# About universal quantum computation by “quantum wires”?

+ 2 like - 0 dislike
28 views

In this paper: A. Y. Kitaev, "Unpaired Majorana fermions in quantum wires", Phys.-Usp. 44 131 (2001), arXiv:cond-mat/0010440, it says:

Unlimited quantum computation is possible if errors in the implementation of each gate are below certain threshold. Unfortunately, for conventional fault-tolerance schemes the threshold appears to be about $$10^{−4}$$, which is beyond the reach of current technologies. It has been also suggested that fault-tolerance can be achieved at the physical level (instead of using quantum error-correcting codes). The first proposal of these kind was based on non-Abelian anyons in two-dimensional systems. In this paper we describe another (theoretically, much simpler) way to construct decoherence-protected degrees of freedom in one-dimensional systems (“quantum wires”). Although it does not automatically provide fault-tolerance for quantum gates, it should allow, when implemented, to build a reliable quantum memory.

My questions:

1. why "conventional fault-tolerance schemes the threshold appears to be about $$10^{−4}$$, which is beyond the reach of current technologies" Why is it $$10^{−4}$$? and what is this ratio?

2. the “quantum wire” does not automatically provide fault-tolerance for quantum gates? Why is that? and what correspond to the quantum operations for quantum gates in “quantum wire”? are these quadratic Majorana operators or higher order Majorana operators?

3. "Although it does not automatically provide fault-tolerance for quantum gates, it should allow, when implemented, to build a reliable quantum memory."--> What are the criteria for "reliable quantum memory?" (does it make difference in 1d or other dimensions.)

4. Later there is a claim "Even without actual inelastic processes, this will produce the same effect as decoherence" (this here means "different electron configurations will have different energies and thus will pick up different phases" due to the fermion number $$a^\dagger a$$ term on a local site). What are the actual inelastic processes mean in quantum sense?

5. In p.4, "if a single Majorana operator can be localized, symmetry transformation S should not mix it with other operators." What does it mean to have S not mixed with other operators? Is that S commutative to other operators? Namely other operators respect the symmetry S?

6. In a footnote "3-dimensional substrate can effectively induce the desired pairing between electrons with the same spin direction — at least, this is true in the absence of spin-orbit interaction" --> What does (with or without) the spin-orbit interaction affect then?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-12-03 17:30 (UTC), posted by SE-user annie marie heart
 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): Email me at this address if my answer is selected or commented on: 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$\hbar$ysi$\varnothing$sOverflowThen 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.