Interferometer Heisenberg limit

From amowiki
Revision as of 15:25, 18 March 2007 by imported>Ichuang (New page: <section begin=content /> The shot noise limit we have just seen, however, is not fundamental. Here is a simple argument that something better should be possible. Recall that the desired ...)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

<section begin=content />

The shot noise limit we have just seen, however, is not fundamental. Here is a simple argument that something better should be possible. Recall that the desired signal at the output of our Mach-Zehnder interferometer is , and the noise is . If the inputs have and , and if were zero, then the measured signal would be . And at the balanced operating point ,

Thus, if the smallest photon number change resolvable is , then , from which it follows that

This is known as the "Heisenberg limit" on interferometry. There are some general proofs in the literature that such a limit is the best possible on interferometry. It governs more than just measurements of phase shifters; gyroscopes, mass measurements, and displacement measurements all use interferometers, and obey a Heisenberg limit. The argument above only outlines a sketch for why might be an achievable limt, versus ; it assumes that the noise can be made zero, however, and does not provide a means for accomplishing this in practice. Many ways to reach the Heisenberg limit in interferometry are now known. Given the basic structure of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer,

Chapter2-quantum-light-part-5-interferometry-l7-generic-mzi.png

\noindent one can consider changing the input state , changing the beamsplitters, or changing the measurement. Common to all of these approaches is the use of entangled states. How entanglement makes Heisenber-limited interferometry possible can be demonstrated by the following setup. Let us replace the beamsplitters in the Mach-Zehnder interferometer with entangling and dis-entangling devices:

Chapter2-quantum-light-part-5-interferometry-l7-entangled-mzi.png

\noindent Conceptually, the unusual beamsplitters may be the nonlinear Mach-Zehnder interferometers we discussed in Section~2.3. They may also be described by simple quantum circuits, using the Hadamard and controlled-{\sc not} gate; for two qubits, the circuit is

Chapter2-quantum-light-part-5-interferometry-l7-entangler1.png

\noindent Note how the output is one of the Bell states. For three qubits, the circuit is

Chapter2-quantum-light-part-5-interferometry-l7-entangler2.png

\noindent This output state, (suppressing normalization) is known as a GHZ (Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger) state. Straightforward generalization leads to larger "Schrodinger cat" states , using one Hadamard gate and controlled-{\sc not} gates. Note that the reversed circuit unentangles the cat states to produce computational basis states. The important feature of such -qubit cat states, for our purpose, is how they are transformed by phase shifters. A single qubit becomes . Similarly, two entangled qubits in the state , when sent through two phase shifters, becomes , since the phases add. And qubits in the state sent through phase shifters becomes . When such a phase shifted state is un-entangled, using the reverse of the entangling circuit, the controlled-{\sc not} gates leave the state , where the last qubits are left in , and the first qubit (the qubit used as the control for the {\sc cnot} gates) is

Compare this state with that obtained from the single qubit interferometer, Eq.(\ref{eq:l7-1qubitphase}); instead of a phase , the qubit now carries the phase . This means that the probability of measuring a single photon at the output becomes

The standard deviation, from repeating this experiment, on average, would be

Using , we obtain for the uncertainty in ,

which meets the Heisenberg limit.

<section end=content />