On the classical character of control fields in quantum information processing

Quantum Information and Computation

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 1-13

  Van Enk, S J ^a   Kimble, H J ^b  

^a LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES   (United States)

^b CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Entanglement; Quantum information processing

Indexed keywords

ATOM LASERS; LASER BEAMS; QUANTUM COMMUNICATION; QUANTUM OPTICS; QUBITS;

ATOM-FIELD ENTANGLEMENT; ATOMIC QUBITS; AVERAGE NUMBERS; CONTROL FIELDS; ENTANGLEMENT; QUANTUM COMPUTING; QUANTUM STATE; QUANTUM-INFORMATION PROCESSING;

QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT;

EID: 0012041535     PISSN: 15337146     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. S.L. Braunstein and H-K. Lo, eds., Fortschritte der Physik 48, nr. 9-11, 2000. Special issue on experimental proposals for quantum computation.
2. D.J. Wineland et al., J. Res. Natl. Stand. Technol. 103, 259 (1998).
3. J.I. Cirac and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 4091 (1995).
4. A. Steane, Rep. Progr. Phys. 61, 117 (1998).
5. R.J. Hughes et al., Fortschr. d. Physik 46, 329 (1998).
6. J.P. Barnes and W.S. Warren, Phys. Rev. A 60, 4363 (1999).
7. J. Ye, D. W. Vernooy, and H. J. Kimble, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 4987 (1999).
8. T. Pellizzari, S.A. Gardiner, J.I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 3788 (1995).
9. S.J. van Enk, J.I. Cirac and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 5178 (1997); Science 279, 205 (1998).
10. S.J. van Enk, J.I. Cirac and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 5178 (1997); Science 279, 205 (1998).
11. H.J. Carmichael, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 2273 (1993); P. Kochan and H.J. Carmichael, Phys. Rev. A 50, 1700 (1994).
12. H.J. Carmichael, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 2273 (1993); P. Kochan and H.J. Carmichael, Phys. Rev. A 50, 1700 (1994).
13. S.J. van Enk and H.J. Kimble, Phys. Rev. A 63, 023809 (2001);
14. ibidem 61, 051802 (2000).
15. C.-H. Bennett, D.P. DiVincenzo, J.A. Smolin, and W.K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. A 54, 3824 (1996).
16. We are aware [14] of the issue raised by K. Mølmer in [15] that the quantum state of a laser is in fact not a coherent state, but rather a mixture of coherent states with random phases. However, as shown in [14], the distillable entanglement between atom and field is equal to the entanglement one would have if the quantum state of a laser field were a coherent state.
17. S.J. van Enk and C.A. Fuchs, quant-ph/0104036.
18. K. Mølmer, Phys. Rev. A 55, 3195 (1997); J. Mod. Optics 44, 1937 (1997).
19. K. Mølmer, Phys. Rev. A 55, 3195 (1997); J. Mod. Optics 44, 1937 (1997).
20. K.J. Blow, R. Loudon, S.J. Phoenix, and T.J. Shepherd, Phys. Rev. A 42, 4102 (1990).
21. S.J. Phoenix and P.L. Knight, Phys. Rev. A 44, 6023 (1990).
22. Quantum Optics, M.O. Scully and M.S. Zubairy, Cambridge University Press (1997).
23. H.C. Nägerl, Ch. Roos, D. Leibfried, H. Rohde, G. Thalhammer, J. Eschner, F. Schmidt-Kaler, and R. Blatt, Phys. Rev. A 61, 023405 (2000); ibidem 60, 145 (1999).
24. H.C. Nägerl, Ch. Roos, D. Leibfried, H. Rohde, G. Thalhammer, J. Eschner, F. Schmidt-Kaler, and R. Blatt, Phys. Rev. A 61, 023405 (2000); ibidem 60, 145 (1999).
25. -40Coul-m.
26. D.M. Meekhof, C. Monroe, B.E. King, W.M. Itano, and D.J. Wineland. Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 1796 (1996).
27. J. Preskill, quant-ph/9712048; D. Gottesman, quant-ph/9903099.