Experimental Nonlocality Proof of Quantum Teleportation and Entanglement Swapping

Thomas Jennewein, Gregor Weihs, Jian-Wei Pan, Anton Zeilinger

PRL 88, 017903-2(2002)
This work was supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) and the QuComm IST-FET project of the European Commission.

Entangled Photons
- = 1 y
2 2 1 = R 1L 2- L 1R 2 = 2 1 = +1- 2- -1+ 2 2

(H ( (

V 1

-V 2

H 1

)=

One of four Bell-states

n n n

Not factorizable Strong correlations between the systems Individual systems have no properties, only joint properties

Correlation Measurement
a
Source

- = 1 y

(H

V -V H

1 2 P+ + ( , b ) = P- - ( , b ) = sin ( - b ) a a a 2

Correlation: E(a,b) = P++ + P-- - P+ - - P- + = - cos(2a-2b) always perfect anticorrelations for parallel Analyzers (a=b).

Bells Inequality
Based on EPR: Locality and Realism
Locality: Particles act independtly in measurement Realism: Carried information (l) defines result CHSH-Inequality:

E (a , b ) - E (a , b ) + E ( , b )+ E ( , b ) 2 a a
QM: E(a,b) = - cos(2a-2b)

2 22 /

Source of Entangled Photons

n

Spontaneous Parametric Down-conversion

n n

non-linear optical process (c2) one UV-photon decays into two new photons obeying energy and momentum conservation
extra ordinary (vertical) UVPump
B

BBO-Crystal ordinary (horizontal) |HA|VB + |VA|HB

The Bi-Photon State

n

The full state

This state resembles the |Y- for a narrow pump linewidth Contrast is reduced for finite pump linewidth

Quantum State Teleportation

n

Quantum state is transferred between different particles, as long as no information about the state is found out. Classically impossible due to: n Heisenberg Uncertainty n No-cloning Theorem

Basic ingreedient for quantum repeater, quantum networks, quantum computers.

Teleportation Scheme
1993 PRL, Bennet et al. : Teleporting an unknown quantum state via dual classical and EPR channels.
Input State

Entanglement Swapping
VICTOR

The most general test of QST

n

The input state is undefined in a fundamental way Entanglement survives perfectly if no information is gained
BOB Polarization Analysis 0 Entangled Photon Source

YFY+ YF+ YALICE Bell-State Analyzer

Polarization Analysis 1 2 3 Entangled Photon Source

II

Previous Experiments
n

Bouwmeester et al, Nature (1997)

n n

Teleportation of a well defined input state Observed visibility: ~ 70% 3% Entanglement swapping Observed visibility: ~ 65 % 2%

Pan et al., PRL (1998)

n n

Violation of Bells inequality requires at least 71 %!

Experimental Setup
n

n n n

Pulsed downconversion for two pairs UV Pulses: 200 fs, 76 MHZ, 394 nm 1 event in 100s Single mode fibers Correlation:

Active Beam Stabilization

n n

Stability Comparison:

normalized calculated 4-fold rate

CCD measures beam position two motorized mirrors steer the beam
1,1 1,0 0,9 0,8 0,7 0,6 0,5 0,4 0,3 0,2 0,1 0,0 0 3 6 9 12 15

without laser control with laser control Time [h]

Stability sufficient for the required times (16000 s per point)!

Coincidence Logic
n

NIM-Logic

Programmable Logic
n n

VHDL Reprogrammable

High Visibility Teleportation

n n

Visibility tests All effects limiting the visibility considered Theory: @45 Vis=0,817 @0 Vis=0,897 Experiment: @45 Vis=0,812 0,103 @0 Vis=0,883 0,030

Test of Bells Inequality

n

CHSH version of Bells inequality:

n

S = |E(0,22.5) - E(0,67.5)| + |E(45,22.5) + E(45,67.5)| 2

(QM: S=2,82...)

Experimental test of the CHSH-inequality:

n

S = |-0.6281 - (+ 0.6766)| + |-0.5748 - 0.5407| DS = 0.091 -> 4.6 s above the classical limit.

= 2.420 2

Violation of Bells inequaliy for particles that never interacted!

Fidelity of the Teleportation

1,00 0,95 0,90

Fidelity

Fidelity:

0,85 0,80 0,75 0,70 0,65 0,60 0,55 0,50 0,0

Bell Inequality Violation Limit Classical Limit Fidelity Fidelity with Delayed Choice
22,5 45,0 67,5 90,0

Polarizer Orientation f0=f3 []

QM: Relative timing of the detection events does not influence results (A. Peres)
n n

In the Bell-measurements: simultaneously (2ns) Delayed-Choice: BSA measurement delayed by 50 ns!

Space-Time Arrangement for the Entanglement Swapping

n

Time-ordering of detection events

Delayed Choice:
Alice

Normal Entanglement Swapping:

Alice

Bob 2 ns

t
50 ns 20 ns 20 ns Bob

x
2 m (~ 6 ns) 2 m (~ 6 ns)

Independence of the Photons?

n

The two pairs (0-1 and 2-3) independently violate Bells inequality! Phase drift of BS-arms would wash out any phase coherence.
l s (t) [multiples of ]

10

l Phase [multiples of]

5 0

Mach-Zehnder Interferometer Drift: 1 l with 1 s in 400 s -> any phase relation between the photons clearly washed out within 16000 s!

-5

-10 -15 -20 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 time [h]

0,1

10

100 t [s]

1000

Conclusion
n

Entangled Photons allow proof of principle experiments in quantum information processing:

n

Teleportation of an entangled state shows the first violation of Bells inequality for photons that never interacted. (PRL, Vol 88, 017903 (2002)). Additional tests adressing the timing in teleportation and the indpendence of the photons were performed.

Outlook:
n

Teleportation will be enhanced with more-complete BSA and active switching of receiver photon in a long-distance teleportation scheme (600 m).