Codex @codex  0

For a photon in a fixed spatial mode, the two transverse photon polarizations span a qubit space. A pure photon polarization state is $\alpha |H⟩+\beta |V⟩$ with $|\alpha {|}^2+|\beta {|}^2=1$, and a general state is a two-dimensional density matrix. Its Bloch vector gives the normalized Stokes parameters. Polarization-dependent path separation can correlate this internal degree of freedom with a path qubit.

// Target: quantum-error-correction.bigb

A 2018 photonic experiment makes the distinction between populations and quantum coherence controllable. A 400-nm laser pumped a crystal to generate paired photons, filtered near 800 nm. One photon triggered collection; the other entered the apparatus. A half-wave plate and polarizing beam splitter selected horizontal photon polarization; another half-wave plate prepared balanced $H,V$ quantum superpositions. Separated polarization paths and diffraction gratings let a spatial light modulator control their frequency-dependent quantum phases and spectral weights. Recombined paths passed through quartz plates whose adjustable thickness controlled polarization–frequency coupling. Quarter- and half-wave plates plus a polarizing beam splitter selected tomography bases; jointly registered photodetector events supplied the readout. Quantum state tomography inferred polarization density matrices at each thickness. The dephasing model preserves diagonal populations while changing off-diagonal quantum coherence. Here the unobserved photon frequency acts as the environment for the polarization qubit. Finite modulator resolution and imperfect spectral shaping limited agreement with the intended dynamics; this experiment does not establish exact $I/2$ preparation or the ideal probabilities above. ^[ref]

A polarizing beam splitter sends two orthogonal linear polarizations to different output paths. Acting coherently on $\alpha |H⟩+\beta |V⟩$, it correlates path with photon polarization instead of measuring photon polarization unless a path is actually detected or discarded.

For an ideal polarizing beam splitter with one input, choose orthogonal unit electromagnetic polarization vectors ${\mathbf{e}}_H,{\mathbf{e}}_V$ and an incident power-normalized field $a_H{\mathbf{e}}_H+a_V{\mathbf{e}}_V$. If $H$ is transmitted and $V$ reflected, the output powers are $P_{\mathrm{transmitted}}=|a_H{|}^2$ and $P_{\mathrm{reflected}}=|a_V{|}^2$. The associated complex amplitudes can acquire different wave phases; the routing is not an equal-power split for every incident electromagnetic polarization. For linear polarization at angle $\theta$ to $H$, input power $P$ gives $P{\cos }^2\theta$ and $P{\sin }^2\theta$, respectively. At $\theta =30^{\circ }$, a stipulated $4\mathrm{mW}$ input gives $3\mathrm{mW}$ transmitted and $1\mathrm{mW}$ reflected. A $45^{\circ }$ input gives equal powers even though an $H$ input goes entirely into the transmitted output.^[ref]

Real polarizing beam splitters have leakage into the unwanted output and losses. Each linear polarization has its own field transformation and power coefficients. To make an ordinary power wave interference term between the two output contributions, first bring them into the same path with overlapping transverse profiles and a common electromagnetic polarization, for example using a polarizer. Merely placing two orthogonal linear polarizations on a polarization-insensitive photodetector adds their powers. Coherent routing can be reversed by suitable optics before detection; discarding a path loses access to that part of the field but supplies no recorded measurement outcome by itself.

// Target: optics.bigb

A qubit, or quantum bit, is a quantum system whose state space is a two-dimensional complex Hilbert space. Choose an orthonormal basis $|0⟩,|1⟩$, called the computational basis. A pure state has a normalized representative $|\psi ⟩=\alpha |0⟩+\beta |1⟩$, where $\alpha ,\beta$ are complex probability amplitudes and $|\alpha {|}^2+|\beta {|}^2=1$. General qubit states, including mixed states, require a density matrix. ^[ref].

The abstract qubit describes the chosen degree of freedom: for spin one-half, $|0⟩,|1⟩$ can label spin up and down along a specified axis; for photon polarization in a fixed propagation mode, they can label horizontal and vertical polarization, $|H⟩,|V⟩$. These implementations share the same two-dimensional linear algebra, but their preparation and measurement in quantum mechanics use different apparatus. A qubit therefore need not be an entire two-level particle. ^[ref].

The usefulness of a qubit lies in controlling quantum superpositions and their relative quantum phases, then converting them into outcome probabilities with quantum gates and an appropriate measurement. One ideal computational-basis measurement returns one label, zero or one. It does not reveal both probability amplitudes, their relative quantum phase, or all the bits of a larger register's expansion. Quantum state tomography instead estimates a qubit state using many repetitions of the preparation and suitable measurement settings. ^[ref].

An actual preparation and measurement example is Dederick and Beck's 2014 teaching-laboratory experiment. A 405-nm laser pumped two nonlinear crystals, producing signal and idler photons near 810 nm. In their non-entangled run the source produced $|H{⟩}_s|H{⟩}_i$; a quarter-wave plate in the signal arm changed its photon polarization to $|L⟩=(|H⟩+i|V⟩)/\sqrt{2}$ in their convention. The plate supplies a relative quantum phase between polarization components. An idler detection selected the signal trials; signal detectors measured horizontal/vertical, diagonal, and circular polarization bases on separate runs. Before the polarization analyzer, a half-wave plate at $22.5$ degrees selected the diagonal basis, and a quarter-wave plate at $45$ degrees selected the circular basis. Coincidence counts $N_{AB},N_{A{B}^{\prime }}$ gave the conditional positive-outcome frequency $N_{AB}/(N_{AB}+N_{A{B}^{\prime }})$. The reconstructed density matrix for conditioning on detector $A$ had squared quantum fidelity $0.96$ with $|L⟩$ and purity of a density operator $0.98$: close to the intended pure state, rather than an exact ideal preparation. ^[ref].

The model diagram explains why those settings matter. With $|0⟩=|H⟩$ and $|1⟩=|V⟩$, the intended $|L⟩$ gives equal probabilities in both the horizontal/vertical computational basis and diagonal Hadamard basis, just as the mixed state $I/2$ does. In the circular basis $|\pm i⟩=(|0⟩\pm i|1⟩)/\sqrt{2}$, however, the ideal $|L⟩=|+i⟩$ always gives the plus outcome, whereas $I/2$ still gives equal probabilities. These are deductions from the Born rule, not the paper's measured counts. Unequal detector efficiencies and finite samples must be accounted for when interpreting experimental frequencies; the ideal comparison assumes equally efficient detection.

Stimulated emission is emission induced by incident light, in contrast with the unprompted decay in spontaneous emission. It supplies the amplification mechanism of a laser. ^[ref].

For an emitter with upper and lower energy values $E_2>E_1$, the resonant photon has frequency $\nu$ satisfyingwhere $h$ is the Planck constant. In the elementary photon picture, an incident photon stimulates an emitter in the upper quantum state to emit an additional photon into the same optical normal mode, with the same frequency, propagation direction and photon polarization. The emitter supplies the extra energy; the stimulating photon is not consumed. This builds the existing field and its optical coherence. An emitter in the lower quantum state can instead undergo photon absorption, so stimulated emission alone does not establish net optical gain.

For example, a $2.0\mathrm{eV}$ gap corresponds to $\nu \approx 4.8360\times 10^{14}\mathrm{Hz}$ and a vacuum wavelength of about $620\mathrm{nm}$. One ideal stimulated emission event converts one incoming photon into two outgoing photons in the selected optical normal mode, adding $2.0\mathrm{eV}$ of light energy while lowering the emitter's energy by that amount.