Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

New features!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

122 submissions , 103 unreviewed
3,497 questions , 1,172 unanswered
4,548 answers , 19,352 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
409 active unimported users
More ...

Quantum information science references

+ 5 like - 0 dislike
3381 views

I was hoping you guys could recommend reading material on Quantum Information Science. First off, here's my background.

Personally, I started reading Ballentine's Quantum Mechanics and I found it be a very consistent book in terms of foundations and absolutely loved it. The treatment is better than most other books on the subject, including the popular ones like Sakurai, Merzbacher. I wondered why there existed this difference. Why were the others rather sloppy?

I found my answer when I discovered my new favorite author, Asher Peres. As I read his works, I found this quote in an excellent paper (Rev. Mod. Phys., 76, 2004)

"Quantum mechanics is used by theorists in two different ways. It is a tool for computing accurate relationships between physical constants, such as energy levels, cross sections, transition rates, etc. These calculations are technically difficult, but they are not controversial."

The other group is tackling the foundations. I was drawn towards this group and as I read more of Peres' works, I got absorbed with the idea of information in QM. I then read many of C. Fuchs' works and followed on with those in the Perimeter Institute, where this sort of research seems to be hot.

Coming from the background of Peres and Ballentine, my gut reaction to books which talk of collapse or simultaneous measurements or quantum mechanics of individual systems as opposed to ensembles is to shut them. Only slowly am I overcoming this, because I find that most books are very sloppy and that if I wish to learn any more, I cannot afford to do so. I am trying to be as open as possible.

Currently, I am reading the book by Busch, Lahti and Grebowski, notes on Arxiv by Keyl and also the notes by Preskill. If anyone has any suggestions, recommended reads, I'd love to know!


This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user WiFO215

asked Jan 30, 2012 in Resources and References by WiFO215 (0 points) [ revision history ]
recategorized Apr 24, 2014 by dimension10
Most voted comments show all comments
It is absolutely incorrect to think quantum mechanics only describes ensembles. The quantum state of a single hydrogen atom predicts many definite things about its motion, and the wavefunction of the electron is a physical thing--- that's what you feel when you knock your hand against a table. The idea that it is sloppy to treat the wavefunction as a complete description of a physical system is just an error of thinking, and if your sources commit it, please try to switch to other sources which are more "sloppy" in your view, because you will come to understand that they are not sloppy at all.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user Ron Maimon
@Ron Maimon: When we knock at a table, we feel not the wave function of an electron but the density matrix of a many-electron system. As statistical mechanics reveals, it is a density matrix (namely $e^{-S/k_B}$) that describes a single macroscopic system - not wave functions, which are not observable.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user Arnold Neumaier
@Ron Maimon: What is incorrect? A metal at any temperature is described by a mixed multielectron state, not by the wave function of an electron. For each single piece of metal, there is only a single density matrix, not a multitude of wavefunctions. None of the latter is observbable (they are not even uniquely determined by the state), while the former is.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user Arnold Neumaier
@Arnold Neumaier: The wavefunction is a wavefunction of all the electrons, not of one electron. At zero temperature, the density matrix might as well be a wavefunction, because it is a single pure state, the ground state. The ground state wavefunction and the ground state density matrix are identical information. What you are saying is that I mixed up the multi-electron wavefunction with the single-electron wavefunction, which is a terrible error, I agree, but one that I did not make.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user Ron Maimon
@Ron Maimon: So you wrote ''the wavefunction of the electron'' for the multi-electron wavefunction!?? But even then - absolute zero is never attained. Moreover, at room temperature (you knock your hand against a table at T=293 K or so) you never have a wave function but a density matrix composed of a huge number of relevant states.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user Arnold Neumaier
Most recent comments show all comments
I've found Claude Shannon's original papers to be a good source of inspiration. I'm making this a comment because Shannon did not contribute, or even know about, quantum information theory. You can look in AT&T's archives for his bibliography and try to find the ones you like, or if you're ambitious, you can pick up a copy of his collected papers edited by Wyner and Sloane (1993).

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user bwkaplan

@ronmaimon the ensemble considered inthe ensemble is a virtual ensemble just to identify the 'state' of the system with the preparation method 

7 Answers

+ 6 like - 0 dislike

Nielsen, Chuang: Quantum Computation and Quantum Information

Bengtsson, Życzkowski, Geometry of Quantum States

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user celtschk
answered Jan 30, 2012 by celtschk (0 points) [ no revision ]
Hi, Thanks, but I already know of those two. Any other suggestions?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user WiFO215
+ 3 like - 0 dislike

You might like quantiki http://www.quantiki.org/, it is a portal dedicated to quantum information theory. It contains interesting stuff ( e.g, video abstracts of papers).

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user Serifo Blade
answered Jan 31, 2012 by Serifo Blade (0 points) [ no revision ]
Thanks, but I knew of this too. I was hoping there'd be something I missed.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user WiFO215
+ 2 like - 0 dislike

I'd recommend the lecture notes from these two courses taught by John Watrous. They can be found at http://www.cs.uwaterloo.ca/~watrous/lecture-notes.html from when he taught at the University of Calgary. I've used the notes from his Theory of Quantum Information course numerous times for a quick reference on some more difficult concepts.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user Kent Fisher
answered Feb 26, 2012 by Kent Fisher (0 points) [ no revision ]
The notes from his course at the University of Waterloo are also great.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user Chris Ferrie
+ 2 like - 0 dislike

Scott Aaronson has just published a new book about quantum computing. According to the nice introductary comments the author himself has written to his book here (scroll down to the second half of the article if you only want to learn about the book), it should explain and introduce both the physical and mathematical concepts quantum computing is based on.

Maybe reading this book can help students in choosing the appropriat mathematical and phyics lectures to be heard in what reasonable order to finally being able to do research in quantum computing too.

answered Apr 10, 2013 by Dilaton (4,175 points) [ revision history ]
+1 I'm on p. 85 (of 370) and thus far it is a delight. I suggest perusing the first pages ("Critical Review") using Amazon's "Look Inside" feature to assist you in your purchasing decision.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:22 (UCT), posted by SE-user Glen The Udderboat
+ 1 like - 0 dislike

The best recommendation I can offer isn't for a book, but a series of video lectures. The Perimeter Institute and the University of Waterloo offer a Masters program in theoretical physics called Perimeter Scholars International (full disclosure: I graduated from PSI in 2010), and videos of all PSI lectures are posted on PI's video site, PIRSA. One of the PSI courses, Rob Spekkens' course on quantum foundations, sounds like it'd be the exact kind of thing you're looking for. The most recent offering of his class can be found here.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user Chris Granade
answered Feb 1, 2012 by Chris Granade (260 points) [ no revision ]
I know of these too. I like Spekkens' course and also Ben Schumacher's course. Chris Fuchs lectures are very inspiring and informative.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user WiFO215
Would you happen to know any references for Statistical Mechanics books which introduce stat mech from the perspective of information theory?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user WiFO215
The online book ''Classical and Quantum Mechanics via Lie algebras'' (lanl.arxiv.org/abs/0810.1019) has in Chapter 10: Models, statistics, and measurements a discussion on the relation of statistical mechanics to information theory

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user Arnold Neumaier
+ 1 like - 0 dislike

Have you seen Quantum Computer Science : An Introduction by Mermin? It is a really fine book.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:22 (UCT), posted by SE-user Vijay Murthy
answered Apr 13, 2012 by Vijay Murthy (80 points) [ no revision ]
This book is the clearest and most straightforward introduction that I've seen.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:22 (UCT), posted by SE-user Nick Thompson
+ 1 like - 0 dislike

I have found a resource on my own. Here are lectures from H. Mabuchi at Stanford:

http://www.stanford.edu/~hmabuchi/AP225-2008/

and R. Sasaki:

http://www.stanford.edu/~rsasaki/AP226/AP226.html

Both have excellent lecture material uploaded.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:22 (UCT), posted by SE-user WiFO215
answered May 12, 2012 by WiFO215 (0 points) [ no revision ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar$ysicsOv$\varnothing$rflow
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...