Proposal for production and detection of entangled electron-hole pairs in a degenerate electron gas

Physical Review Letters

Volumn 91, Issue 14, 2003, Pages

  Beenakker, C W J ^a   Emary, C ^a   Kindermann, M ^a   van Velsen, J L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITEIT LEIDEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COULOMB BLOCKADE; ELECTRON TRANSPORT PROPERTIES; ELECTRON TUNNELING; FERMI LEVEL; HALL EFFECT; HOLE MOBILITY; MATHEMATICAL TRANSFORMATIONS; QUANTUM THEORY; SHOT NOISE; SUPERCONDUCTING MATERIALS;

BELL INEQUALITY; COULOMB INTERACTION; DEGENERATE ELECTRON GAS; ELECTRON-ELECTRON INTERACTIONS; ELECTRON-HOLE PAIRS; INTEGER QUANTUM HALL EFFECT; LANDAU LEVEL;

ELECTRON GAS;

EID: 0242425256     PISSN: 00319007     EISSN: 10797114     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.91.147901     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. B.M. Terhal, M.M. Wolf, and A.C. Doherty, Phys. Today 56, No.�4, 46 (2003).
2. A. Aspect, P. Grangier, and G. Roger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 460 (1981).10.1103/PhysRevLett.47.460
3. Two recent reviews are T.�Martin, A.�Crepieux, and N.�Chtchelkatchev, in Quantum Noise in Mesoscopic Physics, edited by Yu. V. Nazarov, NATO Science Series II, Vol.�97 (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 2003), p.�313;
4. J.C. Egues, P.�Recher, D.S. Saraga, V.N. Golovach, G.�Burkard, E.V. Sukhorukov, and D.�Loss, Quantum Noise in Mesoscopic Physics, p.�241.
5. G.�Burkard, D.�Loss, and E.V. Sukhorukov, Phys. Rev. B 61, R16?303 (2000); 10.1103/PhysRevB.61.R16303
6. D.�Loss and E.V. Sukhorukov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 1035 (2000).10.1103/PhysRevLett.84.1035
7. W.D. Oliver, F.�Yamaguchi, and Y.�Yamamoto, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 037901 (2002).10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.037901
8. D.S. Saraga and D. Loss, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 166803 (2003).10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.166803
9. G.B. Lesovik, T.�Martin, and G.�Blatter, Eur. Phys. J. B 24, 287 (2001).10.1007/s10051-001-8675-4
10. P.�Recher, E.V. Sukhorukov, and D.�Loss, Phys. Rev. B 63, 165314 (2001); 10.1103/PhysRevB.63.165314
11. P. Recher and D. Loss, Phys. Rev. B 65, 165327 (2002).10.1103/PhysRevB.65.165327
12. C. Bena, S. Vishveshwara, L. Balents, and M.P.A. Fisher, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 037901 (2002).10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.037901
13. V.�Bouchiat, N.�Chtchelkatchev, D.�Feinberg, G.B. Lesovik, T.�Martin, and J.�Torrès, Nanotechnology 14, 77 (2003).10.1088/0957-4484/14/1/318
14. A.T. Costa, Jr. and S. Bose, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 277901 (2001).10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.277901
15. P. Samuelsson, E.V. Sukhorukov, and M. Büttiker, cond-mat/0303531.
16. E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and G.J. Milburn, Nature (London) 409, 46 (2001).10.1038/35051009
17. S. Scheel and D.-G. Welsch, Phys. Rev. A 64, 063811 (2001).10.1103/PhysRevA.64.063811
18. M.S. Kim, W.�Son, V.�Bužek, and P.L. Knight, Phys. Rev. A 65, 032323 (2002).10.1103/PhysRevA.65.032323
19. W. Xiang-bin, Phys. Rev. A 66, 024303 (2002).10.1103/PhysRevA.66.024303
20. S. Bose and D. Home, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 050401 (2002).10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.050401
21. N.M. Chtchelkatchev, G.�Blatter, G.B. Lesovik, and T.�Martin, Phys. Rev. B10.1103/PhysRevB.66.161320 66, 161320(R) (2002).
22. C.W.J. Beenakker and H.�van�Houten, Solid State Phys. 44, 1 (1991).
23. M. Henny, S. Oberholzer, C. Strunk, T. Heinzel, K. Ensslin, M. Holland, and C. Schönenberger, Science 284, 296 (1999).10.1126/science.284.5412.296
24. B.J. van Wees, E.M.M. Willems, C.J.P.M. Harmans, C.W.J. Beenakker, H.�van�Houten, J.G. Williamson, C.T. Foxon, and J.J. Harris, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 1181 (1989).10.1103/PhysRevLett.62.1181
25. S. Kawabata, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 70, 1210 (2001).
26. W.K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 2245 (1998).10.1103/PhysRevLett.80.2245
27. J.S. Bell, Physics (Long Island City, N.Y.) 1, 195 (1964);
28. J.F. Clauser, M.A. Horne, A.�Shimony, and R.A. Holt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 23, 880 (1969).10.1103/PhysRevLett.23.880
29. Violation of the Bell inequality is a necessary and sufficient condition for entanglement of a pure state, such as (Formula presented). For a mixed state (such as resulting from dephasing) the condition is sufficient but not necessary; cf.�R.F. Werner, Phys. Rev. A 40, 4277 (1989); 10.1103/PhysRevA.40.4277
30. R.A. Bertlmann, H.�Narnhofer, and W.�Thirring, Phys. Rev. A 66, 032319 (2002).10.1103/PhysRevA.66.032319
31. G.B. Lesovik, JETP Lett.JTPLA2 49, 592 (1989);
32. M.�Büttiker, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 2901 (1990).10.1103/PhysRevLett.65.2901
33. S. Popescu and D. Rohrlich, Phys. Lett. A 166, 293 (1992).
34. N. Gisin, Phys. Lett. A 154, 201 (1991).10.1016/0375-9601(91)90805-I
35. One source of dephasing (pointed out to us by P.G. Silvestrov) is the finite energy range (Formula presented) of the entangled edge channels. Referring to Fig.� 1, consider the area (Formula presented) between the two equipotentials starting at (Formula presented), through (Formula presented), and ending at (Formula presented). This enclosed area varies by (Formula presented) when the energy of the equipotentials varies by (Formula presented). Dephasing results if (Formula presented). The ratio (Formula presented) depends on the gradient of the electric field (Formula presented) near the edge. For (Formula presented), (Formula presented), one would need (Formula presented) to avoid dephasing by energy averaging.
36. J.L. van Velsen, M.�Kindermann, and C.W.J. Beenakker, cond-mat/0307198.