Quanta magazine this week published an article about two very recent papers, in which different groups performed quantum simulations of anyons, objects that do not follow Bose-Einstein or Fermi-Dirac statistics when they are exchanged. For so-called Abelian anyons (which I wrote about in the link above), the wavefunction picks up a phase factor \(\exp(i\alpha)\), where \(\alpha\) is not \(\pi\) (as is the case for Fermi-Dirac statistics), nor is it 0 or an integer multiple of \(2\pi\) (which is the case for Bose-Einstein statistics). Moreover, in both of the new papers (here and here), the scientists used quantum simulators (based on trapped ions in the former, and superconducting qubits in the latter) to create objects that act like nonAbelian anyons. For nonAbelian anyons, you shouldn't even think in terms of phase factors under exchange - the actual quantum state of the system is changed by the exchange process in a nontrivial way. That means that the system has a memory of particle exchanges, a property that has led to a lot of interest in trying to encode and manipulate information that way, called braiding, because swapping objects that "remember" their past locations is a bit like braiding yarn - the braided lengths of the yarn strands keep a record of how the yarn ends have been twisted around each other.
Hat tip to Pierre-Luc Dallaire-Demers for the meme. |
Analog simulation goes back a long way. It is possible to build electronic circuits using op-amps and basic components so that the output voltage obeys desired differential equations, effectively solving some desired problem. In some sense, the present situation is a bit like this. Using (somewhat noise, intermediate-scale) quantum computing hardware, the investigators have set up a system that obeys the math of nonAbelian anyons, and they report that they have demonstrated braiding. Assuming that the technical side holds up, this is impressive and shows that it is possible to implement some version of the math behind this idea of topologically encoding information. That is not the same, however, as showing that some many-body system's spontaneously occurring excitations obey that math, which is the key scientific question of interest to CM physicists.
(Obligatory nerdy joke: What is purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.)
6 comments:
The link to the first paper doesn't seem to work.
Fixed, thanks.
The article seems to suggest there is an important difference between the two experiments (one of them has non abelian topological order but the other apparently does not?). I don't understand that difference, can anyone explain it?
Another important difference is that people trying to make these states in a condensed matter system want the benefit of having an energy gap to protect the state. You don't get that gap when you make them like this in a quantum computer
The first author of the 2023 PRX nu=7/2 Quantum Hall paper you linked to is at (Nokia) Bell Labs!! Shocking to me to see they are still publishing in Quantum Hall physics after Bell labs was gutted so many years ago. What's the story there Doug?
Interesting. Can you explain the perspective of the condensed matter physicist in the meme? Why would non-Abelian anyons not be valid quasi-particles, is it the preference for composite fermions?
I heard a different version of that joke:
What's purple and doesn't commute?
a non-abelian grape.
Post a Comment