Entangled States of More Than 40 Atoms in an Optical Fiber Cavity

All Together Now In quantum entanglement, correlations between particles mean that the measurement of one determines the outcome of the other(s). Generally, when trying to exploit quantum entanglement, the larger the number of entangled particles, the better. However, the size of entangled systems has been limited. Haas et al. (p. 180, published online 27 March; see the Perspective by Widera) prepared a small ensemble of ultracold atoms into a collective entangled state. Starting from one internal quantum state, the system of cold atoms was excited with a weak microwave pulse leading to a small excitation probability. Because it is not known which atom is promoted into the excited state, the detection of one quantum of excitation projects the system into an entangled quantum state, called a W-state. A fast repeat-until-success scheme produced such W-states quasi-deterministically. Using such a technique was able to yield entangled states of more than 40 particles. The relatively large ensemble-entangled states could potentially in the future find use in quantum sensing or enhanced quantum metrology applications. A small ensemble of ultracold atoms in a chip trap has been used to realize a collective entangled state. [Also see Perspective by Widera] Multiparticle entanglement enables quantum simulations, quantum computing, and quantum-enhanced metrology. Yet, there are few methods to produce and measure such entanglement while maintaining single-qubit resolution as the number of qubits is scaled up. Using atom chips and fiber-optical cavities, we have developed a method based on nondestructive collective measurement and conditional evolution to create symmetric entangled states and perform their tomography. We demonstrate creation and analysis of entangled states with mean atom numbers up to 41 and experimentally prove multiparticle entanglement. Our method is independent of atom number and should allow generalization to other entangled states and other physical implementations, including circuit quantum electrodynamics.

[1]  S. Gleyzes,et al.  Phase space tweezers for tailoring cavity fields by quantum Zeno dynamics. , 2010, Physical review letters.

[2]  Vlatko Vedral,et al.  Quantifying entanglement in macroscopic systems , 2008, Nature.

[3]  P. Windpassinger,et al.  Mesoscopic atomic entanglement for precision measurements beyond the standard quantum limit , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[4]  Dieter Meschede,et al.  Bayesian feedback control of a two-atom spin-state in an atom-cavity system. , 2012, Physical review letters.

[5]  Kevin C. Cox,et al.  Reduced spin measurement back-action for a phase sensitivity ten times beyond the standard quantum limit , 2013, Nature Photonics.

[6]  M. Ježek,et al.  Iterative algorithm for reconstruction of entangled states , 2000, quant-ph/0009093.

[7]  V. Vuletić,et al.  Implementation of cavity squeezing of a collective atomic spin. , 2009, Physical review letters.

[8]  G. Tóth,et al.  Entanglement detection , 2008, 0811.2803.

[9]  F. Arecchi,et al.  Atomic coherent states in quantum optics , 1972 .

[10]  D. Stamper-Kurn,et al.  Tunable cavity optomechanics with ultracold atoms. , 2010, Physical review letters.

[11]  A. D. Boozer,et al.  Cooling to the ground state of axial motion for one atom strongly coupled to an optical cavity. , 2006, Physical review letters.

[12]  R. Blatt,et al.  Heralded entanglement of two ions in an optical cavity. , 2013, Physical review letters.

[13]  Yun Li,et al.  Atom-chip-based generation of entanglement for quantum metrology , 2010, Nature.

[14]  V. Vuletić,et al.  States of an ensemble of two-level atoms with reduced quantum uncertainty. , 2008, Physical review letters.

[15]  P. Facchi,et al.  Quantum Zeno subspaces. , 2002, Physical review letters.

[16]  Hua Zhao,et al.  Spin polarized localization between two quantum dots , 2007 .

[17]  W. Ertmer,et al.  Twin Matter Waves for Interferometry Beyond the Classical Limit , 2011, Science.

[18]  Tilo Steinmetz,et al.  A fiber Fabry–Perot cavity with high finesse , 2010, 1005.0067.

[19]  D. Meschede,et al.  Analysis of dephasing mechanisms in a standing-wave dipole trap (12 pages) , 2005 .

[20]  D. Matsukevich,et al.  Storage and retrieval of single photons transmitted between remote quantum memories , 2005, Nature.

[21]  J. Cirac,et al.  Three qubits can be entangled in two inequivalent ways , 2000, quant-ph/0005115.

[22]  N. P. Bigelow,et al.  Atomic quantum non-demolition measurements and squeezing , 1998 .

[23]  S. Lloyd,et al.  Quantum-Enhanced Measurements: Beating the Standard Quantum Limit , 2004, Science.

[24]  Morgan W. Mitchell,et al.  Sub-projection-noise sensitivity in broadband atomic magnetometry. , 2010, Physical review letters.

[25]  Andreas Wallraff,et al.  Time Resolved Collective Entanglement Dynamics in Cavity Quantum Electrodynamics , 2012 .

[26]  T. Monz,et al.  14-Qubit entanglement: creation and coherence. , 2010, Physical review letters.

[27]  L. Pezzè,et al.  Entanglement, nonlinear dynamics, and the heisenberg limit. , 2007, Physical review letters.

[28]  D. Hunger,et al.  Strong atom–field coupling for Bose–Einstein condensates in an optical cavity on a chip , 2007, Nature.

[29]  Tobias Donner,et al.  Cavity QED with a Bose–Einstein condensate , 2007, Nature.

[30]  J. Ashby.  References and Notes , 1999 .

[31]  M. Oberthaler,et al.  Nonlinear atom interferometer surpasses classical precision limit , 2010, Nature.

[32]  Tilo Steinmetz,et al.  Cavity-based single atom preparation and high-fidelity hyperfine state readout. , 2010, Physical review letters.

[33]  H. Kimble.  Strong interactions of single atoms and photons in cavity QED , 1998 .

[34]  H. J. Kimble,et al.  Measurement-induced entanglement for excitation stored in remote atomic ensembles , 2005, Nature.

[35]  Jakob Reichel,et al.  Measurement of the internal state of a single atom without energy exchange , 2011, Nature.

[36]  Gilles Nogues,et al.  Probing a quantum field in a photon box , 2005 .