Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2001 iii Paper 61 2 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
The Schmidt decomposition and local unitary operations put any entangled two-qubit pure state intoBoth Schmidt coefficients are nonzero. Alice performs a two-outcome generalized measurement with Kraus operatorsTheir effects sum to the identity, so this is a legitimate local measurement in quantum mechanics. On success,The normalized output is the Bell state . Bob's unitary matrix maps it to the spin singlet state. Alice communicates her success flag; no shared quantum operation is needed. At the filter is the identity and success is certain. This is the singlet target case of optimal stochastic conversion of a two-qubit pure state.
For dichotomic local outcomes , the CHSH inequality isIt assumes a local hidden-variable theory with freely chosen settings independent of the hidden-variable distribution. For the spin singlet state, direct evaluation of its Pauli matrices correlations givesChoose , , , and . The four correlations are , respectively, giving
The success flag must be recorded and communicated before the subsequent independent choice of Bell-test settings. This conditioning is legitimate because setting-independent heralding preserves Bell locality: a putative local hidden-variable theory for the entire sequential experiment would, after successful filtering, still have local response functions with a setting-independent conditional hidden-variable distribution. More explicitly, if the hidden variable is and is the already determined success flag, conditioning changes its distribution to but leavesClassical messages used in preparation can be included in ; none are exchanged during the spacelike Bell measurements. Such a conditioned model still obeys the CHSH inequality, contradicting the displayed singlet correlations. Therefore no local hidden-variable theory reproduces all sequential measurement correlations of any entangled two-qubit pure state. This argument does not discard outcomes on the basis of the later measurement settings.
Photonic entanglement-swapping experiment 2026-10-18
In 1998, Jian-Wei Pan, Dik Bouwmeester, Harald Weinfurter and Anton Zeilinger created two photon pairs by two passages of a pulsed pump through a crystal using spontaneous parametric down-conversion. Interfering the inner photons at a nonpolarizing beam splitter implemented a partial Bell-basis measurement. Narrow optical filters and spatial filtering removed distinguishing information; changing the outer polarizer bases checked the conditional correlations. Fourfold detections selected the entanglement swapping events. The reported interference supported conditional quantum entanglement, but the paper reserved a statistically significant Bell inequality violation for improved visibility; it was not a demonstration closing the detection loophole.[ref]
Experimental Entanglement Swapping: Entangling Photons That Never Interacted by Jian-Wei Pan and others. pp. 3892-3894, Eq. (3), Figs. 2-3; visibility discussion
The ideal calculation makes the distinction between conditional and unconditional quantum states explicit. Start with spin singlet states , where and denote orthogonal photon polarizations. Taking the inner product with gives : expanding the four terms leaves precisely the two antisymmetric outer terms. That Bell-basis measurement outcome has probability and leaves the outer pair in a spin singlet state. Ignoring the inner outcome instead leaves the outer density matrix , a maximally mixed state. A conditional preparation flag is useful for later Bell tests only with the timing and setting conditions in setting-independent heralding preserves Bell locality.