Quantum Info. group Entanglement sources Tomography Quantum computing Optical Imaging Tests of nonlocality Interferometry Goal of the talk • To understand from basic principles how a quantum information protocol works in theory and in practice using optics • I chose quantum teleportation where we can understand the discrete (polarization) and continuous variable versions of this protocol Quantum teleportation • A process for transmitting quantum information using a classical channel and shared entanglement Figure credit: Bouwmeester et al. Nature 390, 575 (1997). Outline • Introduction to quantum optics – photons, encodings, entanglement • QIP with polarization – waveplates, CNOT, teleportation • QIP with continuous variables – Wigner function, measurements, teleportation Photons Field quantization • A procedure for finding a quantum description of light • Starting point is Maxwell’s Equations in vacuum • Introducing the potentials and gauge Field quantization • From these derive wave equation for the vector potential • Spatial mode expansion (exact form depends on boundary conditions) Plane wave solutions Periodic BC, cubic volume Field quantization • Also from classical physics, the energy stored in an EM field • Energy for a single mode • Rewriting complex A in terms of real quant • Gets us onto familiar territory Classical Harmonic Oscillator (mass = 1) Field quantization Field quantization • Promote the classical parameters to operators • Which defines field operators Field quantization • And find the energy for each mode • Which simplifies to Field quantization • Harmonic oscillator “number” operator q The excitations of the EM modes are “photons” – particles of light Experimental evidence for photons • Particles can only be detected in one place Ca Atomic Cascade Grangier, Roger, Aspect Europhysics Lett 1, 173 (1986) Properties of photons • A single photon has just three properties: – Colour/energy, – Polarization, – Direction/momentum, • Its quantum state can be described as a superposition of these properties Single photon QI encodings • Spatial modes • Polarization +i |H> • Time-bin = |V> • Freq. encoding QIP with optics • Pros: – Low decoherence* – High speed – Flexible encodings Ideal for quantum communication • Cons: – Negligible photon-photon interactions – Loss – Hard to keep in one place – Some encodings unsuitable for some situations, ex., polarization/modes in fibre *can be susceptible to coupling internal DOF But an optical mode is more complicated… • Photons are bosons, so we can have many per mode • Important multi-photon states of a single mode: – Fock or number state – Coherent state – Squeezed state – Thermal state • (Things can get very complicated with a large number of modes and all the DOF) “Mode” observables: Quadratures • We can write quadrature operators analogous to x and p (but do not correspond to pos/mom of the photon!) • Since , there must be an uncertainty relation Useful operator identities • Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff lemma • Glauber’s identity valid when [A,[A,B]]= [A,[A,B]]=0. Phase shift operators • Phase shift operator (exp free-field) • Using BCH • Or • Free-field evolution converts one quadrature into the other in the form of a rotation Quadratures • These observables correspond to components of the electric field • There is an uncertainty relation between the E field ‘now’ and the E field a quarter cycle ‘later’ Coherent states • Defined as eigenstates of lowering operator a is not Hermitian so α can be complex • Uncertainties in mode variables: • Min uncertainty, equal between q and p Displacement operator • Coherent states can be generated using the displacement operator: • This can be seen by rewriting the operator using Glauber’s identity and comparing Displacement operator • Useful identities and properties: Coherent states in quantum optics • Coherent states play an important role as a basis in quantum optics • But coherent states with different amplitudes are orthogonal • And the basis is “overcomplete” (projectors do not sum to identity) Entanglement The characteristic trait of QM E. Schrödinger Math. Proc. Camb. Philos. Soc. 31, 555 (1935). Definition of entanglement • Any state that can be written, is said to be separable, otherwise it is entangled ÃA B • Pure states: Ã(x 1 ; x 2 ) = = ÃA ÃB Ã(x 1 )Ã(x 2 ) are separable, otherwise entangled Superposition and entanglement Superposition Entanglement The characteristic trait of QM Quantum Computing Enhanced Sensors Phase transitions http://www.ligo.caltech.edu http://www.eng.yale.edu/rslab/ Entanglement Quantum Communication http://www.quantum-munich.de Quantum relativistic effects Foundations of QM Figure credit: Rupert Ursin Jennewein et al. PRL 84, 4729 (2000) S. Hawking Illustrated Brief History of Time Nonlinear optics • Direct photon-photon interactions too weak • Instead atoms can mediate interactions between photons – Nonlinear Optics • Ex. Second-order nonlinearity Nonlinear coefficient Creates pairs of photons Destroys pairs of photons Nonlinear optics • Instead of oscillating only at the frequency of the driving field, the charge can oscillate at new frequencies Example: Second Harmonic Generation ω 2ω Χ(2) material (such as BBO or KTP) Second-harmonic generation Entangled photons • Reverse of SHG Parametric Down-conversion “blue” photon two “red” photons c(2) wpump = ws + wi Phase matching: kpump = ks + ki ‘Conservation laws’ constrain the pair without constraining the individual entanglement Also: QD, at. casc Down-conversion movie KTP – nonlinear crystal www.quantum.at PPKTP source PPKTP source Multiphoton sources: Pulsed SPDC • Down-conversion can sometimes emit two pairs. • If a short pulse is used for an entangled photon source, the pair are properly described by a 4-photon state H = gay ay + gay ay H1 V2 H 2 j0i V1 H2 + h:c: ! (ay ay + ay ay ) 2 j0i = j2H 1 ; 2V2 i + jH 1 ; V1 ; H 2 ; V2 i + j2V1 ; 2H 2 i H1 V2 V1 H2 GHZ Correlations • Measured 4-photon coincidences to post-select GHZ state j2H 1 ; 2V2 i + jH 1 ; V1 ; H 2 ; V2 i + j2V1 ; 2H 2 i V H • Needs at least 1H and 1V in mode 1 H V Bouwmeester PRL 82, 1345 (1999) Lavoie NJP 11, 073501 (2009) H H V V H a H bVc H V V Va VbH c Three-photon GHZ states • ~4 four-fold coincidence counts per minute (3fold coincidence + trigger) • Fidelity with target GHZ 84% from tomography 2nd method: Cascaded down-conversion e 10-11 ~1 in a billion years ~1 per day 10-9 ~1 in a hundred thousand years ~3 per hour 10-6 ~2 per month ~1 per second Bulk crystal (BBO) PPKTP Waveguide PPLN *assuming 106 s-1 primary photons, no loss, perfect detectors Experimental cascaded down-conversion See also Shalm Nature Physics 9, 19 (2013); Hamel arxiv: 1404.7131 4.7 ± 0.6 counts/hr Two-mode squeezed vacuum • Two mode squeezing operator • Creates or destroys photons in pairs • Properties • Warning: can’t use Glauber’s theorem Two-mode squeezed vacuum • The interesting properties show up in the correlations between quadrature obs. Two-mode squeezed vacuum • The commutator, • And so we have the same uncertainty relation between these joint observables as the quadratures themselves: Two-mode squeezed vacuum • We can calculate the uncertainty in these observables for the TMSV • Recall • To calculate this requires several applications of the squeeze operator identities, ex., Two-mode squeezed vacuum • After some algebra • Choosing • We can “squeeze” the uncertainty in one observable at the expense of the other Einstein Podolsky Rosen correlations • If we consider a different pair of joint quadrature observables, ex. • These operators commute (thus the uncertainty relation is trivial) and for the TMSV Einstein Podolsky Rosen Correlations • For infinite squeezing, the state is an eigenstate of both • Highly entangled state central to: Two-mode squeezed vacuum • This state is the most entangled state for a given amount of energy (its subsystems are thermal states, which have the highest entropy for a fixed energy) • As such it plays the role of the Bell states in CV protocols