Bell-inequality test for spatial-mode entanglement of a single massive particle

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 80, Issue 3, 2009, Pages

  Heaney, Libby ^a,b   Anders, Janet ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^b NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE   (Singapore)

^c UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BELL INEQUALITIES; EXPERIMENTAL SCHEME; MASSIVE PARTICLES; MODE ENTANGLEMENT; NONLOCAL; NONLOCAL CORRELATIONS; NONLOCALITIES; PARTICLE ENTANGLEMENT; PARTICLE NUMBERS; SECOND QUANTIZATION; SPATIAL-MODE ENTANGLEMENT; SUPERSELECTION;

ELECTRON TRANSITIONS;

BELLS;

EID: 69949144677     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.80.032104     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000).
2. A. Aspect, J. Dalibard, and G. Roger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 1804 (1982). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.49.1804
3. J. Anders, Phys. Rev. A 77, 062102 (2008). 10.1103/PhysRevA.77.062102
4. V. Vedral, Cent. Eur. J. Phys. 1, 289 (2003). 10.2478/BF02476298
5. C. Simon, Phys. Rev. A 66, 052323 (2002). 10.1103/PhysRevA.66.052323
6. J. Anders, D. Kaszlikowski, Ch. Lunkes, T. Ohshima, and V. Vedral, New J. Phys. 8, 140 (2006) 10.1088/1367-2630/8/8/140
7. L. Heaney, e-print arXiv:0711.0942.
8. S. Ashhab, K. Maruyama, and F. Nori, Phys. Rev. A 75, 022108 (2007) 10.1103/PhysRevA.75.022108
9. S. Ashhab, K. Maruyama, and F. Nori, Phys. Rev. A 76, 052113 (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevA.76.052113
10. L. Heaney, J. Anders, D. Kaszlikowski, and V. Vedral, Phys. Rev. A 76, 053605 (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevA.76.053605
11. J. Goold, L. Heaney, Th. Busch, and V. Vedral, Phys. Rev. A 80, 022338 (2009). 10.1103/PhysRevA.80.022338
12. A. G. Sykes, D. M. Gangardt, M. J. Davis, K. Viering, M. G. Raizen, and K. V. Kheruntsyan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 160406 (2008). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100. 160406
13. D. M. Greenberger, M. A. Horne, and A. Zeilinger, in Quantum Interferometry, edited by, F. DeMartini, (Wiley-VCH, 1996).
14. S. M. Tan, D. F. Walls, and M. J. Collett, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 252 (1991). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.66.252
15. B. Hessmo, P. Usachev, H. Heydari, and G. BjÃrk, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 180401 (2004). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.180401
16. L. Heaney and V. Vedral, e-print arXiv:0907.5404.
17. J. S. Bell, Physics 1, 195 (1964).
18. J. F. Clauser, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony, and R. A. Holt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 23, 880 (1969). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.23.880
19. R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and M. Horodecki, Phys. Lett. A 200, 340 (1995). 10.1016/0375-9601(95)00214-N
20. W. Tittel, J. Brendel, H. Zbinden, and N. Gisin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 3563 (1998) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.81.3563
21. M. A. Rowe, D. Kielpinski, V. Meyer, C. A. Sackett, W. M. Itano, C. Monroe, and D. J. Wineland, Nature (London) 409, 791 (2001). 10.1038/35057215
22. G. C. Wick, A. S. Wightman, and E. P. Wigner, Phys. Rev. 88, 101 (1952) 10.1103/PhysRev.88.101
23. D. Giulini, E. Joos, C. Kiefer, J. Kupsch, I.-O. Stamatescu, and H. D. Zeh, Decoherence and the Appearance of the Classical World in Quantum Theory (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1996).
24. S. D. Bartlett, T. Rudolph, and R. W. Spekkens, Rev. Mod. Phys. 79, 555 (2007). 10.1103/RevModPhys.79.555
25. Y. Aharonov and L. Susskind, Phys. Rev. 155, 1428 (1967). 10.1103/PhysRev.155.1428
26. R. Mirman, Phys. Rev. 186, 1380 (1969). 10.1103/PhysRev.186.1380
27. M. R. Dowling, S. D. Bartlett, T. Rudolph, and R. W. Spekkens, Phys. Rev. A 74, 052113 (2006). 10.1103/PhysRevA.74.052113
28. M. Zukowski, A. Zeilinger, M. A. Horne, and A. K. Ekert Phys. Rev. Lett. 71 4287 (1993) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.71.4287
29. A. Gerber and J. J. M. Franse, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 1895 (1993). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.71.1895
30. A. Recati, P. O. Fedichev, W. Zwerger, J. von Delft, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 040404 (2005). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.040404
31. Let us note that the full clicking pattern of the detectors builds up a tomography of the state that would, under the assumption of a correct theoretical model, allow the exact mathematical characterization of its entanglement.
32. Two other loopholes are the detection and the locality loophole. The detection loophole can be excluded when efficient single atom detection is guaranteed. Locality demands that the two arms of the setup are separated by distances great enough to avoid communication during the measurement, which is, at present, not possible with massive particles.
33. J. Cooper and J. Dunnigham, New J. Phys. 10, 113024 (2008). 10.1088/1367-2630/10/11/113024
34. W. Son, J. Lee, and M. S. Kim, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 060406 (2006). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.060406
35. S.-W. Lee and D. Jaksch, Phys. Rev. A 80, 010103 (R) (2009). 10.1103/PhysRevA.80.010103
36. F. Laloà and W. J. Mullin, Phys. Rev. A 77, 022108 (2008). 10.1103/PhysRevA.77.022108
37. D. Cassettari, B. Hessmo, R. Folman, T. Maier, and J. Schmiedmayer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 5483 (2000) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.5483
38. D. Cassettari, A. Chenet, R. Folman, A. Haase, B. Hessmo, P. Krüger, T. Maier, S. Schneider, T. Calarco, and J. Schmiedmayer, Appl. Phys. B: Lasers Opt. 70, 721 (2000). 10.1007/s003400050886
39. J. Fortagh and C. Zimmermann, Rev. Mod. Phys. 79, 235 (2007). 10.1103/RevModPhys.79.235