Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userTopological proofs of contextuality in quantum mechanics
67
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
We provide a cohomological framework for contextuality of quantum mechanics that is suited to describing contextuality as a resource in measurement-based quantum computation. This framework applies to the parity proofs first discussed by Mermin, as well as a different type of contextuality proofs based on symmetry transformations. The topological arguments presented can be used in the state-dependent and the state-independent case.
rate research
Read More
If a quantum system is prepared and later post-selected in certain states, paradoxical predictions for intermediate measurements can be obtained. This is the case both when the intermediate measurement is strong, i.e. a projective measurement with Luders-von Neumann update rule, or with weak measurements where they show up in anomalous weak values. Leifer and Spekkens [quant-ph/0412178] identified a striking class of such paradoxes, known as logical pre- and post-selection paradoxes, and showed that they are indirectly connected with contextuality. By analysing the measurement-disturbance required in models of these phenomena, we find that the strong measurement version of logical pre- and post-selection paradoxes actually constitute a direct manifestation of quantum contextuality. The proof hinges on under-appreciated features of the paradoxes. In particular, we show by example that it is not possible to prove contextuality without Luders-von Neumann updates for the intermediate measurements, nonorthogonal pre- and post-selection, and 0/1 probabilities for the intermediate measurements. Since one of us has recently shown that anomalous weak values are also a direct manifestation of contextuality [arXiv:1409.1535], we now know that this is true for both realizations of logical pre- and post-selection paradoxes.
A central result in the foundations of quantum mechanics is the Kochen-Specker theorem. In short, it states that quantum mechanics is in conflict with classical models in which the result of a measurement does not depend on which other compatible measurements are jointly performed. Here, compatible measurements are those that can be performed simultaneously or in any order without disturbance. This conflict is generically called quantum contextuality. In this article, we present an introduction to this subject and its current status. We review several proofs of the Kochen-Specker theorem and different notions of contextuality. We explain how to experimentally test some of these notions and discuss connections between contextuality and nonlocality or graph theory. Finally, we review some applications of contextuality in quantum information processing.
The notion of contextuality, which emerges from a theorem established by Simon Kochen and Ernst Specker (1960-1967) and by John Bell (1964-1966), is certainly one of the most fundamental aspects of quantum weirdness. If it is a questioning on scholastic philosophy and a study of contrafactual logic that led Specker to his demonstration with Kochen, it was a criticism of von Neumanns proof that led John Bell to the result. A misinterpretation of this famous proof will lead them to diametrically opposite conclusions. Over the last decades, remarkable theoretical progresses have been made on the subject in the context of the study of quantum foundations and quantum information. Thus, the graphic generalizations of Cabello-Severini-Winter and Acin-Fritz-Leverrier-Sainz raise the question of the connection between non-locality and contextuality. It is also the case of the sheaf-theoretic approach of Samson Abramsky et al., which also invites us to compare contextuality with the logical structure of certain classical logical paradoxes. Another approach, initiated by Robert Spekkens, generalizes the concept to any type of experimental procedure. This new form of universal contextuality has been raised as a criterion of non-classicality, i.e. of weirdness. It notably led to identify the nature of curious quantum paradoxes involving post-selections and weak measurements. In the light of the fiftieth anniversary of the publication of the Kochen-Specker theorem, this report aims to introduce these results little known to the French scientific public, in the context of an investigation on the nature of the weirdness of quantum physics.
In quantum physics the term `contextual can be used in more than one way. One usage, here called `Bell contextual since the idea goes back to Bell, is that if $A$, $B$ and $C$ are three quantum observables, with $A$ compatible (i.e., commuting) with $B$ and also with $C$, whereas $B$ and $C$ are incompatible, a measurement of $A$ might yield a different result (indicating that quantum mechanics is contextual) depending upon whether $A$ is measured along with $B$ (the ${A,B}$ context) or with $C$ (the ${A,C}$ context). An analysis of what projective quantum measurements measure shows that quantum theory is Bell noncontextual: the outcome of a particular $A$ measurement when $A$ is measured along with $B$ would have been exactly the same if $A$ had, instead, been measured along with $C$. A different definition, here called `globally (non)contextual refers to whether or not there is (noncontextual) or is not (contextual) a single joint probability distribution that simultaneously assigns probabilities in a consistent manner to the outcomes of measurements of a certain collection of observables, not all of which are compatible. A simple example shows that such a joint probability distribution can exist even in a situation where the measurement probabilities cannot refer to properties of a quantum system, and hence lack physical significance, even though mathematically well-defined. It is noted that the quantum sample space, a projective decomposition of the identity, required for interpreting measurements of incompatible properties in different runs of an experiment using different types of apparatus has a tensor product structure, a fact sometimes overlooked.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
