Interferometer Heisenberg limit
The shot noise limit 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,
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:
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
Note how the output is one of the Bell states. For three qubits, the circuit is
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.