- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review A

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Isolating noise and amplifying the signal using weak quantum measurement and postselection

Ahana Ghoshal1, Soham Sau1,2,3, Debmalya Das4,5, and Ujjwal Sen1

  • 1Harish-Chandra Research Institute, A CI of Homi Bhabha National Institute, Chhatnag Road, Jhunsi, Prayagraj 211 019, India
  • 2Department of Physics, School of Physical Sciences, Central University of Rajasthan, Bandarsindri, Rajasthan 305 817, India
  • 3RCQI, Institute of Physics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravská Cesta 9, Bratislava 84511, Slovakia
  • 4Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14627, USA
  • 5Center for Coherence and Quantum Optics, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14627, USA

PDF

Phys. Rev. A 107, 052214 – Published 22 May, 2023

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.107.052214

Abstract

The so-called quantum Cheshire cat is a phenomenon in which an object, identified with a “cat”, is dissociated from a property of the object, identified with the “grin” of the cat. We propose a thought experiment, similar to this phenomenon, with an interferometric setup, where a property (a component of polarization) of an object (photon) can be separated from the object itself and can simultaneously be amplified when it is already decoupled from its object. We further show that this setup can be used to dissociate two complementary properties, e.g., two orthogonal components of polarization of a photon and identified with the grin and the snarl of a cat, from each other and one of them can be amplified while being detached from the other. Moreover, we extend the work to a noisy scenario, effected by a spin-orbit-coupling–like additional interaction term in the Hamiltonian for the measurement process, with the object in this scenario being identified with a so-called confused Cheshire cat. We devise a gedanken experiment in which such a “confusion” can be successfully dissociated from the system, and we find that the dissociation helps in the amplification of signals.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (52)

  1. P. B. Dixon, D. J. Starling, A. N. Jordan, and J. C. Howell, Ultrasensitive Beam Deflection Measurement via Interferometric Weak Value Amplification, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 173601 (2009).
  2. P. Busch and P. J. Lahti, On various joint measurements of position and momentum observables in quantum theory, Phys. Rev. D 29, 1634 (1984).
  3. A. Barchielli, L. Lanz, and G. M. Prosperi, A model for the macroscopic description and continual observations in quantum mechanics, Nuovo Cimento B 72, 79 (1982).
  4. C. M. Caves, Quantum mechanics of measurements distributed in time. A path-integral formulation, Phys. Rev. D 33, 1643 (1986).
  5. Y. Aharonov, D. Z. Albert, and L. Vaidman, How the Result of a Measurement of a Component of the Spin of a Spin-12 Particle Can Turn Out to be 100, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 1351 (1988).
  6. I. M. Duck, P. M. Stevenson, and E. C. G. Sudarshan, The sense in which a “weak measurement” of a spin-12 particle's spin component yields a value 100, Phys. Rev. D 40, 2112 (1989).
  7. Y. Aharonov, S. Popescu, and J. Tollaksen, A time-symmetric formulation of quantum mechanics, Phys. Today 63(11), 27 (2010).
  8. G. J. Pryde, J. L. O'Brien, A. G. White, T. C. Ralph, and H. M. Wiseman, Measurement of Quantum Weak Values of Photon Polarization, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 220405 (2005).
  9. O. Hosten and P. Kwiat, Observation of the spin Hall effect of light via weak measurements, Science 319, 787 (2008).
  10. J. S. Lundeen, B. Sutherland, A. Patel, C. Stewart, and C. Bamber, Direct measurement of the quantum wave function, Nature (London) 474, 188 (2011).
  11. T. Denkmayr, H. Geppert, S. Sponar, H. Lemmel, A. Matzkin, J. Tollaksen, and Y. Hasegawa, Observation of a quantum Cheshire Cat in a matter-wave interferometer experiment, Nat. Commun. 5, 4492 (2014).
  12. R. Corrêa, M. F. Santos, C. H. Monken, and P. Saldanha ‘Quantum Cheshire Cat’ as simple quantum interference, New J. Phys. 17, 053042 (2015).
  13. S. Sponar, T. Denkmayr, H. Geppert, and Y. Hasegawa, Fundamental features of quantum dynamics studied in matter-wave interferometry—spin weak values and the quantum Cheshire-Cat, Atoms 4, 11 (2016).
  14. J. M. Ashby, P. D. Schwarz, and M. Schlosshauer, Observation of the quantum paradox of separation of a single photon from one of its properties, Phys. Rev. A 94, 012102 (2016).
  15. M. Cormann, M. Remy, B. Kolaric, and Y. Caudano, Revealing geometric phases in modular and weak values with a quantum eraser, Phys. Rev. A 93, 042124 (2016).
  16. J. S. Lundeen and C. Bamber, Procedure for Direct Measurement of General Quantum States Using Weak Measurement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 070402 (2012).
  17. H. F. Hofmann, Complete characterization of post-selected quantum statistics using weak measurement tomography, Phys. Rev. A 81, 012103 (2010).
  18. S. Wu, State tomography via weak measurements, Sci. Rep. 3, 1193 (2013).
  19. M. Cormann and Y. Caudano, Geometric description of modular and weak values in discrete quantum systems using the Majorana representation, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 50, 305302 (2017).
  20. H. Kobayashi, K. Nonaka, and Y. Shikano, Stereographical visualization of a polarization state using weak measurements with an optical-vortex beam, Phys. Rev. A 89, 053816 (2014).
  21. A. K. Pati, C. Mukhopadhyay, S. Chakraborty, and S. Ghosh, Quantum precision thermometry with weak measurements, Phys. Rev. A 102, 012204 (2020).
  22. A. K. Pati, U. Singh, and U. Sinha, Measuring non-Hermitian operators via weak values, Phys. Rev. A 92, 052120 (2015).
  23. G. Nirala, S. N. Sahoo, A. K. Pati, and U. Sinha, Measuring average of non-Hermitian operator with weak value in a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, Phys. Rev. A 99, 022111 (2019).
  24. R. Jozsa, Complex weak values in quantum measurement, Phys. Rev. A 76, 044103 (2007).
  25. C. A. Chatzidimitriou-Dreismann, Weak values and two-state vector formalism in elementary scattering and reflectivity—a new effect, Universe 5, 58 (2019).
  26. M. Nairn, Superoscillations: Realisation of quantum weak values, arXiv:2109.14404.
  27. Y. Aharonov, S. Popescu, D. Rohrlich, and P. Skrzypczyk, Quantum Cheshire Cats, New J. Phys. 15, 113015 (2013).
  28. M.-J. Hu, Z.-Y. Zhou, X.-M. Hu, C.-F. Li, G.-C. Guo and Y.-S. Zhang, Observation of non-locality sharing among three observers with one entangled pair via optimal weak measurement, npj Quantum Inf. 4, 63 (2018).
  29. Y. Kim, Y.-S. Kim, S.-Y. Lee, S.-W. Han, S. Moon, Y.-H. Kim, and Y.-W. Cho, Direct quantum process tomography via measuring sequential weak values of incompatible observables, Nat. Commun. 9, 192 (2018).
  30. G. Scala, M. D'Angelo, A. Garuccio, S. Pascazio, and F. V. Pepe, Signal-to-noise properties of correlation plenoptic imaging with chaotic light, Phys. Rev. A 99, 053808 (2019).
  31. L. Li, X. Li, B. Zhang, and L. You, Enhancing test precision for local Lorentz-symmetry violation with entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 99, 042118 (2019).
  32. J.-H. Huang, F.-F. He, X.-Y. Duan, G.-J. Wang, and X.-Y. Hu, Modified weak-value-amplification technique for measuring a mirror's velocity based on the Vernier effect, Phys. Rev. A 105, 013718 (2022).
  33. Y. Jin, J. Yan, S. J. Rahman, X. Yu, and J. Zhang, Imaging the dipole scattering of an optically levitated dielectric nanoparticle, Appl. Phys. Lett. 119, 021106 (2021).
  34. Y.-Z. Ma, M. Jin, D.-L. Chen, Z.-Q. Zhou, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Elimination of noise in optically rephased photon echoes, Nat. Commun. 12, 4378 (2021).
  35. L. Bai, L. Zhang, Y. Yang, R. Chang, Y. Qin, J. He, X. Wen, and J. Wang, Enhancement of spin noise spectroscopy of rubidium atomic ensemble by using of the polarization squeezed light, Opt. Express 30, 1925 (2022).
  36. Y. Kim and D. G. Im, and Y. S. Kim, Observing the quantum Cheshire cat effect with noninvasive weak measurement, npj Quantum Inf. 7, 13 (2021).
  37. J.-D. Bancal, Quantum physics: Isolate the subject, Nat. Phys. 10, 11 (2014).
  38. D. P. Atherton, G. Ranjit, A. A. Geraci, and J. D. Weinstein, Observation of a classical Cheshire cat in an optical interferometer, Opt. Lett. 40, 879 (2015).
  39. Q. Duprey, S. Kanjilal, U. Sinha, D. Home, and A. Matzkin, The Quantum Cheshire Cat effect: Theoretical basis and observational implications, Ann. Phys. (NY) 391, 1 (2018).
  40. Y. Aharonov, E. Cohen, and S. Popescu, A dynamical quantum Cheshire Cat effect and implications for counterfactual communication, Nat. Commun. 12, 4770 (2021).
  41. D. Das and A. K. Pati, Can two quantum Cheshire cats exchange grins? New J. Phys. 22, 063032 (2020).
  42. D. Das and U. Sen, Delayed choice of paths in the quantum paradox of separating different properties of a photon, Phys. Rev. A 103, 012228 (2021).
  43. P. Chowdhury, A. K. Pati, and J. L. Chen, Wave and particle properties can be spatially separated in a quantum entity, Photon. Res. 9, 1379 (2021).
  44. Z.-H. Liu, W.-W. Pan, X.-Y. Xu, M. Yang, J. Zhou, Z.-Y. Luo, K. Sun, J.-L. Chen, J.-S. Xu, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Experimental exchange of grins between quantum Cheshire cats, Nat. Commun. 11, 3006 (2020).
  45. J.-S. Chen, M.-J. Hu, X.-M. Hu, B.-H. Liu, Y.-F. Huang, C.-F. Li, C.-G. Guo, and Y.-S. Zhang, Experimental realization of sequential weak measurements of non-commuting Pauli observables, Opt. Express 27, 6089 (2019).
  46. M. Żukowski, A. Zeilinger, M. A. Horne, and H. Weinfurter, Independent photons and entanglement. A short overview, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 38, 501 (1999).
  47. A. Sen(De), U. Sen, and M. Żukowski, Output state in multiple entanglement swapping, Phys. Rev. A 68, 062301 (2003).
  48. J. C. Flores, Decoherence from internal degrees of freedom for clusters of mesoparticles: A hierarchy of master equations, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 31, 8623 (1998).
  49. T. A. Brun and L. Mlodinow, Decoherence by coupling to internal vibrational modes, Phys. Rev. A 94, 052123 (2016).
  50. M. Hillery, L. Mlodinow, and V. Bužek, Quantum interference with molecules: The role of internal states, Phys. Rev. A 71, 062103 (2005).
  51. H. Nikolić, Internal environment: What is it like to be a Schrödinger cat?, Eur. J. Phys. 36, 045003 (2015).
  52. T. Koike and S. Tanaka, Limits on amplification by Aharonov-Albert-Vaidman weak measurement, Phys. Rev. A 84, 062106 (2011).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. A 107, 052214– Published 22 May, 2023
  • Received 10 April 2022
  • Accepted 9 May 2023
Crossmark - Check for updates button

©2023 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation