Bloch rotation matrix anomaly
Bloch rotation matrix anomaly
Mike Ulrey Apr 28, 2023
By computing a simple Bloch rotation matrix by (what should be) two equivalent methods, we find a slight discrepancy.
Create a list of the Pauli matrices.
In[]:=
σs={σ1,σ2,σ3}=Normal[QuantumOperator[#]["Matrix"]]&/@{"PauliX","PauliY","PauliZ"};
Create a particular Bloch rotation in two different ways -- by using1. The definition (θ)=Exp[-θ/2.], and2. A linear combination of Pauli operators .{QuantumOperator[{"RX",θ}],QuantumOperator[{"RY",θ}],QuantumOperator[{"RZ",θ}]}.
R
n
n
σ
n
bRotate1[θ_,n_]:=MatrixExp-n.σs;bRotate2[θ_,n_]:=n.{QuantumOperator[{"RX",θ}],QuantumOperator[{"RY",θ}],QuantumOperator[{"RZ",θ}]};
θ
2
Now find the matrix representing each of the rotations.
rotateMat1=bRotate1θ,
1
3
3
{1,1,1}//FullSimplify;rotateMat2=ComplexExpandNormalbRotate2θ,1
3
3
{1,1,1}["Matrix"];Finally compare the rotation matrices. Note they are slightly different in the diagonal entries. Why??
In[]:=
MatrixForm/@{rotateMat1,rotateMat2}%/.{θ->90°}//Simplify
Out[]=
,
Cos θ 2 Sin θ 2 3 | - (1+)Sin θ 2 3 |
(1-)Sin θ 2 3 | Cos θ 2 Sin θ 2 3 |
3 Cosθ 2 Sin θ 2 3 | - (1+)Sin θ 2 3 |
(1-)Sin θ 2 3 | 3 Cosθ 2 Sin θ 2 3 |
Out[]=
,
1 2 6 | - 1+ 6 |
1- 6 | 1 2 6 |
3- 6 | - 1+ 6 |
1- 6 | 3+ 6 |