HW 2 - Starting QC Calculations

2.18

Theorem

If ⟨u|=∑ibi⟨i| and |v⟩=∑iai|i⟩ then:

⟨u|v⟩=∑iaibi

\begin{proof}

⟨u|v⟩=(∑ibi⟨i|)(∑iai|i⟩)=∑i∑jbi⟨i|aj|j⟩=∑i∑jbiaj⟨i|j⟩=∑i∑jajbiχ(i=j)=∑iaibi

\end{proof}

3.5

Theorem

The Hamiltonian of a quantum state |ψ⟩=[1,2,1]∗ is given by H=[203010302]. Supposing, if we measure the quantum state in an arbitrary basis, which eigenvalue is the most probable? Also, calculate the expectation value of that state.

\begin{proof}
We find the eigenvalues of H. First, finding all the eigenstates implies finding all the eigenvectors for H:

p(λ)=(2−λ)(1−λ)(2−λ)−3(−3)=(2−λ)2(1−λ)+9=(4−4λ+λ2)(1−λ)+9=…λ1=5,λ2=−1,λ3=1

with corresponding e-vectors:

v1=(1,0,1),v2=(−1,0,1),v3=(0,1,0)

this is our eigenbasis. We need to compose |ψ⟩ out of these:

|ψ⟩=v1+0v2+2v3

Therefore, when we measure we'll (most likely) get λ3=1 since the number in front of v3 is the largest magnitude.

For expectation value, we just do:

⟨H^⟩=⟨ψ|H^|ψ⟩=(1,2,1)H(1,2,1)∗=(1,2,1)(5,2,5)∗=5+4+5=14

Note that if we had to do it with v1,v2 then we'd need to normalize, then find the expectation value.
\end{proof}

3.8

Theorem

The basis vectors for a qutrit are |0⟩,|1⟩,|2⟩. In matrix form, the basis states are defined as:

|0⟩=[100],|1⟩=[010],|2⟩=[001]

If the state of the system is defined as |ψ⟩=2|0⟩+3|1⟩+5|2⟩38, and the measurement operator [20003000−6], what are the possible measurements? What are their probabilities?

\begin{proof}
What helps is to find the eigenvalues λi and eigenvectors |ei⟩ for our measurement operator. Notice that it's a diagonal matrix, so we can shortcut and say that |0⟩,|1⟩,|2⟩ are the eigenstates, with corresponding eigenvalues of 2,3,−6 respectively. These are our measurements.

To get their probabilities, we just take the magnitude of each ket:

P(|0⟩)=|238|2≈10.53%P(|1⟩)=|338|2≈23.68%P(|2⟩)=|538|2≈65.79%

and the measurements would be the expectation values of |0⟩,|1⟩,|2⟩ respectively, which are λ1=2,λ2=3,λ3=−6 respectively.
\end{proof}

5.2

Theorem

The state of a three-qubit system is described as 123(|0⟩+|0⟩+|1⟩). Verify whether this is a valid quantum state. (Hint: the norm of a valid quantum state is 1.)

\begin{proof}
As the hint implies, we should make sure that |ψ⟩ is of unit length. As such:

|ψ⟩=2|0⟩+|1⟩23

Here, notice that if we just have the top part:

|ψ′⟩=2|0⟩+|1⟩→|ψ′⟩‖ψ′‖=|ψ′⟩22+12=|ψ′⟩5≠|ψ⟩

Notice that our |ψ⟩ is not the same size as our norm of the same vector |ψ′⟩, which point in the same direction while |ψ′⟩ is of unit length. As such, |ψ⟩ is not a valid quantum state.

Note

We can use this to show that HW 2 - Starting QC Calculations#^f307aa's |ψ⟩ is not a valid state there. However, the answer there is still correct, assuming a normalized |ψ⟩.

\end{proof}

5.3

Theorem

The state of a qubit is described by |ψ⟩=a|0⟩+b|1⟩, where a=13(1+i) and b=3.53(1+i). Check whether the wavefunction is normalized, and if it is, evaluate the probability of measuring the qubit in a state of |0⟩ or |1⟩.

\begin{proof}
We can determine the norm of the vector:

‖|ψ⟩‖=|a|2+|b|2=|13(1+i)|2+|3.53(1+i)|2=1922+3.5922=2+79=1

thus the norm is 1, so |ψ⟩ is correctly normalized. To evaluate the probability of measuring the qubit in a state of |0⟩ or |1⟩:

P(|0⟩)=|13(1+i)|2=29P(|1⟩)=|3.53(1+i)|2=79

Thus it is more likely to measure the qubit in a state of |1⟩ than |0⟩.
\end{proof}

5.4

Theorem

When we discussed global and relative phases, it became clear that |1⟩ and −|1⟩ are the same state, excepting up to a phase, which cannot be measured. Explain why the same argument does not hold good for the states 12(|0⟩+|1⟩) and 12(|0⟩−|1⟩).

\begin{proof}
Looking back at comparing |1⟩ and −|1⟩, the reason that these were the same state, barring phase, was that their probabilities are equivalent:

|⟨1|H^|−1⟩|2=H2

thus why we can't measure the 180 degree phase difference in their ai's. Furthermore, when we measure them, we can do so relative to an eigenbasis where |1⟩ is a basis vector, so the −1 factor still means that these |1⟩'s are relating to the same set of eigenvectors (as any eigenvector is a scalar multiple of some normed on, which |1⟩ and −|1⟩ are just scalar multiples of each other).

But for this new case, notice that the negative effect doesn't occur to the whole vector, just the |1⟩ part. If we had a flipped sign on |0⟩ then the same argument applies. To make sure this is correct, one can consider the evolution between states:

|[2−1/22−1/2]H^[2−1/2−2−1/2]|2≠H2

\end{proof}