3
$\begingroup$

Given a single-qubit state $|\psi\rangle=\alpha|0\rangle+\beta|1\rangle$, is it fine to calculate something like:

$$\langle\Phi^+|\psi\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\alpha\langle0| + \beta\langle1|),$$

where $\langle\Phi^+| = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\langle00| + \langle11|)$?

I feel that it's okay, since if we have $\langle00|0\rangle=\langle0|\otimes\langle0|\otimes|0\rangle$, and by orthonormality, we can simplify to $\langle0|$.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ First quantum state is described with vector of dimension 2, while the second one with a vector of dimension 4. You cannot calculate inner product of vectors having different dimensions. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 16 at 4:38
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ As @Martin said, the notation is ill-defined at best. You do see people do this sometimes, though. What is often meant is a local measurement/projection. A better description would be a partial trace on density matrices and projectors, because then it becomes clear that the state does not stay pure, in general. Hope this helps! $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 16 at 5:17

1 Answer 1

7
$\begingroup$

Your two-qubit state is defined on (funnily enough) two qubits, let's call them $A$ and $B$. It is now important to know whether $|\psi\rangle$ is a state/projection/measurement of qubit $A$ or qubit $B$. Without at least that specification, the operation is highly ambiguous (although the two answers happen to be the same in the example you give).

For greater clarity (and mathematical correctness), you need to include identity, $I$, on the qubit that you're not projecting on. For example, either $$ \langle\Phi^+|(|\psi\rangle\otimes I)\qquad\text{or}\qquad \langle\Phi^+|(I\otimes|\psi\rangle). $$

$\endgroup$
3
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ A common way to improve clarity is to add subscripts indicating the system, then one does not need to write the identity. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 16 at 6:43
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @NorbertSchuch This is certainly what I do, but I find my students often get themselves confused, hence why I suggested the version with explicit identities. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 16 at 7:33
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ You can't protect your students from the rough outside world forever! $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 16 at 7:57

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.