Quick Navigation
Topics
Trapped Ion Quantum Computing
Decoherence as detector of the Unruh effect, II
arXiv
Authors: Manuel de Atocha Rodríguez Fernández, Alexander I. Nesterov, Gennady P. Berman, C. Moreno-González
Year
2025
Paper ID
36098
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
98
Citations
N/A
Abstract
The Unruh effect remains a central topic in quantum field theory, although its direct experimental verification continues to be challenging. Recent efforts have therefore focused on indirect detection strategies in which the Unruh effect emerges through measurable physical processes. In this work, we extend a previously introduced detector model, originally formulated for a massless scalar field, to the electromagnetic field. We show that the decoherence decay rates differ between inertial and accelerated frames. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the characteristic exponential decay associated with the Unruh effect can be observed at lower accelerations than those considered in earlier studies.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Trapped-Ion Quantum Computing research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2025 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- The Unruh effect remains a central topic in quantum field theory, although its direct experimental verification continues to be challenging.
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.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.