Arxiv:0807.1793V7
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
On Entanglement and Separability Dhananjay P. Mehendale∗ Department of Physics, Savitribai Phule University of Pune,Pune,India-411007. (Dated: April 15, 2021) Abstract We present a necessary and sufficient condition to determine the entanglement status of an arbitrary N-qubit quantum state (may be pure or mixed) represented by the density matrix, ρN . A necessary condition satisfied by separable bipartite quantum states was obtained by A. Peres [1]: If a bipartite state represented by the density matrix, ρ, is separable then its partial transpose, ρT , is positive semidefinite i.e. ρT , has no negative eigenvalues. In other words, if ρT , is not positive semidefinite and so one or more of its eigenvalues are negative then ρ is entangled. It was then shown by M. Horodecki et.al.[2] that this necessary condition is also sufficient for 2 2 × and 2 3 dimensional systems. However, in other dimensions if ρ, is positive semidefinite (i.e. × if ρ has positive partial transpose (PPT)) then what can we say about whether ρ is separable or entangled? In general, nothing. In fact it was shown by P. Horodecki [3] that the criterion due to A. Peres [1] is not sufficient in general by providing counterexamples in terms of the entangled mixed states with positive partial transpose for 3 3 and 2 4 dimensional systems. In this × × paper we develop a new approach and a new criterion for deciding entanglement status of the state represented by the density matrix, ρN , corresponding to N-qubit systems. We begin with 2-qubit case and then show that these results for 2-qubit system can be extended to N-qubit system by proceeding along the similar lines. We discuss few examples to illustrate the method proposed in this paper for testing the entanglement status of few density matrices. arXiv:0807.1793v7 [math.GM] 14 Apr 2021 PACS numbers: 03.67.Mn, 03.65.Ca, 03.65.Ud ∗ dhananjay.p.mehendale@gmail.com 1 I. INTRODUCTION One of the central issues in quantum information theory is whether a given N-qubit pure or mixed quantum state represented by the density matrix, ρN , is separable or entangled [1–9]. This important question of deciding whether a given N-qubit (pure or mixed) quantum state represented by the density matrix, ρN , is separable or entangled is completely solved in this paper. In this paper, we present a criterion which leads to an algorithm for deciding the entanglement status of an arbitrary N-qubit pure or mixed N N quantum state, represented in terms of a density matrix, ρN , of size 2 2 . × Our result for N-qubit “pure” quantum state is as follows: A quantum state repre- N N sented by a density matrix, ρN of size 2 2 is a “pure separable” state if and only if × there is a matrix called basic matrix of size 4 4 whose rank is equal to one and other × (N 2) matrices of size 4 4 (in all 4 − in number including the basic matrix) made up of × certain coefficients that arise in the representation for this density matrix, ρN , in terms of the Generalized Pauli Basis and all these other matrices are certain constant multiples of this basic matrix. Our result for N-qubit “mixed” quantum state is as follows: A quantum state repre- N N sented by a density matrix, ρN of size 2 2 is a “mixed separable” state if and only if × there is a matrix called basic matrix of size 4 4 and other matrices of size 4 4 (in × × (N 2) all 4 − in number including the basic matrix) made up of certain coefficients that arise in the representation for this density matrix, ρN , in terms of the Generalized Pauli Basis such that all the other matrices are certain constant multiples of this basic matrix and this basic matrix can be split into sum of certain other matrices of rank one and of size 4 4. × Entanglement describes a correlation between different parts of a quantum system that exceeds anything that is possible classically. When a quantum system is in such an entangled state, actions performed on one sub-system will have effects on another sub-system even though that sub-system is not acted upon directly and could be far away. This leads to many highly counterintuitive phenomena. All the known quantum 2 algorithms that display an exponential speedup over their classical counterparts exploit such entanglement-induced side effects in one way or another [10]. Therefore, to study, understand, and characterize entanglement is one of the very important problems in quantum information theory. II. GENERALIZED PAULI BASIS Let I(= σ ), σ , σ , σ denote the well-known Pauli matrices: { 0 1 2 3} 1 0 I = 0 1 0 1 σ1 = 1 0 0 i σ2 = − i 0 1 0 σ3 = 0 1 − Let A = [aij] and B = [bij] be some 2 2 hermitian matrices then we denote their scalar × 2 2 or dot product as A.B and define it as A.B = a∗ bij, where a∗ denotes the Pi=1 Pj=1 ij ij complex conjugate of aij. Pauli matrices I(= σ ), σ , σ , σ form the orthogonal vector { 0 1 2 3} space basis for 2 2 hermitian matrices i.e. every 2 2 hermitian matrix can be uniquely × × 4 expressed as linear combination of Pauli matrices over reals, R. Thus, if A = αiσi Pi=1 then αi = A.σi/σi.σi It is easy to check that σi.σi = 2 for all i, and σi.σj = 0 if i = j 6 i, j 0, 1, 2, 3 . The density operator is a positive semidefinite operator with nonnegative ∈{ } N N eigenvalues. The density matrix, ρN , corresponding to an N-qubit state is a 2 2 matrix × with certain well defined properties: For example, (i) the sum of the diagonal elements of ρ, tr(ρ), is equal to one. (ii) ρ is hermitian, (iii) If ρ corresponds to a pure state then tr(ρ2)=1, (iv) If ρ corresponds to a mixed state then tr(ρ2) < 1, etc. 3 We now define the Generalized Pauli matrices. Definition 2.1: Generalized Pauli matrices of size 2N 2N are those obtained from × usual Pauli matrices, I(= σ ), σ , σ , σ , by taking their all possible tensor products: { 0 1 2 3} Gi1i2 is iN = σi1 σi2 σis σiN , where each σis is a usual Pauli matrix i.e. ··· ··· ⊗ ⊗···⊗ ⊗···⊗ σis I(= σ ), σ , σ , σ . ∈{ 0 1 2 3} N N Now, let C = [cij] and D = [dij] be some 2 2 hermitian matrices then we × 2N 2N denote their scalar or dot product as C.D and define it as C.D = c∗ dij, Pi=1 Pj=1 ij where cij∗ denotes the complex conjugate of cij. Similar to the well-known simple result stated above, namely, Pauli matrices I(= σ ), σ , σ , σ form the orthogonal vector { 0 1 2 3} space basis for 2 2 hermitian matrices i.e. every 2 2 hermitian matrix can be uniquely × × expressed as linear combination of Pauli matrices over reals, R, one can easily obtain the following generalization by proceeding on similar lines: Generalized Pauli matrices Gi1i2 ir iN = σi1 σi2 σir σiN , where each σir is a usual Pauli matrix i.e. σir ··· ··· ⊗ ⊗···⊗ ⊗···⊗ ∈ I(= σ ), σ , σ , σ , form the orthogonal vector space basis for 2N 2N hermitian matrices { 0 1 2 3} × i.e. every 2N 2N hermitian matrix can be uniquely expressed as linear combination of × Generalized Pauli matrices over reals, R. Let A be 2N 2N hermitian matrix then A can × be uniquely expressed as A = αi1i2 ir iN Gi1i2 ir iN X ··· ··· ··· ··· i1,i2, ,ir, ,iN ··· ··· where αi1i2 ir iN =(A).(Gi1i2 ir iN )/(Gi1i2 ir iN ).(Gi1i2 ir iN ) ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· N It is easy to check that the scalar or dot product (Gi1i2 ir iN ).(Gi1i2 ir iN )=2 and ··· ··· ··· ··· also the scalar or dot product (Gi1i2 ir iN ).(Gj1j2 jr jN ) = 0 if some ir = jr, r ··· ··· ··· ··· 6 ∈ 1, 2, , , N . { ··· } The vectors in the Generalized Pauli basis for N-dimensional case are actually the matrices of size 2N 2N and they have a special form. × (i) For the case of N = 2 these “sixteen” matrices (each of these matrices are of size 4 4 and have exactly “four” nonzero elements C, the field of complex numbers) × ∈ 4 representing basis vectors have “four” types of forms and so they can be divided into “four” (independent and disjoint) groups as given below: Group 1: The 4 4 matrices representing basis vectors in × (I, σ ) (I, σ )= I I,I σ , σ I, σ σ 3 ⊗ 3 ⊗ ⊗ 3 3 ⊗ 3 ⊗ 3 and they have the form of a “Diagonal” matrix: a 0 0 0 11 0 a 0 0 22 0 0 a 0 33 0 0 0 a44 Group 2: The 4 4 matrices representing basis vectors in × (I, σ ) (σ , σ )= I σ ,I σ , σ σ , σ σ 3 ⊗ 1 2 ⊗ 1 ⊗ 2 3 ⊗ 1 3 ⊗ 2 and they have the form as given below: 0 a 0 0 12 a 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 a 34 0 0 a43 0 Group 3: The 4 4 matrices representing basis vectors in × (σ , σ ) (I, σ )= σ I, σ σ , σ I, σ σ 1 2 ⊗ 3 1 ⊗ 1 ⊗ 3 2 ⊗ 2 ⊗ 3 and they have the form as given below: 0 0 a 0 13 0 0 0 a 24 a 0 0 0 31 0 a42 0 0 Group 4: The 4 4 matrices representing basis vectors in × (σ , σ ) (σ , σ )= σ σ σ σ , σ σ σ σ 1 2 ⊗ 1 2 1 ⊗ 1 1 ⊗ 2 2 ⊗ 1 2 ⊗ 2 5 and they have the form of an “Off-Diagonal” matrix: 0 0 0 a 14 0 0 a 0 23 0 a 0 0 32 a41 0 0 0 (ii) For the case of N = 3 these “sixtyfour” matrices (each of these matrices are of size 8 8 and have exactly “eight” nonzero elements C, the field of complex numbers) × ∈ representing basis vectors have “eight” types of forms and so they can be divided into “eight” (independent and disjoint) groups as given below: Group 1: The 8 8 matrices representing basis vectors in × (I, σ ) (I, σ ) (I, σ ), are “eight” in number 3 ⊗ 3 ⊗ 3 and they have the form of a “Diagonal” matrix.