Arxiv:1601.03238V3 [Quant-Ph]

Home , Coherence (physics)

arXiv:1601.03238v3 [quant-ph] 7 Jun 2016 † ∗ fqatmchrne trcie nraigatninunt attention increasing importance received fundamental it Baumgratz the coherence, Despite quantum pro- of information 20]. quantum [19, experi- various tasks optics as cessing quantum well in as resource [15–18], physical ments a as coheren regarded en- correlation, is to quantum Analogous discord-type fun [14]. and key tanglement the physics quantum of of one aspects is damental principle, superposition state quantum U the of bath. effect th thermal the from ruh to degradation due observers a noninertial of from viewpoint suffer cor nonlocality, quantum and discord-type quantu relation of entanglement, quantity as the that such found resources, been accelerated has an It in [3–13]. systems quantum setting on influ effect the Unruh considered t the of authors of ence of acceleration number proper a th the Recently, of to observer. concept proportional temperature the is the that bath and reveals thermal observer-dependent effect is Unruh particle The of bath. thermal Minkowski fields a which quantum in of as 2], observer vacuum Minkowski accelerated [1, the effect uniformly observes spacetime Unruh a that the us is tells QFT im- and An in QFT. (QFT) the prediction on theory portant based field made been quantum have predictions to several birth gave relativity gen- with the eral mechanics bridge quantum to Reconciling forward them. early put between the gap been have Since effort physics. much century, modern 20th of fundamentals two are ory lcrncades [email protected] address: Electronic lcrncades [email protected] address: Electronic nteohrhn,qatmchrne rsn rmthe from arising coherence, quantum hand, other the On the- relativity and mechanics quantum that known well is It t al. et. ASnmes 46.v 37.k 62.f 05.30.Jp 06.20.-f, 03.70.+k, 04.62.+v, numbers: PACS accessibl more are resources tasks. quantum r type more coherence is the coherence and quantum Therefore, infl the acceleration. under large entanglement than better accele is finite coherence a quantum for zero to ze reduce approaches could coherence entanglement quantum quantum that un shown irreversible is It is radiation. state n quantum have detectors detectors’ the of tha (ii) decoherence find or We state, incoherence setting. a relativistic as a prepared in frozen be can coherence esuytednmc fqatmchrneudrUrhtherm Unruh under coherence quantum of dynamics the study We reesbedgaaino unu oeec ne relat under coherence quantum of degradation Irreversible .INTRODUCTION. I. oto fMnsr fEuain ua omlUniversity, Normal Hunan Education, of Ministry of Control nrdcdargru rmwr o the for framework rigorous a introduced 3 nttt fTertclPyis nvriyo asw Pa Warsaw, of University Physics, Theoretical of Institute 1 eateto hsc,ClaoaieInvto etrfo Center Innovation Collaborative Physics, of Department n e aoaoyo o iesoa unu Structuresan Quantum Dimensional Low of Laboratory Key and nttt fPyisCieeAaeyo cecs Beijing Sciences, of Academy Physics,Chinese of Institute ic Wang, Jieci 2 ejn ainlLbrtr o odne atrPhysics, Matter Condensed for Laboratory National Beijing ,2, 1, ∗ eu Tian, Zehua he ce n- m il e e - - - 3 iin Jing, Jiliang neato ihteetra ed hti osy the say, to is That field. external the with interaction o eety Streltsov Recently, esbeta nageetfrrltvsi unu infor tasks. quantum processing relativistic tion ac- for more entanglement are than resources cessible quantum type coherence and decoherence the be Unruh therefore to Unruh under found entanglement of is than effect coherence robust the quantum more to addition, due In can acceleration noise. coherence any thermal quantum for the frozen that be find not We me is quantum and 25]. treated is [10, line freedom chanically world of degree classical internal a its because possesses it that sense eitdtcosadteeouino rprdsaei the in state prepared a of evolution the Unruh and entangled detectors the Dewitt of description information quantum the uha h eaieetoyo oeec n the and coherence of quantifiers, entropy relative several the as proposed such and coherence of measurement fethsas ensuid h eetris detector The studied. Unruh the been of also influence has the effect under [13] metrology detect quantum entangled for of advantage The hav detectors recently. discussed entangled been two of [12] nonlocality quantum [ and correlations suc quantum aspects, discord-type [10], resource wit entanglement quantum interacts as The and field. acceleration scalar de- massless constant Bob’s the a while with stationary moves remains i tector detector and Alice’s off that switched assume We always wit fields. locally interact scalar to neighbor designed atoms the are and semiclassical gap two-level energy fixed by with modeled accelerated are is detectors them The of one when [25] detectors Unruh-Dewitt 24]. [23, sys- conditions open dynamical some an under of frozen coherence be the can that Most tem found monotone. been coherence has coherence for it of recently, candidate norm promising trace a the is while [22] coherence of requirem monotonicity measure the a satisfy as not en- does fidelity to the converted that Shao be [21]. can operations basis incoherent via reference tanglement some to respect with e h nuneo hra os nue yUnruh by induced noise thermal of influence the der ool ntelmto nifiieaclrto,while acceleration, infinite an of limit the in only ro h rzncniini ihr()teiiilsaeis state initial the (i) either is condition frozen the t bs hnetnlmn na ceeaigsystem accelerating an in entanglement than obust ec fteao-editrcinfra extremely an for interaction atom-field the of uence ain ti lodmntae htterbsns of robustness the that demonstrated also is It ration. h uln fteppri sflos nSc Iw discuss we II Sec. In follows. as is paper the of outline The nti ae esuyqatmchrnebtenapi of pair a between coherence quantum study we paper this In o eaiitcqatmifrainprocessing information quantum relativistic for e lnieadse ne hc odto the condition which under seek and noise al tua5 203Wra,Poland Warsaw, 02-093 5, steura 1, hnsa ua 101 China 410081, Hunan Changsha, † n egFan Heng and unu Effects, Quantum r 010 China 100190, t al. et. Quantum d on htaydge fcoherence of degree any that found vsi motion ivistic 2 classical l t al. et. 1 om[20]. norm quantum proved nthe in 11], ma- ors ent h h h e s - - . 2 case of only one detector with relativistic motion. In Sec. III, where we recall the common conditions that any coherence quan- tifier should satisfy and introduce a few coherence measure- φ(f) d4x√ gχ(x)f ments. In Sec. IV, we study the dynamics of quantum coher- ≡ Z − † ence under Unruh thermal noise and seek the conditions for = i[aRI (uEf) aRI (uEf)], (5) the frozen of quantum coherence. The conclusion are given in − the last section. is a field operator which describes the distribution of the external scalar field [10, 27]. In Eq. (5), f ǫ(t)e−iΩtχ(x) is a compact support complex function defined≡ in the Minkowski † II. EVOLUTION OF THE DETECTORS' STATE UNDER spacetime, and aRI (u) and aRI (u) are the annihilation and RELATIVISTIC MOTION creation operators of u modes [10–13, 27], respectively. In addition, u is an operator that takes the positive frequency part We consider two observers, Alice and Bob, where each of the solutions of the Klein-Gordon equation in Rinlder met- of them possesses a Unruh-Dewitt detector [25] modeling ric [10, 27], and E is the difference between the advanced and through a two-level non-interacting atom [10–12]. The atom retarded Green functions. carried by Alice keeps static and Rob’s detector moves with By inserting the initial state Eq. (1) into Eq. (4), we ob- uniform acceleration a for a time duration ∆. Then we let tain the final state of the total system in terms of the Rindler † Alice’s detector always be switched off and the one holed by operators aRI and aRI , which is given by Rob is switched on when it moves with constant acceleration. ARφ ARφ † The world line of Rob’s detector is Ψ = Ψ 0 + sin θ 0A 0R (a (λ) 0M ) | t i | t i | i| i⊗ RI | i −1 −1 + cos θ 1 1 (a (λ) 0 ), (6) t(τ)= a sinh aτ, x(τ)= a cosh aτ, | Ai| Ri⊗ RI | M i where λ = uEf. Here the Rindler operators a† (λ) and y(τ)= z(τ)=0, where a is Rob’s proper acceleration and τ − RI is the proper time of the detector. Throughout this paper, we aRI (λ) are defined in Rindler region I, while the 0M is | i set c = ~ = κB = 1. We assume that the initial state of the vacuum state in the Minkowski spacetime. The Bogoliubov detector-field system has the form transformations between the Rindler operators and the operators annihilating the Minkowski 0M vacuum state can be ARφ | i Ψ = Ψ 0 , (1) written as [10, 13] | t0 i | ARi ⊗ | M i −πΩ/a † where ΨAR = sin θ 0A 1R + cos θ 1A 0R denotes the aM (F1Ω)+ e aM (F2Ω) | i | i| i | i| i aRI (λ) = , (7) initial state shared by Alice’s (A) and Bob’s (R) detectors, and (1 e−2πΩ/a)1/2 − 0M represents the external scalar field is in Minkowski vac- † −πΩ/a | i a (F1Ω)+ e aM (F2Ω) uum. a† (λ) = M , (8) RI (1 e−2πΩ/a)1/2 The total Hamiltonian of the system is given by − −πΩ/a −πΩ/a Rφ λ+e λ◦w λ◦w+e λ where F = −2 Ω 1 2 , and F = −2 Ω 1 2 . HARφ = HA + HR + HKG + Hint , (2) 1Ω (1−e π /a) / 2Ω (1−e π /a) / Here is a wedge reflection isometry that † † w(t, x) = ( t, x) where HA = ΩA A and HR = ΩR R are the detectors’ makes a reflection− from− λ in the Rindler region I to λ w in Hamiltonian and Ω is the energy gap of the detectors. The the Rindler region II [10, 13, 27]. ◦ Rφ interaction Hamiltonian Hint (t) between the accelerated de- We are interested in the dynamics of the detectors’ state af- tector and the external scalar field is given by ter interacting with the field. By tracing out the degrees of freedom of the external field φ(f), we obtain the density ma- Rφ 3x x x † Hint (t)= ǫ(t) d √ gφ(x)[χ( )R + χ( )R ], (3) trix that describes the detector’s state ZΣt − γ 0 00 where , and is the Minkowski metric. Here 2 g det(gab) gab AR  0 2α sin θ α sin 2θ 0  ≡ −3 2 2 ρ = , (9) χ(x) = (κ√2π) exp( x /2κ ) is a coupling function t 0 α sin 2θ 2α cos2 θ 0 −   which vanishes outside a small volume around the detector.  00 0 β  Such a Gaussian coupling function describes a point-like de-   tector which only interacts with the neighbor scalar fields [26] where ΨAR is the detectors’s initial state in Eq. (1) and the in the Minkowski vacuum. parameters α, β and γ are given by In the weak coupling case, we can calculate the final state 1 q ΨRφ of the atom-field system at time t = t + ∆ in the α = − , | t=t0+∆i 0 2(1 q)+2ν2(sin2 θ + q cos2 θ) first order of perturbation over the coupling constant ǫ [25]. − Under the dynamic evolution described by the Hamiltonian ν2q cos2 θ β = , given by Eq. (2), the final state ΨRφ is found to be [10– (1 q)+ ν2(sin2 θ + q cos2 θ) | t i − 13, 27] ν2 sin2 θ γ = 2 , ΨRφ = [I i(φ(f)R + φ(f)†R†)] ΨRφ , (4) (1 q)+ ν2(sin θ + q cos2 θ) | t i − | t0 i − 3 respectively, with the parametrized acceleration q e−2πΩ/a IV. DYNAMICS BEHAVIOR OF QUANTUM COHERENCE 2≡ 2 2 and the effective coupling ν2 λ 2 = ǫ Ω∆ e−Ω κ FOR THE DETECTOR MODEL ≡ || || 2π [10, 13, 27], where Ω−1 ∆ is required for the validity of the above definition. Moreover,≪ the effective coupling should Our aim is to study the dynamics behaviors of quantum co- be restricted to ν2 1 for the validity of the perturbative ap- herence under the Unruh thermal noise and find under which proach applied in≪ this paper. Obviously, q is a monotonous condition coherence can be frozen with the increasing of the function of the acceleration a. In particular, we have q 0 acceleration parameter q. Using Eqs. (9 -11), we can explic- → for a zero acceleration, and in the limit of infinite acceleration itly get the l1 norm of coherence q 1. → AR Cl1 (ρt )=2α sin 2θ , (13)

III. QUANTIFICATIONS OF QUANTUM COHERENCE and the relative entropy of coherence,

3 Coherence properties of a quantum state are usually at- C (ρAR) = λ log Λ β log β γ log γ RE t i 2 i − 2 − 2 tributed to the off-diagonal elements of its density matrix with Xi=1 respect to a selected reference basis. With such a fundamental 2α sin2 θ log (2α sin2 θ) framework, the measure of coherence for a quantum state ρ − 2 2α cos2 θ log (2αcos2θ) , (14) in a fixed basis can be defined by measuring the distance be- − 2 tween ρ and its nearest incoherent state. The resource based AR for the detectors’ final state density matrix ρt , where λi(i = definition and quantification of quantum coherence was intro- AR 1, 2, 3) are nonzero eigenvalues of the final state ρt . duced by Baumgratz et. al. [20]. They suggested that any AR To obtain the trace norm coherence of the final state ρt , information-theoretic measure of quantum coherence C is re- AR quired to satisfy the following conditions: one needs to seek the nearest incoherence state δ among the set of incoherent states . Fortunately, we noticed that AR I (C1) C(ρ)=0 iff ρ . ρt has non-zero elements only along its diagonal and anti- ∈ I diagonal. In other words, the state given by Eq. (9) describes (C2) Monotonicity under incoherent selective measurements 3 a bipartite system with maximally mixed marginals (M2 ) [28, on average: C(ρ) pnC(ρn), where ρn = 29]. Therefore, the nearest diagonal incoherence state AR ≥ n δ ˆ ˆ† Pˆ ˆ† ˆ† ˆ for AR in trace norm is given by AR . The trace norm nρ n/pn and pn = tr nρ n , with n n = ρt diag(ρt ) n AR K K K K K K coherence Ctr(ρ ) is found to be I and ˆ ˆ† . P t KnIKn ⊂ I AR (15) (C3) Convexity (on-increasing under mixing of states), i.e., Ctr(ρt )=2α sin 2θ, C( p ρ ) p C(ρ ), for any set of states n n n n n n which is identical with the l norm of coherence C (ρAR). ρ and probability≤ distribution p . 1 l1 t { nP} P { n} It have been found in [22] that the trace norm of coherence There are several coherence quantifiers which have been for a one-qubit state has the same form of expression with proven to satisfy the above criteria, for instance, the intuitive the l1 norm. Here we have come to the same conclusion for a two-qubit system in the entangled one-detector-accelerated l1 norm, relative entropy coherence [20], and trace norm dis- setting. tance coherence [22]. The l1 norm is defined via the off diagonal elements of the density matrix ρ [20] We are particularly concerned about whether the coherence of the final state can be frozen under some initial or interaction conditions. Such conditions can be obtained by differentiating Cl1 (ρ)= ρi,j . (10) | | the coherence of the final state with respect to the acceleration i,j X AR i=6 j parameter q: ∂qC(ρt ) [23, 24]. That is, coherence is unaf- fected during the interaction between the accelerated detector One can also quantify quantum coherence by the relative en- and external scalar field if the differential is zero. By taking tropy of coherence [20] given by the q derivative of the l1 norm (or the T-norm coherence), we obtain CRE (ρ)= S(ρdiag) S(ρ) . (11) − v2 sin 2θ AR (16) for any state ρ, where S(ρ) = Tr(ρ log ρ) is the von Neu- ∂qCl1 (ρt )= 2 2 2 2 2 , − −(1 q + qv cos θ + v sin θ ) mann entropy and ρdiag is the matrix containing only diag- − onal elements of ρ in the reference basis. Alternatively, the which equals to zero only for sin θ =0 or v =0. The former trace norm distance (T-norm) has been proposed as a coher- means that the initial state should be prepared as an incoherence measure, which is ence state and the latter indicates that the detectors have no interaction with the external scalar field. We can see that the Ctr(ρ) := min ρ δ 1, (12) decrease of quantum coherence can not be frozen under the δ∈I k − k influence of thermal noise induced by the Unruh effect. The where is a set of incoherent states. decoherence of the detectors’s quantum state is irreversible I 4

HaL HbL 1.0 1.0

0.8 0.8 C C 0.6 1 0.6 1 l l REC REC 0.4 0.4 REC l1-norm REC l1-norm 0.2 CHΡL 0.2 CHΡL

0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 q q

HcL HdL 1.0 0.8 0.8 C C 0.6 1 1 0.6 l l REC REC 0.4 0.4 REC REC l1-norm l1-norm 0.2 CHΡL 0.2 CHΡL

0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 q q

FIG. 1: (Color online) Quantum coherence (dashed lines) and entanglement (solid line) between the detectors as a function of the acceleration parameter q. The initial state parameter θ and effective coupling parameter ν are fixed as (a) θ = π/4,ν2 = 0.01, (b) θ = π/4,ν2 = 0.0225, (c) θ = π/4,ν2 = 0.04, and (d) θ = π/6,ν2 = 0.04, respectively. due to the interaction between the accelerated detector and its which is exactly the nearest incoherence state of the final state AR external scalar field. ρt . That is to say, the effect of the Unruh radiation acts on Now let us discuss this phenomenonfurther in the theory of the detectors’ state as incoherent operations. Therefore, there open quantum systems [30]. The evolution from the detectors is no freezing phenomenon of coherence due to the mono- AR initial state ΨAR to the final state ρt in Eq. (9) can also be tonicity of the coherence measures. represented| by i In Fig. (1) we plot the l1 norm (or the T-norm coherence), ρAR = M A M R Ψ Ψ (M A M R)†, (17) relative entropy coherence (REC), as well as quantum entan- t µ ⊗ ν | ARih AR| µ ⊗ ν Xµν glement of the final state given by Eq. (9) as functions of the acceleration parameter q for some fixed coupling parameter A B where Mµ and Mµ are the Kraus operators acting on Al- ν and initial state parameter θ. Here we employ the concur- ice’s and Rob’s state. Since Alice’s detector keeps static and is rence [31, 32] as an entanglementquantifier, which is given by switched off, M A is in fact an identity matrix. After some cal- µ C(ρ) = 2max 0, C˜1(ρ), C˜2(ρ) for a state with a X-type culations, we find that Rob’s Kraus operators have the forms n o structure. In this definition C˜1(ρ) = √ρ14ρ41 √ρ22ρ33 − R √1 q 0 R 0 0 and C˜2(ρ) = √ρ23ρ32 √ρ11ρ44, with ρij being matrix el- M1 = − ,M2 = , − 0 √1 q v√q 0 ements of the final state density matrix ρAR. The initial state − t 0 v parameter θ for Figs. (1a, 1b, 1c) is fixed as θ = π/4, i.e., M R = . (18) 3 0 0 the initial states are singlet states. It is shown that both the quantum coherence and entanglement are monotone degraded Applying these Kraus operators to the nearest incoherence with the growth of the acceleration parameter q, which means state of the initial state ΨAR and normalizing the output that the thermal noise induced by Unruh radiation destroys all state, we obtain | i types of quantum resources. However, the quantum coherence approaches to zero only in the limit of infinite accelera- γ 0 00 tion q 1, while quantum entanglement could reduce to zero  0 2α sin2 θ 0 0  for a finite→ acceleration. In other words, quantum coherence , (19) 0 0 2α cos2 θ 0 is more robust than entanglement as the Unruh temperature    00 0 β  increases.   5

FIG. 2: (Color online) Relative entropy coherence (I), l1 norm coherence (II), and entanglement (III) between the detectors as functions of the initial state parameter θ and the effective coupling parameter ν for an extremely large acceleration (q = 0.9999). (IV) Quantum coherence (dashed lines) and entanglement (solid line) as a function of the effective coupling parameter ν for an extremely large acceleration. In ﬁgure (IV) the initial state parameter θ is ﬁxed as θ = π/4.

In Fig. 2 (I-III), we plot the relative entropy coherence (I), mal noise and therefore the coherence type quantum resource l1 norm coherence (II), and entanglement (III) between the is more accessible for relativistic quantum information pro- detectors as functions of the initial state parameter θ and the cessing tasks. effective coupling parameter ν for an extremely large acceleration (q =0.9999). As discussed in [4], this limit describes a physical picture where Alice is freely falling into a black hole V. CONCLUSIONS while the accelerated Rob barely escapes from the black hole with an extremely large acceleration. We find that both quan- In conclusion, we have studied quantum coherence for two tum coherence and entanglement monotone decrease with the entangled Unruh-Dewitt detectors when one of them is ac- increases of effective coupling parameter ν, which means that celerated and interacted with a massless scalar field. We em- the interaction between the detector and field destroys quan- ploy the Unruh-Dewitt detector model, which interacts locally tum resources. It is also shown that, like the behavior of quan- with the neighbor external field. This model avoids a phys- tum coherence, quantum entanglement of the final state oscil- ically unfeasible detection of global free models in the full lates with the increase of θ for any value of ν. We plot in space [10–13]. We find that the quantum coherence can not Fig. (2 IV) the coherence and entanglement as a function of be frozen during the whole evolution, which is due to the in- the coupling parameter ν for an extremely large acceleration. fluence of the Unruh thermal noise. It is shown that quan- We can see that the entanglement decreases more quickly than tum coherence is more robust than entanglement over ther- coherence and suffers from a sudden death as the effective mal noise induced by the Unruh effect and therefore the co- coupling parameter ν increases. Comparing with the behavior herence type quantum resources are more accessible for rel- of quantum coherence versus q, quantum entanglement suf- ativistic quantum information processing tasks. We known fers a sudden death for an much smaller coupling parameter. that an accelerated observer in the Minkowski vacuum corre- That is to say, quantum coherence is even more robust than sponds to a static observers outside a black hole in the Hartle- entanglement under the influence of the interaction between Hawking vacuum [4, 11, 33]. Similarly, a static observer in the accelerated detector and its surrounding field. Then we the Minkowski space-time corresponds to a free-falling ob- can safely arrive at the conclusion that quantum coherence is server in the Schwarzschild spacetime. Therefore, the analysis more robust than entanglement under the effect of Unruh ther- used to derive the results of our manuscript can, in principle, 6 be applied to study the dynamic behavior of quantum coher- tific Fund Project of the Ministry of Education of China un- ence under the influence of Hawking radiation. der Grant No. 20134306120003,and the Postdoctoral Science Foundation of China under Grant No. 2014M560129 and No. 2015T80146. J. J. is supported the National Natural Science Acknowledgments Foundation of China under Grant No. 11475061. H. F. is supported the National Natural Science Foundation of China J. W. is supported the National Natural Science Founda- under Grant No. 91536108. tion of China under Grant No. 11305058, the Doctoral Scien-

[1] W. G. Unruh, Phys. Rev. D 14, 870, (1976). Berlin, 1995). [2] L. Crispino et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 787 (2008). [19] M. Nielsen and I. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quan- [3] P. M. Alsing and G. J. Milburn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 180404 tum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, (2003). England, 2000), ISBN: 9781139495486. [4] I. Fuentes-Schuller and R. B. Mann, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 120404 [20] T. Baumgratz, M. Cramer, and M. B. Plenio, Phys. Rev. Lett. (2005). 113, 140401 (2014). [5] T. G. Downes, I. Fuentes, and T. C. Ralph, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, [21] A. Streltsov, U. Singh, H. S. Dhar, M. N. Bera, and G. Adesso, 210502 (2011); B. L. Hu, Shih-Yuin Lin, Jorma Louko, Class. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 020403 (2015). Quantum Grav. 29, 224005 (2012). [22] L. Shao, Z. Xi, H. Fan, and Y. Li, Phys. Rev. A 91 042120 [6] N. Friis et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 113602 (2013). (2015). [7] E. Mart´ın-Mart´ınez, D Aasen, and A. Kempf, Phys. Rev. Lett. [23] Thomas R. Bromley, Marco Cianciaruso, and Gerardo Adesso1, 110, 160501 (2013). Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 210401 (2015). [8] J. C. Wang and J. L. Jing, Phys. Rev. A 82, 032324 (2010); 83, [24] X. Liu, Z. Tian, J. Wang, and J. Jing, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 366, 022314 (2011). 102(2016). [9] David C. M. Ostapchuk, S. Y. Lin, R. B. Mann, and B. L. Hu, [25] W. G. Unruh and R. M. Wald, Phys. Rev. D 29, 1047 (1984). JHEP 07, 072 (2012); J. Doukas, Shih-Yuin Lin, B. L. Hu, [26] P. Kok and U. Yurtsever, Phys. Rev. D 68, 085006 (2003). Robert B. Mann, JHEP 11, 119 (2013). [27] R. M. Wald, Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetimes and [10] AndréG. S. Landulfo, and George E. A. Matsas, Phys. Rev.A Black Hole Thermodynamics (The University of Chicago Press, 80, 032315 (2009). Chicago, 1994). [11] L. C. Céleri, AndréG. S. Landulfo, R. M. Serra, and George E. [28] R. Horodecki and M. Horodecki, Phys. Rev. A 54, 1838 (1996). A. Matsas, Phys. Rev. A 81, 062130 (2010). [29] R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and K. Horodecki, [12] Z. H. Tian, J. C. Wang, and J. L. Jing, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 332, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865 (2009). 98 (2012). [30] H. P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum [13] J. C. Wang, Z. H. Tian, J. L. Jing, and H. Fan, Sci. Rep. 4, 7195 Systems (Oxford University Press, Oxford), 2002. (2014). [31] W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 2245 (1998). [14] A. J. Leggett, Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 69, 80 (1980). [32] V. Coffman, J. Kundu, and W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. A 61, [15] R. J. Glauber, Phys. Rev. 131, 2766 (1963). 052306 (2000). [16] M. O. Scully, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 1855 (1991). [33] W. G. Unruh, Phys. Rev. D 14, 870 (1976). [17] A. Albrecht, J. Mod. Opt. 41, 2467 (1994). [18] D. F. Walls and G. J. Milburn, Quantum Optics (SpringerVerlag,