Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Thermodynamics
Leggett-Garg inequalities for quantum fluctuating work
arXiv
Authors: Harry J. D. Miller, Janet Anders
Year
2017
Paper ID
44058
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
127
Citations
N/A
Abstract
The Leggett-Garg inequalities serve to test whether or not quantum correlations in time can be explained within a classical macrorealistic framework. We apply this test to thermodynamics and derive a set of Leggett- Garg inequalities for the statistics of fluctuating work done on a quantum system unitarily driven in time. It is shown that these inequalities can be violated in a driven two-level system, thereby demonstrating that there exists no general macrorealistic description of quantum work. These violations are shown to emerge within the standard Two-Projective-Measurement scheme as well as for alternative definitions of fluctuating work that are based on weak measurement. Our results elucidate the influences of temporal correlations on work extraction in the quantum regime and highlight a key difference between quantum and classical thermodynamics.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Thermodynamics research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2017 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- The Leggett-Garg inequalities serve to test whether or not quantum correlations in time can be explained within a classical macrorealistic framework.
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.