Qubits and angular momentum-like operators

In summary: The third spin-1/2 is simply the product of the first two spin-1/2s, so its angular momentum must be 1.
  • #1
lfqm
22
0
Hi guys, my quesion is quite simple but I think I need to give some background...
Let's suppose I have 3 qubits, so the basis of the space is:

[tex]\left\{{\left |{000}\right>,\left |{001}\right>,\left |{010}\right>,\left |{100}\right>,\left |{011}\right>,\left |{101}\right>,\left |{110}\right>,\left |{111}\right>}\right\}[/tex]

i.e. the dimesion is [tex]2^{3}=8[/tex]

I define the angular momentum-like operators:

[tex]J_{z}=\left [{\frac{1}{2}\left ({\left |{1}\right>\left <{1}\right|-\left |{0}\right>\left <{0}\right|}\right)\otimes I \otimes I}\right] + \left [{I \otimes \frac{1}{2}\left ({\left |{1}\right>\left <{1}\right|-\left |{0}\right>\left <{0}\right|}\right) \otimes I}\right] + \left [{I \otimes I \otimes \frac{1}{2}\left ({\left |{1}\right>\left <{1}\right|-\left |{0}\right>\left <{0}\right|}\right)}\right][/tex]
[tex]J_{+}=\left [{|1⟩⟨0|⊗I⊗I}\right]+\left [{I⊗|1⟩⟨0|⊗I}\right]+\left [{I⊗I⊗|1⟩⟨0|}\right][/tex]
[tex]J_{-}=\left [{|0⟩⟨1|⊗I⊗I}\right]+\left [{I⊗|0⟩⟨1|⊗I}\right]+\left [{I⊗I⊗|0⟩⟨1|}\right][/tex]
[tex]J^{2}=\frac{1}{2}\left ({J_{+}J_{-}+J_{-}J_{+}}\right)+J_{z}^{2}[/tex]


And get the right commutation relations:

[tex][J_{z},J_{\pm{}}]=\pm{}J_{\pm{}}[/tex]
[tex][J_{+},J_{-}]=2J_{z}[/tex]
[tex][J^{2},J_{z}]=0[/tex]

So I deduce [tex]J^{2}[/tex] and [tex]J_{z}[/tex] share a common set of eigenvectors [tex]\left\{{\left |{j,m}\right>}\right\}[/tex] where [tex]\left |{m}\right |\leq{j}\leq{\displaystyle\frac{3}{2}}[/tex]

But there are only 6 of this vectors:

[tex]\left\{{\left |{j=\frac{3}{2},m=\frac{3}{2}}\right>,\left |{j=\frac{3}{2},m=\frac{1}{2}}\right>,\left |{j=\frac{3}{2},m=-\frac{1}{2}}\right>,\left |{j=\frac{3}{2},m=-\frac{3}{2}}\right>,\left |{j=\frac{1}{2},m=\frac{1}{2}}\right>,\left |{j=\frac{1}{2},m=-\frac{1}{2}}\right>}\right\}[/tex]

So my question is, does the sharing set of eigenvectors between two commuting observables must be complete?

Why isn't complete in this example?
What are the other 2 missing common eigenvectors?

Thanks in advance! :smile:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Each qbit is like one spin 1/2, i.e., your 3-qbit space is the direct product of three spins 1/2.

Now you can use the angular-momentum-addition rules to reduce out the irreducible representations of the rotation group. Then you find
[tex]\frac{1}{2} \otimes \frac{1}{2} \otimes \frac{1}{2}=(0 \oplus 1) \otimes \frac{1}{2} = \frac{1}{2} \oplus \frac{1}{2} \oplus \frac{3}{2},[/tex]
i.e., except of the irreducible representation 3/2 you have two more spin-1/2 representations, which makes the correct dimension 4+2+2=8.
 
  • #3
I'm not really into representation theory, but as far as I understand, the only thing that I get from there is the multiplicity of the eigenvalues... Could you explain your answer using linear algebra?

I'm looking for the other two common eigenvectors.

Thank you
 
  • #4
lfqm said:
So I deduce [tex]J^{2}[/tex] and [tex]J_{z}[/tex] share a common set of eigenvectors [tex]\left\{{\left |{j,m}\right>}\right\}[/tex] where [tex]\left |{m}\right |\leq{j}\leq{\displaystyle\frac{3}{2}}[/tex]

But there are only 6 of this vectors:

...

So my question is, does the sharing set of eigenvectors between two commuting observables must be complete?

Why isn't complete in this example?
What are the other 2 missing common eigenvectors?

Thanks in advance! :smile:

In order to totally determine the state, you need a maximal set of commuting operators. Your analysis has basically told you that you haven't done this yet: j and m aren't sufficient to determine the state. Vanhees was trying to send you on the right track by suggesting you consider adding the three spins pairwise. His equation is written in group theory notation, but the idea is simple: adding two spin-1/2s result in a spin-0 (1 dimensional) and a spin-1 (3 dimensional). Then, you add the last spin-1/2 to both of these results. The spin-1/2 and spin-0 give you a spin-1/2 (2-dim). The spin-1/2 and spin-1 gives you both a spin-1/2 (2-dim) and spin-3/2 (4-dim). So 8-dimensional as required.

Now think about the above procedure. Clearly, enumerating the number of final states involved required knowing what the total angular momentum of the first two spin-1/2s is. We seem to have a commuting observable!
 

Related to Qubits and angular momentum-like operators

1. What is a qubit?

A qubit is a unit of quantum information that can exist in multiple states at the same time, unlike classical bits which can only exist in either a 0 or 1 state. Qubits are the building blocks of quantum computers and are typically represented by the superposition of two states, such as the spin of an electron or the polarization of a photon.

2. What is angular momentum in quantum mechanics?

Angular momentum is a physical quantity that describes the rotational motion of a particle or system. In quantum mechanics, it is represented by the operator L, which can be thought of as a mathematical representation of the physical measurement of angular momentum.

3. How are qubits and angular momentum related?

Qubits can be represented by angular momentum-like operators, such as the Pauli matrices or the spin operator. This is because the angular momentum of a particle, such as an electron, can be used to encode information in a quantum system.

4. What is the significance of angular momentum-like operators in quantum computing?

Angular momentum-like operators are crucial in quantum computing as they are used to manipulate and measure qubits. By applying these operators, quantum algorithms can be implemented to perform complex calculations and simulations that are not possible with classical computers.

5. How are angular momentum-like operators used in quantum error correction?

In quantum error correction, angular momentum-like operators are used to detect and correct errors that may occur in qubits during quantum computation. By measuring the angular momentum states of qubits, errors can be detected and corrected without disrupting the overall quantum computation process.

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
513
Replies
24
Views
683
Replies
2
Views
615
Replies
2
Views
230
Replies
3
Views
908
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
915
Replies
3
Views
861
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
4
Views
998
Back
Top