5
$\begingroup$

In field theory, by quantizing a dirac field, we can obtain a creation operator for a single electron of definite momentum, of definite spin up or down, these respectively are: $$a^\dagger_{+}(p)|0\rangle, {a^\dagger}_{-}(p)|0\rangle$$ Where we've defined the former to create a spin +1/2 electron, the latter to create a spin -1/2 electron. By addition and repeated-application of these creation operators we can write down a state of any number of particles, each having any superposition of spins. : $$ \int dp f(p)\prod_{i=0}^n(\alpha_ia^\dagger_{i+}(p)+\beta_i{a^\dagger}_{i-}(p))|0 \rangle $$ Where of course $i$ labels the particle, and $a,b,f$ are some distributions.

Question: For a given field theory, how does one write down a creation operator for a pair of entangled particles? (say electrons in a Dirac theory of spinors)

In quantum mechanics, an entangled state is one which lives in a tensor product Hilbert space, but does not have a tensor product decomposition. Since Fock space is essentially built up with a bunch of tensor products of Hilbert spaces, it doesn't seem unreasonable to demand that it contains such entangled states. But how does one explicitly write down such a state?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I would like to note that this is not a duplicate of any previous questions on measurement in QFT or entanglement in QFT, for I am asking for something specific and explicit that has not been answered by any previous questions. $\endgroup$ – zzz Jul 25 '14 at 17:36
  • $\begingroup$ 1007.1569 appears to be a relevant reference, maybe I will read through it and write an answer. $\endgroup$ – zzz Jul 25 '14 at 17:51
  • $\begingroup$ this previous question gives an example of what's not an answer. $\endgroup$ – zzz Jul 25 '14 at 17:55
0
$\begingroup$

A state like $ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(a^\dagger_+(\vec p)a^\dagger_+(-\vec p) + a^\dagger_-(\vec p)a^\dagger_-(-\vec p))|0\rangle$ would be an example. It is both entangled in spin and entangled in momenta.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It is an entangled state. If you measure the spin of one of the $2$ particles relatively to an axis $Oz$ and find $+1$, then a measure of the spin of the other particle relatively to this axis $Oz$ will give you $+$ too. The measurement will project the initial state, into the state $a^\dagger_+(\vec p)a^\dagger_+(-\vec p)$ $\endgroup$ – Trimok Jul 27 '14 at 11:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ this is actually right now that I think about it, it has this weird form because Fock space is already equipped with a tensor product structure, but the state you give here would indeed give an entangled system. $\endgroup$ – zzz Aug 11 '14 at 3:52
3
$\begingroup$

Let $f(x,y)\in L^2(\mathbb{R}^{2d})$ and $\Omega$ the vacuum of the symmetric Fock space $\Gamma_s(L^2(\mathbb{R}^d))$. Suppose there is no $f_1,f_2\in L^2(\mathbb{R}^d)$ such that $f(x,y)=f_1(x)f_2(y)$: then $f_s$ (the symmetrized of $f$) is an "entangled" two particle state of $\Gamma_s(L^2(\mathbb{R}^d))$. This is created by $$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\int f(x,y) a^*(x)a^*(y)dxdy\Omega\; .$$ For antisymmetric particles and/or more degrees of freedom the reasoning is the same.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you very much. This looks right to me, but can you give a link of where this form is used explicitly in literature? $\endgroup$ – zzz Jul 26 '14 at 2:59
  • $\begingroup$ @bechira Unluckily I don't know of papers utilizing this type of operators in the context of entanglement (mainly because I don't know much about entanglement itself), however as you can see it is a fairly easy construction. Trying to remember the literature I know better, I found a state similar to what you look for in this paper (page 10); but I don't know if this may be useful to you...there are surely other better examples that I am not aware of ;-) $\endgroup$ – yuggib Jul 26 '14 at 9:37
  • $\begingroup$ Okay thanks, I will dig through literature as well, and I'll accept this answer as soon as I find some confirmation in literature. $\endgroup$ – zzz Jul 26 '14 at 16:24

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.