6
$\begingroup$

When pure states $|\psi_1⟩$, $|\psi_2⟩$ and $|\phi_1⟩$, $|\phi_2⟩$ in $\mathcal{H}_A \otimes \mathcal{H}_B$ have identical statistical mixtures $$\frac{1}{2}(|\psi_1⟩⟨\psi_1| + |\psi_2⟩⟨\psi_2|) = \frac{1}{2}(|\phi_1⟩⟨\phi_1| + |\phi_2⟩⟨\phi_2|) ,$$ then we know (by linearity of the partial trace) that the reduced states $\rho_i = \text{tr}_B |\psi_i⟩⟨\psi_i|$ and $\sigma_i = \text{tr}_B |\phi_i⟩⟨\phi_i|$ on the space $\mathcal{H}_A$ also have identical mixtures $\frac{1}{2}(\rho_1 + \rho_2) = \frac{1}{2}(\sigma_1 + \sigma_2)$. My question concerns the converse of this statement.

Let $\rho_1$, $\rho_2$ and $\sigma_1$, $\sigma_2$ be density operators on a finite-dimensional space $\mathcal{H}$ which satisfy $$\rho_1 + \rho_2 = \sigma_1 + \sigma_2 .$$ Do there always exist corresponding purifications $|\psi_1⟩$, $|\psi_2⟩$ and $|\phi_1⟩$, $|\phi_2⟩$ in $\mathcal{H} \otimes \mathcal{P}$ (for some purifying space $\mathcal{P}$) of the $\rho_1$, $\rho_2$ and $\sigma_1$, $\sigma_2$ which satisfy $$|\psi_1⟩⟨\psi_1| + |\psi_2⟩⟨\psi_2| = |\phi_1⟩⟨\phi_1| + |\phi_2⟩⟨\phi_2| ?$$

More generally, I would like to know about when (if at all) identical mixtures of the form $\sum_i p_i \rho_i = \sum_i q_i \sigma_i$ imply the existence of purifications such that $\sum_i p_i |\psi_i⟩⟨\psi_i| = \sum_i q_i |\phi_i⟩⟨\phi_i|$.

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

One data point for the general case (that indicates it's not always possible): $\rho_1=|0\rangle\langle0|$, $\rho_2=|1\rangle\langle1|$, $p_1p_2\neq0$ while $\sigma_1=p_1\rho_1+p_2\rho_2$ and $q_1=1$. Note that the purifications of the left-hand side are separable, so $p_1|\psi_1\rangle\langle\psi_1|+p_2|\psi_2\rangle\langle\psi_2|$ is separable. Meanwhile, the purification of $\sigma_1$ must be entangled, so $q_1|\phi_1\rangle\langle\phi_1|+q_2|\phi_2\rangle\langle\phi_2|$ is entangled. Thus, the two things are different.


I think I have a similar variant for the special case you're after. Let $$ \rho_1=|0\rangle\langle 0|,\quad \rho_2=\frac14(|0\rangle+\sqrt{3}|1\rangle)(\langle 0|+\sqrt{3}\langle 1|), \quad\sigma_1=\frac14(\sqrt{3}|0\rangle+|1\rangle)(\sqrt{3}\langle0|+\langle 1|) $$ This implies that $$ \sigma_2=\rho_1+\rho_2-\sigma_1=I/2. $$ As above, the purifications of $\rho_1$ and $\rho_2$ must be separable, meaning that $|\psi_1\rangle\langle\psi_1|+|\psi_2\rangle\langle\psi_2|$ is separable. Thus, our aim is to show that for every possible purification of $\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2$, $\Phi=|\phi_1\rangle\langle\phi_1|+|\phi_2\rangle\langle\phi_2|$ is entangled. My plan to show this is to take the partial transpose and calculate its determinant, $\text{det}(\Phi^{T_A})$. This being negative is a sufficient condition for detecting entanglement.

Let us set $$ |\phi_1\rangle=\frac12(\sqrt{3}|0\rangle+|1\rangle)|\gamma\rangle,\quad|\phi_2\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|00\rangle+|11\rangle). $$ Note that the only important thing in the range of possible purifications is a relative unitary, which I've incorporated into the arbitrary state $|\gamma\rangle$. Note that, strictly, $|\gamma\rangle$ could live in a hilbert space of dimension greater than 2 (3 should be sufficient), although in the following I've assumed it's Hilbert space dimension 2.

If you let $$ |\gamma\rangle=\cos x|0\rangle+\sin xe^{iy}|1\rangle, $$ then $$ \text{det}(\Phi^{T_A})=\frac{1}{32} \left(-\sqrt{3} \sin (2 x) \cos (y)-\cos (2 x)-4\right) $$ (I did this in Mathematica). The largest this can be is $-1/16$, i.e. negative. So the state is necessarily entangled. There do not always exist purifications such that $|\psi_1\rangle\langle\psi_1|+|\psi_2\rangle\langle\psi_2|=|\phi_1\rangle\langle\phi_1|+|\phi_2\rangle\langle\phi_2|$ (up to the caveat that I haven't considered $|\gamma\rangle$ in full generality).

$\endgroup$
9
  • $\begingroup$ It's impossible to use this example but with $\sigma_2 = \sigma_1$ to resolve also the special case, right? One could choose two different purifications of $\sigma_1$, both necessarily entangled, whose mixture (with $q_1 = q_2 = 1/2$) is separable. $\endgroup$
    – Gv26
    Jul 22 at 15:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, it doesn't work with the special case, which is why I didn't answer for the special case! I suspect there probably is a variant of this approach that will answer your special case, but haven't had a chance to look carefully yet $\endgroup$
    – DaftWullie
    Jul 22 at 15:24
  • $\begingroup$ Why do you conclude that a convex combination of entangled states is itself entangled? Counterarguments are quite straightforward; for example equal combinations of the four Bell states $\endgroup$ Jul 23 at 15:05
  • $\begingroup$ I don't conclude that a convex combination of entangled states is entangled. I prove that they are entangled by checking the PPT criterion. $\endgroup$
    – DaftWullie
    Jul 23 at 15:29
  • $\begingroup$ $\sigma_1$ is pure, so the purification is separable. If you take the partial trace of your proposed $|\phi_1\rangle$, you'll get a mixed state outcome unless $|a\rangle=|b\rangle$. $\endgroup$
    – DaftWullie
    Jul 23 at 15:30
0
$\begingroup$

It can be shown by direct calculation that the counterexample provided in the answer of DaftWullie holds in general. As in that answer, define $$ \rho_1 = |0⟩⟨0| , $$ $$ \rho_2 = \frac{1}{4}(|0⟩ + \sqrt{3}|1⟩)(⟨0| + \sqrt{3}⟨1|) , $$ $$ \sigma_1 = \frac{1}{4}(\sqrt{3}|0⟩ + |1⟩)(\sqrt{3}⟨0| + ⟨1|) , $$ and, so that $\rho_1 + \rho_2 = \sigma_1 + \sigma_2$ is satisfied, $$ \sigma_2 = \rho_1 + \rho_2 - \sigma_1 = \frac{1}{2}(|0⟩⟨0| + |1⟩⟨1|) . $$ Consider purifications of these states $$ |\psi_1⟩ = |0⟩ |\alpha⟩ , $$ $$ |\psi_2⟩ = \frac{1}{2}(|0⟩ + \sqrt{3}|1⟩) |\beta⟩ , $$ $$ |\phi_1⟩ = \frac{1}{2}(\sqrt{3}|0⟩ + |1⟩) |\gamma⟩ , $$ $$ |\phi_2⟩ = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0⟩ |0⟩ + |1⟩ |1⟩) , $$ where $|\alpha⟩$, $|\beta⟩$, and $|\gamma⟩$ are arbitrary state vectors in the purifying space (which is also arbitrary). These account for all possible purifications since, by the Schrödinger–HJW theorem, all purifications of a state differ only by a unitary transformation acting on the purifying space.

Suppose for a contradiction that $|\psi_1⟩⟨\psi_1| + |\psi_2⟩⟨\psi_2| = |\phi_1⟩⟨\phi_1| + |\phi_2⟩⟨\phi_2|$. Expanding this out gives $$ \begin{alignat}{2} &|0⟩⟨0| \otimes \bigg( |\alpha⟩⟨\alpha| + \frac{1}{4}|\beta⟩⟨\beta| \bigg) & {}+{} &|1⟩⟨0| \otimes \frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}|\beta⟩⟨\beta| \\ {}+{} &|0⟩⟨1| \otimes \frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}|\beta⟩⟨\beta| & {}+{} &|1⟩⟨1| \otimes \frac{3}{4}|\beta⟩⟨\beta| \\ {}={} &|0⟩⟨0| \otimes \bigg( \frac{3}{4}|\gamma⟩⟨\gamma| + \frac{1}{2}|0⟩⟨0| \bigg) & {}+{} &|1⟩⟨0| \otimes \bigg( \frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}|\gamma⟩⟨\gamma| + \frac{1}{2}|1⟩⟨0| \bigg) \\ {}+{} &|0⟩⟨1| \otimes \bigg( \frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}|\gamma⟩⟨\gamma| + \frac{1}{2}|0⟩⟨1| \bigg) & {}+{} &|1⟩⟨1| \otimes \bigg( \frac{1}{4}|\gamma⟩⟨\gamma| + \frac{1}{2}|1⟩⟨1| \bigg) . \end{alignat} $$ Since the $|0⟩$ and $|1⟩$ are orthogonal, we can equate each term on either side of this expression. In particular, from the terms with $|1⟩⟨0|$, we must have $$ \frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}|\beta⟩⟨\beta| = \frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}|\gamma⟩⟨\gamma| + \frac{1}{2}|1⟩⟨0| . $$ From the terms with $|0⟩⟨1|$, we must have $$ \frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}|\beta⟩⟨\beta| = \frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}|\gamma⟩⟨\gamma| + \frac{1}{2}|0⟩⟨1| . $$ Together, the previous two equalities result in $|1⟩⟨0| = |0⟩⟨1|$, which is false. Therefore, for this example, there are no purifications such that $|\psi_1⟩⟨\psi_1| + |\psi_2⟩⟨\psi_2| = |\phi_1⟩⟨\phi_1| + |\phi_2⟩⟨\phi_2|$.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.