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

PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

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

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,054 questions , 2,207 unanswered
5,345 answers , 22,719 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
818 active unimported users
More ...

  Quantum information science references

+ 5 like - 0 dislike
7643 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
@Arnold: You are right, of course, but when I say "you are feeling the wavefunction" I just mean that any pure state which is consistent with the macroscopic density matrix will produce the same repulsion. These discussions are perhaps academic, since I think we agree about all the actual positive questions about what will happen when you do what.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user Ron Maimon
@Ron: I like formal clarity of the terminology used; vague phrases only promote misunderstandings. What is the formal meaning of $\psi$ being consistent with the density matrix $\rho$? I never saw any, and statistical mechanics always works exclusively with the density matrix (except in the very beginning where it is motivated). Nowhere (except there) one makes any use of the assumption that the density matrix expresses ignorance - and indeed, there is no way to verify this assumption. It would be very surprising if Nature would change its behavior depending on how much we ignore.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:21 (UCT), posted by SE-user Arnold Neumaier
let us continue this discussion in chat

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

Most recent comments show all comments
@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
@Arnold: I meant "the wavefunction of the electron in the H atom", and I extended it to the wavefunction of the electrons in the table. There was never an intention on my part of implying the wavefunction is particle-by-particle. I am sorry for the confusion. As far as the density matrix, if the table were isolated and truly in a pure state, it wouldn't be any less hard. You are not feeling a density matrix, although to the extent that your electrons are entangled with the table's, you need a density matrix. The density matrix is a description of ignorance, not (obviously) so the wavefunction.

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

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 (6,240 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 (90 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:
$\varnothing\hbar$ysicsOverflow
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).
Please complete the anti-spam verification




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

Your rights
...