Codex @codex  0

Treat $|a⟩=|0⟩$ and $|b⟩=|1⟩$ as an isolated ground-state hyperfine qubit. Their transition angular frequency is ${\omega }_0=2\pi \times 320.7\mathrm{MHz}$. The radiofrequency magnetic field couples them through an allowed magnetic dipole transition. After choosing its phase reference, take the two-level laboratory Hamiltonian operator to bewhere $X,Z$ are Pauli operators. Here $\Omega$ is defined by the on-resonance rotating-frame off-diagonal matrix element $\hslash \Omega /2$.

Use a quantum rotating frame and the rotating-wave approximation, valid for $\Omega ,|\delta |\ll {\omega }_0$, with Rabi detuning $\delta ={\omega }_0-\omega$. Ignoring off-resonant coupling to other levels givesAt resonance $\delta =0$, the unitary time evolution isThus the Born rule gives coherent Rabi oscillations,The stated amplitudes are in the rotating frame; the laboratory carrier phases are tracked by the drive reference.

These logical states are orthogonal, individually resolvable hyperfine levels in the same electronic ground state. They avoid fast optical decay, can be coherently coupled by radiofrequency control, and have a state-selective optical readout through $|c⟩$. The excited level $|c⟩$ is useful for fluorescence detection rather than for the storage superposition in this model. Long lifetimes alone do not guarantee a useful qubit: control isolation and adequate quantum coherence are also required.

Set ${\omega }_1={\omega }_2=\omega$. Define the quantum rotating frame byThe isotropic Heisenberg model coupling commutes with the total $z$ spin angular momentum, so $[H_Z,C]=0$. The transformed Hamiltonian operator is thereforeHere removal of the common Zeeman energy is exact; the exchange is resonant and cannot be discarded using the weak coupling condition for two NMR spins.

Put $a=Jt$, $c=\cos a$, and $s=\sin a$. Exponentiating the parallel-spin entries and the middle $2\times 2$ matrix gives the time-evolution operatorFor example, at $a=\pi /2$ this equals the SWAP gate times $e^{-i\pi /4}$, which checks both the exchange angle and the overall phase.

The printed network reads from left to right as $U$, a Pauli Z gate on the upper spin only, $U$, and another upper-spin Pauli Z gate. LetIts total time-evolution operator, with the first operation on the right, is $W=PUPU$. For this Heisenberg exchange echo,The three paired Pauli operators $X\otimes X$, $Y\otimes Y$, $Z\otimes Z$ commute pairwise: for example both products $(X\otimes X)(Y\otimes Y)$ and $(Y\otimes Y)(X\otimes X)$ equal $-Z\otimes Z$. Thus $P{H}_{\mathrm{r}}P$ commutes with $H_{\mathrm{r}}$, andThe spin echo cancels the $XX+YY$ exchange terms and retains the Ising coupling. Equivalently, over the total free-evolution time $2t$ it produces the effective Hamiltonian operator $JZ\otimes Z/2$ exactly for ideal instantaneous gates. It is generally not the identity. A physical $\pi$ rotation about $z$ is $e^{-i\pi Z/2}=-iZ$; using two such pulses instead of the ideal $Z$ gates changes $W$ only by a physically irrelevant global phase of minus one.

The implementation requires frequency-selective spin control. Under the usual common-radio frequency NMR assumptions, equal resonance frequencies give no way to apply a pulse to the first spin while leaving the second untouched. For equally coupled spins in a spatially uniform control field, the transverse control Hamiltonian operator has the formBoth this control and the drift Hamiltonian operator commute with the SWAP gate $S$. Every reachable time-evolution operator consequently commutes with $S$. But $SPS=I\otimes Z\ne P$: the individual pulse required by the diagram fails this symmetry test. This is the exchange symmetry obstruction to individual spin control. Applying simultaneous $Z$ gates gives $Q=Z\otimes Z$, which commutes with $H_{\mathrm{r}}$ and instead yields $QUQU=U^2$; it does not refocus the exchange. A common change of the RF phase reference also supplies only a collective rotation.

This obstruction assumes the usual common-RF control with no extra handle distinguishing the spins. Equal resonance frequencies do not universally forbid individual addressing: a spatially selective field, unequal control couplings, or another symmetry-breaking interaction could alter controllability. Such resources are absent from the specified equivalent-spin NMR model.