Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Foundations
Simplified Quantum Optical Stokes observables and Bell's Theorem
arXiv
Authors: Konrad Schlichtholz, Bianka Woloncewicz, Marek Żukowski
Year
2021
Paper ID
41110
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
122
Citations
N/A
Abstract
We introduce a simplified form of Stokes operators for quantum optical fields that involve the known concept of binning. Behind polarization analyzer photon numbers (more generally intensities) are measured. If the value obtained in one of the outputs, say H, is greater the than in the other one, V, then the value of the simplified Stokes operator is, say, 1, otherwise it is -1. For equal photon numbers we put 0. Such observables do not have all properties of the Stokes operators, but surprisingly can be employed in Bell type measurements, involving polarization analyzers. They are especially handy for states of undefined number of photons, e.g. squeezed vacuum. We show that surprisingly they can lead to quite robust violations of associated Bell inequalities.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2021 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- We introduce a simplified form of Stokes operators for quantum optical fields that involve the known concept of binning.
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.