This commit is contained in:
Mark 2024-02-08 09:21:22 -08:00
parent 56b72a0531
commit bd33aeb739
Signed by: Mark
GPG Key ID: C6D63995FE72FD80
5 changed files with 39 additions and 44 deletions

View File

@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ To keep things simple, we'll use regular (usually called \textit{classical}) bit
\definition{Binary Digits}
$\mathbb{B}$ is the set of binary digits. In other words, $\mathbb{B} = \{\texttt{0}, \texttt{1}\}$. \par
\note[Note]{We've seen $\mathbb{B}$ before: It's $(\mathbb{Z}_2, +)$, the addition group mod 2.}
\note[Note]{We've seen $\mathbb{B}$ before---it's the set of integers mod 2.}
\vspace{2mm}
@ -28,7 +28,8 @@ In this handout, we'll often see the following sets:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathbb{R}^2$, a two-dimensional plane
\item $\mathbb{R}^n$, an n-dimensional space
\item $\mathbb{B}^2$, the set $\{\texttt{00}, \texttt{01}, \texttt{10}, \texttt{11}\}$
\item $\mathbb{B}^2$, the set
$\{(\texttt{0},\texttt{0}), (\texttt{0},\texttt{1}), (\texttt{1},\texttt{0}), (\texttt{1},\texttt{1})\}$
\item $\mathbb{B}^n$, the set of all possible states of $n$ bits.
\end{itemize}
@ -61,35 +62,35 @@ We'll therefore say that \texttt{0} and \texttt{1} \textit{orthogonal} (or equiv
\vspace{2mm}
We can draw $\vec{0}$ and $\vec{1}$ as perpendicular axis on a plane to represent this:
We can draw $\vec{e}_0$ and $\vec{e}_1$ as perpendicular axis on a plane to represent this:
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1.5]
\fill[color = black] (0, 0) circle[radius=0.05];
\draw[->] (0, 0) -- (1.5, 0);
\node[right] at (1.5, 0) {$\vec{0}$ axis};
\node[right] at (1.5, 0) {$\vec{e}_0$ axis};
\fill[color = oblue] (1, 0) circle[radius=0.05];
\node[below] at (1, 0) {\texttt{0}};
\draw[->] (0, 0) -- (0, 1.5);
\node[above] at (0, 1.5) {$\vec{1}$ axis};
\node[above] at (0, 1.5) {$\vec{e}_1$ axis};
\fill[color = oblue] (0, 1) circle[radius=0.05];
\node[left] at (0, 1) {\texttt{1}};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
The point marked $1$ is at $[0, 1]$. It is no parts $\vec{0}$, and all parts $\vec{1}$. \par
The point marked $1$ is at $[0, 1]$. It is no parts $\vec{e}_0$, and all parts $\vec{e}_1$. \par
Of course, we can say something similar about the point marked $0$: \par
It is at $[1, 0] = (1 \times \vec{0}) + (0 \times \vec{1})$, and is thus all $\vec{0}$ and no $\vec{1}$. \par
It is at $[1, 0] = (1 \times \vec{e}_0) + (0 \times \vec{e}_1)$, and is thus all $\vec{e}_0$ and no $\vec{e}_1$. \par
\vspace{2mm}
Naturally, the coordinates $[0, 1]$ and $[1, 0]$ denote how much of each axis a point \say{contains.} \par
We could, of course, mark the point \texttt{x} at $[1, 1]$, which is equal parts $\vec{0}$ and $\vec{1}$: \par
We could, of course, mark the point \texttt{x} at $[1, 1]$, which is equal parts $\vec{e}_0$ and $\vec{e}_1$: \par
\note[Note]{
We could also write $\texttt{x} = \vec{0} + \vec{1}$ explicitly. \\
We could also write $\texttt{x} = \vec{e}_0 + \vec{e}_1$ explicitly. \\
I've drawn \texttt{x} as a point on the left, and as a sum on the right.
}
@ -100,10 +101,10 @@ We could, of course, mark the point \texttt{x} at $[1, 1]$, which is equal parts
\fill[color = black] (0, 0) circle[radius=0.05];
\draw[->] (0, 0) -- (1.5, 0);
\node[right] at (1.5, 0) {$\vec{0}$ axis};
\node[right] at (1.5, 0) {$\vec{e}_0$ axis};
\draw[->] (0, 0) -- (0, 1.5);
\node[above] at (0, 1.5) {$\vec{1}$ axis};
\node[above] at (0, 1.5) {$\vec{e}_1$ axis};
\fill[color = oblue] (1, 0) circle[radius=0.05];
\node[below] at (1, 0) {\texttt{0}};
@ -141,7 +142,7 @@ We could, of course, mark the point \texttt{x} at $[1, 1]$, which is equal parts
\vspace{4mm}
But \texttt{x} isn't a member of $\mathbb{B}$, it's not a valid state. \par
Our bit is fully $\vec{0}$ or fully $\vec{1}$. There's nothing in between.
Our bit is fully $\vec{e}_0$ or fully $\vec{e}_1$. By our current definitions, there's nothing in between.
\vspace{8mm}
@ -158,11 +159,11 @@ Our bit is fully $\vec{0}$ or fully $\vec{1}$. There's nothing in between.
\definition{Orthonormal Basis}
The unit vectors $\vec{0}$ and $\vec{1}$ form an \textit{orthonormal basis} of the plane $\mathbb{R}^2$. \par
The unit vectors $\vec{e}_0$ and $\vec{e}_1$ form an \textit{orthonormal basis} of the plane $\mathbb{R}^2$. \par
\note{
\say{ortho-} means \say{orthogonal}; normal means \say{normal,} which means length $= 1$. \\
}{
Note that $\vec{0}$ and $\vec{1}$ are orthonormal by \textit{definition}. \\
Note that $\vec{e}_0$ and $\vec{e}_1$ are orthonormal by \textit{definition}. \\
We don't have to prove anything, we simply defined them as such.
} \par
@ -215,11 +216,11 @@ Instead of writing our bits as just \texttt{0} and \texttt{1}, we'll break them
\null\hfill
\begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
\[ \ket{0} = \begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \end{bmatrix} = (1 \times \vec{0}) + (0 \times \vec{1}) \]
\[ \ket{0} = \begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \end{bmatrix} = (1 \times \vec{e}_0) + (0 \times \vec{e}_1) \]
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
\[ \ket{1} = \begin{bmatrix} 0 \\ 1 \end{bmatrix} = (0 \times \vec{0}) + (1 \times \vec{1}) \]
\[ \ket{1} = \begin{bmatrix} 0 \\ 1 \end{bmatrix} = (0 \times \vec{e}_0) + (1 \times \vec{e}_1) \]
\end{minipage}
\hfill\null
@ -250,10 +251,10 @@ Write \texttt{x} and \texttt{y} in the diagram below in terms of $\ket{0}$ and $
\fill[color = black] (0, 0) circle[radius=0.05];
\draw[->] (0, 0) -- (1.5, 0);
\node[right] at (1.5, 0) {$\vec{0}$ axis};
\node[right] at (1.5, 0) {$\vec{e}_0$ axis};
\draw[->] (0, 0) -- (0, 1.5);
\node[above] at (0, 1.5) {$\vec{1}$ axis};
\node[above] at (0, 1.5) {$\vec{e}_1$ axis};
\fill[color = oblue] (1, 0) circle[radius=0.05];
\node[below] at (1, 0) {$\ket{0}$};

View File

@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ $\{\texttt{0}, \texttt{1}\} \times \{\texttt{0}, \texttt{1}\} = \{\texttt{00}, \
\vspace{1mm}
The same is true of any other state set: if $a$ takes values in $A$ and $b$ takes values in $B$, \par
the compound state $(a,b)$ takes values in $A \times B$. This is trivial.
the compound state $(a,b)$ takes values in $A \times B$.
\vspace{4mm}
@ -69,8 +69,6 @@ the compound state $(a,b)$ takes values in $A \times B$. This is trivial.
We would like to do the same in vector notation. Given $\ket{a}$ and $\ket{b}$, \par
how should we represent the state of $\ket{ab}$?
\vfill
\pagebreak
@ -303,7 +301,10 @@ Write $\ket{5}$ as three-bit state vector. \par
\problem{}
Write the three-bit states $\ket{0}$ through $\ket{7}$ as column vectors. \par
What do you see?
\hint{
You do not need to compute every tensor product. \\
Do a few, you should quickly see the pattern.
}

View File

@ -165,13 +165,11 @@ Our measurement again returns either $\ket{0}$ or $\ket{1}$, with the following
\vspace{2mm}
In addition $\ket{\psi}$ \textit{collapses} to the state we measure: it instantly jumps to the state we measure, \par
leaving no trace of its previous state. If we measure $\ket{\psi}$ and get $\ket{1}$, $\ket{\psi}$ becomes $\ket{1}$---and
In addition, $\ket{\psi}$ \textit{collapses} when it is measured: it instantly changes its state to the result of the measurement,
leaving no trace of its previous state. \par
If we measure $\ket{\psi}$ and get $\ket{1}$, $\ket{\psi}$ becomes $\ket{1}$---and
it will remain in that state until it is changed.
\vspace{2mm}
Quantum bits \textit{cannot} be measured without their state collapsing. \par
We cannot certainly know the state of a qubit unless that state is $\ket{0}$ or $\ket{1}$.
\pagebreak

View File

@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ Find a matrix $A$ so that $A\ket{\texttt{ab}}$ works as expected. \par
\generic{Remark:}
The way a quantum circuit handles information is a bit different than the way a classical circuit does.
We usually think of logic gates as \textit{functions}: they consume some set of bits, and return another:
We usually think of logic gates as \textit{functions}: they consume one set of bits, and return another:
\begin{center}
@ -143,10 +143,10 @@ We'll also add a horizontal time axis, moving from left to right:
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1]
\node[qubit] (a) at (0, 0) {\texttt{0}};
\node[qubit] (b) at (0, -1) {\texttt{0}};
\node[qubit] (b) at (0, -1) {\texttt{1}};
\draw[wire] (a) -- ([shift={(4, 0)}] a.center) node[qubit] {\texttt{0}};
\draw[wire] (b) -- ([shift={(4, 0)}] b.center) node[qubit] {\texttt{0}};
\draw[wire] (b) -- ([shift={(4, 0)}] b.center) node[qubit] {\texttt{1}};
\draw[
color = oblue,

View File

@ -12,12 +12,12 @@ This implies the following: \par
\begin{itemize}
\item $G$ is square \par
\note{
If we think of $G$ as a map, this implies it has as many inputs as it has outputs. \\
This makes sense---we stated earlier that quantum gates do not destroy or create qubits.
If we think of $G$ as a map, this means that $G$ has as many inputs as it has outputs. \\
This is to be expected: we stated earlier that quantum gates do not destroy or create qubits.
}
\item $G$ preserves lengths; i.e $|x| = |Gx|$. \par
\note{This ensures that $G\ket{\psi}$ is always a valid state!}
\note{This ensures that $G\ket{\psi}$ is always a valid state.}
\end{itemize}
(You will prove all these properties in any introductory linear algebra course. \\
@ -103,12 +103,6 @@ Find the matrix that applies the cnot gate.
\vfill
\generic{Remark:}
As we just saw, a quantum gate is fully defined by the place it maps our basis states $\ket{0}$ and $\ket{1}$ \par
(or, $\ket{00...0}$ through $\ket{11...1}$ for multi-qubit gates). This directly follows from \ref{qgateislinear}.
\pagebreak
@ -133,7 +127,11 @@ If we measure the result of \ref{applycnot}, what are the probabilities of getti
\vfill
\generic{Remark:}
As we just saw, a quantum gate is fully defined by the place it maps our basis states $\ket{0}$ and $\ket{1}$ \par
(or, $\ket{00...0}$ through $\ket{11...1}$ for multi-qubit gates). This directly follows from \ref{qgateislinear}.
\pagebreak
%\problem{}
%Now, modify the CNOT gate so that it inverts $\ket{a}$ whenever it is applied.
@ -149,9 +147,6 @@ If we measure the result of \ref{applycnot}, what are the probabilities of getti
% \end{equation*}
%\end{solution}
\vfill
\pagebreak
%\problem{}
%Finally, modify the original CNOT gate so that the roles of its bits are reversed: \par
%$\text{CNOT}_{\text{flip}} \ket{ab}$ should invert $\ket{a}$ iff $\ket{b}$ is $\ket{1}$.
@ -238,11 +233,11 @@ Using this result, find $H^{-1}$.
\problem{}
What are $H\ket{0}$ and $H\ket{1}$? \par
Are these states superpositions?
Are these states entangled?
\begin{solution}
$H\ket{0} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\bigl(\ket{0} + \ket{1}\bigr)$ and $H\ket{1} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\bigl(\ket{0} - \ket{1}\bigr)$ \par
Both of these are superpositions.
Both of these are entangled states.
\end{solution}
\vfill