Quick Navigation

Overview Topics Abstract Importance Paper Tools References Reactions Discussion Publication Related

Topics

Photonic Quantum Computing Quantum Foundations

Ion-Photon Entanglement and Bell Inequality Violation with 138Ba+

arXiv

Authors: Carolyn Auchter, Chen-Kuan Chou, Thomas W. Noel, Boris B. Blinov

Year

2013

Paper ID

32451

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

106

Citations

N/A

Abstract

We report on the demonstration of ion-photon entanglement and Bell inequality violation in a system of trapped 138Ba+ ions. Entanglement between the Zeeman sublevels of the ground state of a single 138Ba+ ion and the polarization state of a single 493 nm photon emitted by the ion with a fidelity of 0.84pm0.01 was achieved, along with a Bell signal of 2.3, exceeding the classical limit of 2 by over eight standard deviations. This system is a promising candidate for a loophole-free Bell inequality violation test as the wavelengths of the transitions of 138Ba+ are in the visible region and thus suitable for long range transmission over fiber optic cable.

Why This Paper Matters

This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
It adds a 2013 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
We report on the demonstration of ion-photon entanglement and Bell inequality violation in a system of trapped 138Ba+ ions.

Paper Tools

Become a member to use research tools

Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.

Become a member Sign in

Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

[1] DOI https://doi.org/arXiv:1310.0028 [2] arXiv https://arxiv.org/abs/1310.0028 [3] Publisher https://arxiv.org/abs/1310.0028

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0

Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.