arxiv: v1 [quant-ph] 30 Apr 2009

Σχετικά έγγραφα
Congruence Classes of Invertible Matrices of Order 3 over F 2

Lecture 2: Dirac notation and a review of linear algebra Read Sakurai chapter 1, Baym chatper 3

2 Composition. Invertible Mappings

Example Sheet 3 Solutions

EE512: Error Control Coding

SCITECH Volume 13, Issue 2 RESEARCH ORGANISATION Published online: March 29, 2018

Phys460.nb Solution for the t-dependent Schrodinger s equation How did we find the solution? (not required)

6.1. Dirac Equation. Hamiltonian. Dirac Eq.

Every set of first-order formulas is equivalent to an independent set

Matrices and Determinants

Ordinal Arithmetic: Addition, Multiplication, Exponentiation and Limit

HOMEWORK 4 = G. In order to plot the stress versus the stretch we define a normalized stretch:

4.6 Autoregressive Moving Average Model ARMA(1,1)

General 2 2 PT -Symmetric Matrices and Jordan Blocks 1

Homework 3 Solutions

Reminders: linear functions

Partial Differential Equations in Biology The boundary element method. March 26, 2013

On Numerical Radius of Some Matrices

Chapter 6: Systems of Linear Differential. be continuous functions on the interval

Απόκριση σε Μοναδιαία Ωστική Δύναμη (Unit Impulse) Απόκριση σε Δυνάμεις Αυθαίρετα Μεταβαλλόμενες με το Χρόνο. Απόστολος Σ.

Tridiagonal matrices. Gérard MEURANT. October, 2008

Concrete Mathematics Exercises from 30 September 2016

C.S. 430 Assignment 6, Sample Solutions

SCHOOL OF MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES G11LMA Linear Mathematics Examination Solutions

Other Test Constructions: Likelihood Ratio & Bayes Tests

Coefficient Inequalities for a New Subclass of K-uniformly Convex Functions

Statistical Inference I Locally most powerful tests

Homework 8 Model Solution Section

CHAPTER 25 SOLVING EQUATIONS BY ITERATIVE METHODS

The Simply Typed Lambda Calculus

k A = [k, k]( )[a 1, a 2 ] = [ka 1,ka 2 ] 4For the division of two intervals of confidence in R +

Lecture 21: Properties and robustness of LSE

Main source: "Discrete-time systems and computer control" by Α. ΣΚΟΔΡΑΣ ΨΗΦΙΑΚΟΣ ΕΛΕΓΧΟΣ ΔΙΑΛΕΞΗ 4 ΔΙΑΦΑΝΕΙΑ 1

Uniform Convergence of Fourier Series Michael Taylor

On a four-dimensional hyperbolic manifold with finite volume

Nowhere-zero flows Let be a digraph, Abelian group. A Γ-circulation in is a mapping : such that, where, and : tail in X, head in

Commutative Monoids in Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets

Problem Set 3: Solutions

Section 8.3 Trigonometric Equations

Jesse Maassen and Mark Lundstrom Purdue University November 25, 2013

The challenges of non-stable predicates

derivation of the Laplacian from rectangular to spherical coordinates

SOLUTIONS TO MATH38181 EXTREME VALUES AND FINANCIAL RISK EXAM

Chapter 6: Systems of Linear Differential. be continuous functions on the interval

( ) 2 and compare to M.

3.4 SUM AND DIFFERENCE FORMULAS. NOTE: cos(α+β) cos α + cos β cos(α-β) cos α -cos β

Finite Field Problems: Solutions

ω ω ω ω ω ω+2 ω ω+2 + ω ω ω ω+2 + ω ω+1 ω ω+2 2 ω ω ω ω ω ω ω ω+1 ω ω2 ω ω2 + ω ω ω2 + ω ω ω ω2 + ω ω+1 ω ω2 + ω ω+1 + ω ω ω ω2 + ω

ΚΥΠΡΙΑΚΗ ΕΤΑΙΡΕΙΑ ΠΛΗΡΟΦΟΡΙΚΗΣ CYPRUS COMPUTER SOCIETY ΠΑΓΚΥΠΡΙΟΣ ΜΑΘΗΤΙΚΟΣ ΔΙΑΓΩΝΙΣΜΟΣ ΠΛΗΡΟΦΟΡΙΚΗΣ 19/5/2007

Approximation of distance between locations on earth given by latitude and longitude

( y) Partial Differential Equations

ST5224: Advanced Statistical Theory II

Space-Time Symmetries

Practice Exam 2. Conceptual Questions. 1. State a Basic identity and then verify it. (a) Identity: Solution: One identity is csc(θ) = 1

A Note on Intuitionistic Fuzzy. Equivalence Relation

6.3 Forecasting ARMA processes

New bounds for spherical two-distance sets and equiangular lines

Numerical Analysis FMN011

Generating Set of the Complete Semigroups of Binary Relations

Second Order RLC Filters

Areas and Lengths in Polar Coordinates

Solutions to Exercise Sheet 5

Inverse trigonometric functions & General Solution of Trigonometric Equations

Econ 2110: Fall 2008 Suggested Solutions to Problem Set 8 questions or comments to Dan Fetter 1

PROPERTIES OF CERTAIN INTEGRAL OPERATORS. a n z n (1.1)

Math221: HW# 1 solutions

CRASH COURSE IN PRECALCULUS

Fourier Series. MATH 211, Calculus II. J. Robert Buchanan. Spring Department of Mathematics

Lecture 2. Soundness and completeness of propositional logic

Solution Series 9. i=1 x i and i=1 x i.

ANSWERSHEET (TOPIC = DIFFERENTIAL CALCULUS) COLLECTION #2. h 0 h h 0 h h 0 ( ) g k = g 0 + g 1 + g g 2009 =?

b. Use the parametrization from (a) to compute the area of S a as S a ds. Be sure to substitute for ds!

Lecture 15 - Root System Axiomatics

Quadratic Expressions

SOLVING CUBICS AND QUARTICS BY RADICALS

Fractional Colorings and Zykov Products of graphs

The ε-pseudospectrum of a Matrix

= λ 1 1 e. = λ 1 =12. has the properties e 1. e 3,V(Y

Second Order Partial Differential Equations

CHAPTER 48 APPLICATIONS OF MATRICES AND DETERMINANTS

Exercises 10. Find a fundamental matrix of the given system of equations. Also find the fundamental matrix Φ(t) satisfying Φ(0) = I. 1.

Appendix S1 1. ( z) α βc. dβ β δ β

A General Note on δ-quasi Monotone and Increasing Sequence

Higher Derivative Gravity Theories

n=2 In the present paper, we introduce and investigate the following two more generalized

= {{D α, D α }, D α }. = [D α, 4iσ µ α α D α µ ] = 4iσ µ α α [Dα, D α ] µ.

SOLUTIONS TO MATH38181 EXTREME VALUES AND FINANCIAL RISK EXAM

12. Radon-Nikodym Theorem

Strain gauge and rosettes

2. Let H 1 and H 2 be Hilbert spaces and let T : H 1 H 2 be a bounded linear operator. Prove that [T (H 1 )] = N (T ). (6p)

Sequent Calculi for the Modal µ-calculus over S5. Luca Alberucci, University of Berne. Logic Colloquium Berne, July 4th 2008

g-selberg integrals MV Conjecture An A 2 Selberg integral Summary Long Live the King Ole Warnaar Department of Mathematics Long Live the King

On a Subclass of k-uniformly Convex Functions with Negative Coefficients

ENGR 691/692 Section 66 (Fall 06): Machine Learning Assigned: August 30 Homework 1: Bayesian Decision Theory (solutions) Due: September 13

Homomorphism in Intuitionistic Fuzzy Automata

On the Galois Group of Linear Difference-Differential Equations

5. Choice under Uncertainty

forms This gives Remark 1. How to remember the above formulas: Substituting these into the equation we obtain with

Homomorphism of Intuitionistic Fuzzy Groups

Orbital angular momentum and the spherical harmonics

Transcript:

A Note on Quantum Entanglement and PPT Shao-Ming Fei 1,2 and Xianqing Li-Jost 3 arxiv:0904.4766v1 [quant-ph] 30 Apr 2009 1 Department of Mathematics, Capital Normal University, Beijing 100037, P.R. China 2 Institut für Angewandte Mathematik, Universität Bonn, 53115 Bonn, Germany E-mail: fei@iam.uni-bonn.de 3 Max-Planck-Institute for Mathematics in the Sciences, 04103 Leipzig, Germany E-mail: Xianqing.Li-Jost@mis.mpg.de Abstract We study quantum states for which the PPT criterion is both sufficient and necessary for separability. We present a class of 3 3 bipartite mixed states and show that these states are separable if and only if they are PPT. Keywords: PPT, Entanglement, Separability PACS numbers: 03.65.Bz, 89.70.+c 1

1 Introduction Quantum entanglement has been recently the subject of much study as a potential resource for communication and information processing [1]. Thus characterization and quantification of entanglement become an important issue. Entanglement of formation (EOF) [2] and concurrence [3] are two well defined quantitative measures of quantum entanglement. For two-quibt systems it has been proved that EOF is a monotonically increasing function of the concurrence and an elegant formula for the concurrence was derived analytically by Wootters [4]. However with the increasing dimensions of the subsystems the computation of EOF and concurrence becomes formidably difficult. A few explicit analytic formulae for EOF and concurrence have been found only for some special symmetric states [5]. In fact if one only wants to know wether a state is separable or not, it is not necessary to compute the exact values of the measures for quantum entanglement. The estimation of lower bounds of entanglement measures can be just used to judge the separability of a quantum state [6]. There are also many separability criteria, e.g., PPT (positive partial transposition) criterion[7], realignment [8] and generalized realignment criteria[9], as well as some necessary and sufficient operational criteria for low rank density matrices [10]. Further more, separability criteria based on local uncertainty relation [11] and the correlation matrix [12] of the Bloch representation for a quantum state have been derived, which are strictly stronger than or independent of the PPT and realignment criteria. The PPT criterion is generally a necessary condition for separability. It becomes sufficient only for the cases 2 2 and 2 3 bipartite systems [13]. Other states of such property are the Schmidt-correlated (SC) states [14], which are the mixtures of pure states sharing the same Schmidt bases and naturally appear in a bipartite system dynamics with additive integrals of motion [15]. In this paper we consider another special class of 3 3 quantum mixed states. We show that for the states in this class, PPT is both necessary and sufficient for separability. 2

2 A class of quantum states and PPT We consider 3 3 quantum mixed states given by ρ = λ X >< X +λ X >< X +λ X >< X, (1) where λ+λ +λ = 1, 0 < λ,λ,λ < 1, X >, X >, X > are orthonormal vectors, X >= (α,0,0,0,β,0,0,0,γ) t, X >= (0,α,0,0,0,β,γ,0,0) t, X >= (0,0,α,β,0,0,0,γ,0) t, where α,β,γ,α,β,γ,α,β,γ are non-zero complex numbers, t stands for transposition. If we take the basis 1 >= (1,0,0) t, 2 >= (0,1,0) t, 3 >= (0,0,1) t, then X(α,β,γ) > X >= α 11 > +β 22 > +γ 33 >, X >= (I P) X(α,β,γ ) >, X >= (I 0 0 1 P 2 ) X(α,β,γ ) >, where P = 1 0 0 is the permutation operator. 0 1 0 Theorem: State ρ is separable if and only if it is PPT. (2) To prove the theorem we first note that after partial transposition ρ has the form ρ pt = λαα 0 0 0 0 λ α β 0 λ α γ 0 0 λ α α 0 λαβ 0 0 0 0 λ α γ 0 0 λ α α 0 λ α β 0 λαγ 0 0 0 λα β 0 λ β β 0 0 0 0 λ β γ 0 0 λ α β 0 λββ 0 λ β γ 0 0 λ α β 0 0 0 0 λ β β 0 λβγ 0 0 0 λα γ 0 λ β γ 0 λ γ γ 0 0 λ α γ 0 0 0 0 λβ γ 0 λ γ γ 0 0 λ α γ 0 λ β γ 0 0 0 0 λγγ. ρ pt is hermitian. The non-negativity of ρ pt, ρ pt 0, implies that < ψ ρ pt ψ > 0 for all vector ψ > H H, which is equivalent to the non-negativity of the following three 3 3 matrices: A 1 = λαα λ α β λ α γ λ α β λ β β λβγ λ α γ λβ γ λ γ γ, (3) 3

A 2 = λ α α λαβ λ α γ λα β λ β β λ β γ λ α γ λ β γ λγγ, (4) and A 3 = λ α α λ α β λαγ λ α β λββ λ β γ λα γ λ β γ λ γ γ. (5) The non-negativity of A 1 is equivalent to the following inequalities: λλ α 2 β 2 λ 2 α 2 β 2, (6) λλ α 2 γ 2 λ 2 α 2 γ 2, (7) λ λ β 2 γ 2 λ 2 γ 2 β 2 (8) and λλ λ α 2 β 2 γ 2 +2λλ λ Reα α β β γγ λ 3 α 2 β 2 γ 2 λ 3 α 2 β 2 γ 2 λ 3 α 2 β 2 γ 2 0. Similarly the non-negativity of A 2 and A 3 give rise to (9) λ λ α 2 β 2 λ 2 α 2 β 2, (10) λλ α 2 γ 2 λ 2 α 2 γ 2, (11) λλ γ 2 β 2 λ 2 γ 2 β 2, (12) and λλ λ α 2 β 2 γ 2 +2λλ λ Reαα β β γ γ λ 3 α 2 β 2 γ 2 λ 3 α 2 β 2 γ 2 λ 3 α 2 β 2 γ 2 0, (13) λλ α 2 β 2 λ 2 α 2 β 2, (14) λ λ α 2 γ 2 λ 2 α 2 γ 2, (15) λλ β 2 γ 2 λ 2 β 2 γ 2, (16) λλ λ α 2 β 2 γ 2 +2λλ λ Reα α β β γ γ λ 3 α 2 β 2 γ 2 λ 3 α 2 β 2 γ 2 λ 3 α 2 β 2 γ 2 0. (17) We can show that the inequalities (6)-(8), (10)-(12), (14)-(16) are equalities. In fact if (6) is an inequality, λλ α 2 β 2 > λ 2 α 2 β 2, then from(10) and (14), one would have, by 4

multiplyingλ α 2 onbothsides, λ α 2 λ 2 α 2 β 2 < λλ 2 α 2 α 2 β 2 λλ α 2 β 2 λ α 2 λ α 2 λ 2 α 2 β 2, which contradicts. Therefore (6)-(8), (10)-(12), (14)-(16) become λλ αβ = λ α β e iθ 1, λλ αγ = λ α γ e iθ 2, λ λ γ β = λγβe iθ 3 (18) λ λ α β = λαβe iθ 1, λλ α γ = λ α γ e iθ 2, λλ γβ = λ γ β e iθ 3 (19) λλ α β = λ α β e iθ 1, λ λ α γ = λαγe iθ 2, λλ γ β = λ γ β e iθ 3, (20) where all θ [ π,π]. From (18)-(20), (9), (13) and (17) become Re(α α β β γγ ) α 2 β 2 γ 2, (21) Re(αα β β γ γ ) α 2 β 2 γ 2, (22) Re(α α β β γ γ) α 2 β 2 γ 2. (23) Applying these 9 equalities one obtains also Similarly one has α α β β γγ α α β β γ γ = λ2 λ λ α β α γ β γ = α 2 β 2 γ 2. (24) αα β β γ γ α 2 β 2 γ 2, α α β β γ γ α 2 β 2 γ 2. (25) By using (18)-(20), we get Re(α α β β γγ ) = α α β β γγ = α 2 β 2 γ 2, (26) Re(αα β β γ γ ) = αα β β γ γ = α 2 β 2 γ 2, (27) Re(α α β β γ γ) = α α β β γ γ = α 2 β 2 γ 2. (28) From (26) and (27), we have While from (26) and (28), we have Therefore α β γ = α 2 β 2 γ 2 αβ γ α 2 β 2 γ = λ2 α 2 1 β 2 γ 2 λ λ = 1. 2 α 2 β 2 γ 2 ( α βγ αβ γ ) = 1. α β γ = αβ γ = α βγ 5

and, from (18)-(20), θ 1 = θ 2 = θ 3 θ,θ 1 = θ 2 = θ 3 θ,θ 1 = θ 2 = θ 3 θ. Now by using these PPT conditions of ρ we prove that ρ has a pure state decomposition ρ = l=3 ψ l >< ψ l such that all states ψ l >, l = 1,2,3, are separable. ψ l > can be generally expressed as ψ l >= 3 m U ml X m >= 3 ij a l ij ij > for some a l ij C under some basis ij >, where U ml are the entries of a 3 3 unitary matrix U, X 1 >= λ X >, X 2 >= λ X >, X 3 >= λ X >. We denote B l the 3 3 matrix with entries a l ij. Suppose the matrix U has the following form u 1 u 2 u 3 c 1 e iθ c 2 e iθ c 3 e iθ U = u 1 u 2 u 3 = c 1 c u 1 u 2 u eiθ 2 c eiθ 3 eiθ, (29) 3 c 1e iθ c 2e iθ c 3e iθ where according to the unitary condition of U, l=3 l=3 c l c l = c l=3 l c l = c l c l = 1, l=3 c l c l = 0, Then B l, l = 1,2,3, has the following form λαul λ α u l B l = λ β u l λβul λ γ u l λ γ u l l=3 λ α u l λ β u l λγul c l c l = 0, It is straightforward to verify that the matrix B l has rank one if l=3 c l c l = 0. (30). (31) c 2 l ei2θ = c l c l. (32) As 0 < rank(b l B + l ) rank(b l )rank(b + l ), if the rank of B l is one, matrix B l B + l has also rank one and ψ l > is separable. Therefore if we can find c l, c l, c l, l = 1,2,3, satisfying the unitary condition (30) and the rank one condition (32), then ρ = λ X >< X +λ X >< X + λ X >< X has separable pure state decomposition, ρ = l=3 ψ l >< ψ l and ρ is then separable if it is PPT. We show now that there exist such coefficients c i, c i, c i, i = 1,2,3, satisfying both the unitary condition and the rank-one condition. Set c l = 1 3 e iϕ l, c l = 1 3 e iϕ l, c l = 1 3 e iϕ l, l = 1,2,3, with ϕ l, ϕ l, ϕ l, l = 1,2,3, satisfying ϕ 1 ϕ 1 = ξ, ϕ 2 ϕ 2 = ξ + 2π 3, ϕ 3 ϕ 3 = ξ 2π 3, 6

ϕ 1 ϕ 1 = ξ + 2π 3, ϕ 2 ϕ 2 = ξ, ϕ 3 ϕ 3 = ξ 2π 3, for some real numbers ξ and ξ. Then the unitary conditions (30) are satisfied. The rank-one conditions require that 2ϕ l +ϕ l+ϕ l = 2θ, 2ϕ l+ϕ l +ϕ l = 2θ, 2ϕ l + ϕ l +ϕ l = 2θ, which can be realized by simply choosing ξ = 2 3 θ 2 3 θ, ξ = 2 3 θ 4 3 θ 2π 3. Therefore if state ρ is PPT, then it is separable. In fact due to that there is still freedom in choosing the parameters ϕ l, ϕ l, ϕ l, l = 1,2,3, there exist many separable pure state decompositions. 3 Conclusions and remarks We have studied a special kind of bipartite quantum mixed states. For this class of states, the PPT criterion is both sufficient and necessary for separability. Here the states we concerned are rank three ones on 3 3 bipartite systems. It has been shown that any bipartite entangled states of rank three are distillable [16], that is, there is no rank three bipartite bound entangled states. Therefore if the state ρ is not PPT, i.e. conditions λ λ = λ λ αβγ λλ α β γ = λ λλ α β γ are not satisfied, ρ must be not only entangled, but also distillable. This gives an example that a separable state could directly become a distillable state when some parameters varies continuously. There could be no bound entangled states between separable states and distillable states. Above all, with a similar construction of states (2), rank 2k+1 states on (2k + 1) (2k + 1), k IN, bipartite system can be obtained. Analogous investigations could be applied to get similar results. Acknowledgments This work is supported by the NSFC 10675086, NSFC 10875081, KZ200810028013 and NKBRPC (2004CB318000). References [1] Nielsen M A, Chuang I L. Quantum Computation and Quantum Information. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, (2000). 7

[2] C. H. Bennett, D. P. DiVincenzo and J. A. Smolin, et al. Phys. Rev. A 54, 3824(1996). M. B. Plenio and S. Virmani, Quant. Inf. Comp. 7, 1(2007). [3] A. Uhlmann Phys. Rev. A 62 032307(2000); P. Rungta, V. Bu zek, and C. M. Caves, et al. Phys. Rev. A 64, 042315(2001); S. Albeverio and S. M. Fei, J. Opt. B: Quantum Semiclass Opt, 3, 223-227(2001). [4] W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 2245 (1998). [5] Terhal B M, Vollbrecht K G H, Phys. Rev. Lett., 85, 2625-2628(2000); S.M. Fei, J. Jost, X.Q. Li-Jost and G.F. Wang, Phys. Lett. A 310, 333-338(2003); S.M. Fei and X.Q. Li-Jost, Rep. Math. Phys. 53, 195-210(2004); S.M. Fei, Z.X. Wang and H. Zhao, Phys. Lett. A 329, 414-419(2004); P. Rungta and C.M. Caves, Phys. Rev. A 67, 012307(2003). [6] K. Chen, S. Albeverio and S.M. Fei, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 040504(2005); K. Chen, S. Albeverio and S.M. Fei, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 210501(2005); X. H. Gao, S. M. Fei and K. Wu, Phys. Rev. A 74, 050303(R)(2007); J. I. de Vicente, Phys. Rev. A 75, 052320 (2007); C. J. Zhang, Y. X. Gong, Y. S. Zhang, and G. C. Guo, Phys. Rev. A 78, 042308(2008); H.P. Breuer, J. Phys. A 39, 11847(2006); E. Gerjuoy, Phys. Rev. A 67, 052308(2003); Y. C. Ou, H. Fan and S. M. Fei, Phys. Rev. A 78, 012311(2008). [7] A. Peres, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1413 (1996). [8] K. Chen and L. A. Wu, Quant. Inf. Comput. 3, 193 (2003); O. Rudolph, Phys. Rev. A 67, 032312 (2003); K. Chen and L. A. Wu, Phys. Lett. A 306, 14 (2002). [9] S. Albeverio, K. Chen and S. M. Fei, Phys. Rev. A 68, 062313 (2003). [10] P. Horodecki, M. Lewenstein, G. Vidal and I. Cirac, Phys. Rev. A 62, 032310 (2000); S. Albeverio, S. M. Fei and D. Goswami, Phys. Lett. A 286, 91 (2001); S. M. Fei, X. H. Gao, X. H. Wang, Z. X. Wang and K. Wu, Phys. Lett. A 300, 555 (2002). 8

[11] H. F. Hofmann and S. Takeuchi. Phys, Rev. A 68, 032103 (2003); O. Gühne, M. Mechler, G. Toth and P. Adam, Phys. Rev. A 74, 010301(R) (2006); O. Gühne, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 117903 (2004); O. Gühne, P. Hyllus, O. Gittsovich, and J. Eisert, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 130504 (2007). [12] J. I. de Vicente, Quantum Inf. Comput. 7, 624 (2007); A. S. M. Hassan and P. S. Joag, Quantum Inf. Comput. 8, 0773 (2008). [13] M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki and R. Horodecki, Phys. Lett. A 223, 1 (1996). [14] E.M. Rains, Phys. Rev. A 60, 179(1999). M.J. Zhao, S.M. Fei and Z.X. Wang, Phys. Lett. A 372, 2552(2008). [15] M. Khasin, R. Koslo, Phys. Rev. A 76, 012304(2007). [16] L. Chen and Y.X. Chen, Phys. Rev. A78, 022318(2008). 9