1 / 25

Exploring Non-Locality in Quantum Communication: Insights from the EPR Paradox

This research delves into the EPR paradox, a concept introduced by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen, to illuminate the phenomenon of non-locality in quantum systems. We investigate the implications of the EPR setup in the context of distributed sampling problems, highlighting the necessity and sufficiency of classical communication in achieving joint distributions. Results demonstrate that a single bit of communication suffices to address intricate computational tasks, challenging previous lower bounds and fostering further understanding of quantum mechanics and communication theory.

kert
Télécharger la présentation

Exploring Non-Locality in Quantum Communication: Insights from the EPR Paradox

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Communication equivalent of non-locality Mario Szegedy, Rutgers University Grant: NSF 0523866 Emerging Technotogies (joint work with Jérémie Roland)

  2. EPR paradox (Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen) e

  3. EPR paradox (Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen) e e |00 + |11 √2

  4. EPR paradox (Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen) e e |00 + |11 √2

  5. 0 1 EPR paradox (Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen) Measurement in the standard basis e

  6. EPR paradox (Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen) e |0

  7. 0 1 EPR paradox (Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen) Measurement in a rotated basis e e

  8. EPR paradox (Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen) e |0 + |1 √2

  9. General EPR experiment b a ψ

  10. 0 1 0 1 EPR experiment a ψ b

  11. 0 1 0 1 EPR experiment A B

  12. EPR experiment b a A B Joint distribution of A and B: P(A,B|a,b) = (1 – A∙B a.b) / 4

  13. Distributed Sampling Problem Random string b a λ

  14. Distributed Sampling Problem Random string b a λ Computational task B(b, λ) A(a, λ) Given distribution D(A,B|a,b), design λ, A, B s.t. P(A(a, λ), B(b, λ) | a,b) = D(A,B|a,b)

  15. Distributed Sampling Problem Random string b a λ EPR paradox B(b, λ) A(a, λ) There is no distribution λ, and functions A and B for which the DSP would give the joint distribution (1 – A∙B a.b) / 4

  16. Additional resources are needed such as: • Classical communication (Maudlin) or • Post selection (Gisin and Gisin) or • Non-local box (N. J. Cerf, N. Gisin, S. Massar, and S. Popescu)

  17. Classical communication avg max year

  18. Our result One bit of communication on average is not only sufficient, but also necessary Previous best lower bound of √2-1 = 0.4142 by Pironio

  19. New Bell inequality ∫∫S( δθ(a,b)+2δ0(a,b)- 2δπ(a,b) ) E(A,B|a,b) da db ≤ 5- θ/π δθ(a,b) = ∫∫Sδθ(a,b) da db= 1. ∞, if angle(a,b)= θ 0, if angle(a,b)= θ

  20. Isoperimetric inequality For every odd 1,-1 valued function on the sphere ∫∫Sδθ(a,b)A(a) A(b) da db ≤ 1- θ/π Note (for what function is the extreme value taken?): 1- θ/π = ∫∫Sδθ(a,b)H(a) H(b) da db. Here H is the function that takes 1 on the Northern Hemisphere and -1 on the Southern Hemisphere.

  21. Product Theorems for Semidefinite Programs By Rajat Mittal and Mario Szegedy, Rutgers University Presented by Mario Szegedy

  22. Product of general semidefinite programs Π = (J,A,b); Π’= (J’,A’,b’). ΠΠ’= (J J’, AA’, b b’),

  23. Main Problem Under what condition on Π and Π’ does it hold that ω(ΠΠ’)= ω(Π) x ω(Π’)?

  24. Positivity of the objective matrices Theorem: J, J’ ≥ 0→ω(ΠΠ’)= ω(Π) x ω(Π’)

More Related