More APS March Meeting GQI Goodness

As a follow up to my last post, I’d also note that Chris Fuchs has set up what looks likes a great lineup for the March meeting.  Because not all of you are GQI members (join!) here is the email Chris sent out that describes the lineup:

Dear GQI Membership,

I write to you as the chair-elect of the GQI executive committee and the program chair of our portion of the 2011 APS March Meeting.  This coming year the meeting will be in Dallas, Texas, 21-25 March 2011.

We believe we have put together an exciting venue of invited talks and focus sessions.  Please have a look at the attachment (see below) and you will see.  There will be some astounding experiments reported, and you will also have a chance to meet several of the founders of our field.  2011 is a hallmark year for quantum information as a field within physics  Also we are pleased to announce that one of our talks will be given by one of the two LeRoy Apker Award winners for “outstanding achievements in physics by undergraduate students.”

I should further mention that the meeting will host a talk from one of this year’s Nobel-Prize winners for the discovery of graphene, Konstantin Novoselov.  (Andre Geim may also speak, but has not yet confirmed.)  Moreover, there will be a recognition of the 100th anniversary of the discovery of superconductivity with a session of historical talks devoted to the subject, as well as a  Nobel-laureate session on it.  Speakers will include Ivar Giaever, Wolfgang Ketterle, Sir Anthony Leggett, K. Alexander Mueller, and Frank Wilczek, and there is word that there may be more.

In all, it should be a more-than-usual memorable meeting, with some quite wonderful GQI invited and focus sessions.  The executive committee and I hope the venue will be exciting enough to tip the scales for you if you have been indecisive about attending.

Particularly, we encourage you to submit a talk or poster on your latest  research.  The better showing GQI makes at this meeting, the greater the chance we have of increasing general APS awareness of our field, the better the chance the topical group may recruit enough members to attain APS Division status, and, MOST IMPORTANTLY, the better the chance we have of convincing American physics departments that it is worthwhile to create faculty and research positions for all of us.  Your participation is really, truly vital.  Quantum information needs you!

This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered—
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne’er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now-a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs’d they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day.

Please note that the deadline for abstract submission is NOVEMBER 19 (less than 11 days away!).  Please submit an abstract yourself; please get your students to submit an abstract too!  Please get your associates to submit an abstract as well!! The place to go to submit and register for the meeting is here:

http://www.aps.org/meetings/march/

The GQI executive committee and I hope to see you in Dallas.  It’ll be a whoppin’ good time!

Chris Fuchs

Chair-elect of APS Topical Group on Quantum Information

GQI Program Chair for 2011 APS March Meeting

The attachment reads:

Sunday, March 20, tutorial
Ivan Deutsch (University of New Mexico)
Quantum Simulation and Computing with Atoms

Tuesday, March 22, invited session, “Quantum Information: Featured Experi-
ments”

H. Jeff Kimble (California Institute of Technology)
Entanglement of Spin Waves among Multiple Quantum Memories

Christopher Monroe (Joint Quantum Institute and University of Maryland)
Quantum Networks with Atoms and Photons

Till Rosenband (National Institute of Standards and Technology)
Quantum-Logic Clocks for Metrology and Geophysics

Robert J. Schoelkopf (Yale University)
Towards Quantum Information Processing with Superconducting Circuits

Anton Zeilinger (University of Vienna)
Quantum Information and the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics: A Story of Mutual Benefit

Wednesday, March 23, invited session, “20 Years of Quantum Information in Physical Review Letters”

Charles H. Bennett (IBM Research)
The Theory of Entanglement and Entanglement-Assisted Communication

David P. DiVincenzo (Aachen University)
Twenty Years of Quantum Error Correction

Artur Ekert (University of Oxford and National University of Singapore)
Less Reality, More Security

Peter W. Shor (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
The Early Days of Quantum Algorithms

Benjamin Schumacher (Kenyon College)
A Brief Prehistory of Qubits

Thursday, March 24, invited session, “Symmetric Discrete Structures for Finite Dimensional Quantum Systems”

Berthold-Georg Englert (National University of Singapore)
On Mutually Unbiased Bases (MUBs)

Asa Ericsson (Institut Mittag-Leffler)
Quantum States as Probabilities from Symmetric Informationally Complete Measurements (SICs)

Steven T. Flammia (California Institute of Technology)
The Lie Algebraic Significance of Symmetric Informationally Complete Measurements

Christophe Schaef (University of Vienna)
Report on the Zeilinger Group SIC and MUB Experiments

William K. Wootters (Williams College)
States with the Same Probability Distribution for Each Basis in a Complete Set of MUBs

Focus Session: Superconducting Qubits

Chair: Robert McDermott (University of Wisconsin – Madison)

John Martinis (University of California at Santa Barbara)
Scaling Superconducting Qubits with the ResQu Architecture

Christopher Chudzicki (Williams College)
Parallel Entanglement Distribution on Hypercube Networks (Apker Award talk)

Focus Session: Quantum Optics with Superconducting Circuits

Chair: David Schuster (Yale University)

Andreas Wallraff (ETH, Zurich)
Tomography and Correlation Function Measurements of Itinerant Microwave Photons

Focus Session: Semiconducting Qubits
Chair: Jason Petta (Princeton University)

Amir Yacoby (Harvard University)
Control and Manipulation of Two-Electron Spin Qubits in GaAs Quantum Dots

Focus Session: Quantum Information for Quantum Foundations

Chair: Christopher Fuchs (Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics)

Giulio Chiribella (Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics)
Toward a Conceptual Foundation of Quantum Information Processing

Focus Session: Advances in Ion Trap Quantum Computation

Chair: Jungsang Kim (Duke University)

Richart E. Slusher (Georgia Tech Quantum Institute)
Trapped Ion Arrays for Quantum Simulation

Focus Session: 20 Years of APS Quantum Cryptography: Where Do We Stand?

Chair: Norbert Lutkenhaus (University of Waterloo)

Richard J. Hughes (Los Alamos National Laboratory)
Twenty-Seven Years of Quantum Cryptography!

Like I said, looks like a wonderful lineup.  So you should go (I mean I think it’s even strong enough to persuade a native Californian like me to go to Texas for a meet
ing.
  And that’s saying a lot.  Though it is easier considering the results of the World Series 🙂 )

Quantum Foundations at the APS March Meeting

If you’re a member of the APS topical group on Quantum Information (GQI) you recently received an email from Chris Fuchs about the upcoming APS March meeting (to be held in Dallas, Texas this year.)  If you’re not a member, shame on you, you should become a member!  But more importantly Chris has made a very good effort this year to have a good showing of talks from the quantum foundations community.  There is a focus session this year, “Quantum Information for Quantum Foundations” with Giulio Chiribella (Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics) as the invited speaker.  Giulio will give a talk titled “Toward a Conceptual Foundation of Quantum Information Processing.”  Further Anton Zeilinger (University of Vienna) will be giving a symposium talk, “Quantum Information and the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics: A Story of Mutual Benefit.”

One of the explicit reasons for forming GQI, in addition to the explosive growth of quantum information science, was a place for all who are tightly tied to quantum theory and in particular for quantum foundations folks.  The mission statement of GQI makes this explicit:

The Group is committed to serving as the home within the American Physical Society for researchers in the foundations of quantum mechanics. The Topical Group will promote a continuation of the active and beneficial exchange of ideas between quantum foundations and quantum information science.

Over the years this has resulted in varying degrees of success.  I can remember a few foundations sessions at the March meeting that were top notch and very interesting, but increasingly there has not been a strong foundations showing.

I would, of course, encourage all quantum information related people to attend (submit a talk or a poster) to the March meeting (at worst you’re going to learn about the very exciting superconducting qubit experiments occurring at places like UCSB, Yale, and IBM) but I would particularly encourage you to submit a talk or a post if you are from the quantum foundations community.

My personal view is that foundations work lies very deep in the heart of quantum information science.  Not necessarily for the grand old debate about the interpretation of quantum theory, but because foundations seeks to bring conceptual clarity to a subject whose mystery is what we are trying to exploit.  So foundations people come out of yer closet and help shed some crazy light on quantum information science!

 

Quantum Article Parse Failure of the Pontiffical Kind

Two observations from yesterdays New York Times article about quantum computing (Moving Toward Quantum Computers.)
First, the drawing accompanying the article (here) is interesting to me.  I wonder where they got the idea for it and whether this idea involved Q*bert, color codes, or topological codes?  Or was it just the same old: we have no idea how to draw a quantum computer, so lets just make a cool looking graphic?
Second, I find this sentence fascinating: “D-Wave has built a system with more than 50 quantum bits, but it has been greeted skeptically by many researchers who believe that it has not proved true entanglement.”  Emphasis mine.  Okay I find it fascinating not because of the debate about the quantum nature of D-wave’s machine, but for its language.  If there is “true” entanglement, what is “false” entanglement?    Further for some reason I can’t quite pen down the sentence strikes me as awkward.  In particular it feels like it needs to be something more like “that is has not proved that its system possess real entanglement.” (Yes I understand the sentence, yes I’m not good at reading comprehension, and yes I’m beyond pedantic.)  Am I the only one having a hard time parsing this sentence

Shor on Shore

The important thing is to never, ever, ever pass up an opportunity for a bad pun. Especially a bad pun that might by some strange coincidence be stumbled upon by Wim van Dam or Michael Freedman while out taking a walk pondering the secrets to the quantum computing universe 🙂 Though I will say that this circuit is not resistant to the correlated errors that are waves that will soon wash it away.
Shor on Shore

Optimizer PECASEd, NyTimes Quantum Computing

Congrats to Scott Aaronson, aka the Optimizer for winning a Presidential Early Career Award for Scientist and Engineers. Scott, please remember to ask Obama for more dollars to build a big old quantum computer 🙂 Cheaper than a spy satellite, we promise.
In other news, an article in the New York Times about quantum computing is here. Mentions IBM, Yale, UCSB, ion traps, photon sources, and S-wave P-wave D-wave.

So You Want to Build an Atomic Clock

Via Paul: Till Rosenband from the Time and Frequency Division of NIST has released as open source software that they use to control some of their atomic physics ion trap experiments:

Ionizer

Summary:

Control-software for atomic physics experiments in ion traps.
LaserBrothers software automatically re-locks lasers to reference cavities, and doubling-cavities to lasers.
Aluminizer software controls the NIST aluminum ion clock. This is an application with a graphical front-end (client) to an FPGA-based pulse-sequencer (server). Pulse-sequences are written as object-oriented C++ programs with timing resolution of 10 ns and jitter of about 1 ns. Many calibrations are performed automatically. This program is written specifically to control the NIST Al+/Mg+ clock, but effort was made to keep the code general enough to adapt to other tasks.
LabAC software controls a laboratory air-conditioning system. THIS CODE HAS NOT YET BEEN UPLOADED.
BullsIon software shows the coordinates of a laser-beam that’s on a webcam. THIS CODE HAS NOT YET BEEN UPLOADED.

So if you happen to be a tech mogul who has enough dollars to start your own lab, this looks like some good stuff for setting up your own ion trap experiments 🙂

Damn Minus Signs

A new entry in the best title ever contest, via Steve, arXiv:1002.0555:

A minus sign that used to annoy me but now I know why it is there

Authors: Peter Tingley

Abstract: We consider two well known constructions of link invariants. One uses skein theory: you resolve each crossing of the link as a linear combination of things that don’t cross, until you eventually get a linear combination of links with no crossings, which you turn into a polynomial. The other uses quantum groups: you construct a functor from a topological category to some category of representations in such a way that (directed framed) links get sent to endomorphisms of the trivial representation, which are just rational functions. Certain instances of these two constructions give rise to essentially the same invariants, but when one carefully matches them there is a minus sign that seems out of place. We discuss exactly how the constructions match up in the case of the Jones polynomial, and where the minus sign comes from. On the quantum group side, we are led to use a non-standard ribbon element.

Two Interesting LaTeX Online Editors

One, a Google Docs app, LaTeX Lab (thanks to Daniel for pointing this out.) Another with https support Verbosus. I couldn’t get the later to compile and display in browser with FireFox, but did in Safari. Verbosus has an android app, but strangely no desktop version.
Recently I’ve been mostly using Dropbox for collaborations using LaTeX. Every once in a while there are conflicts in editing at the same time, but with only a few people this seems to work really well.

Uniquity Symposium on "What is Computation?"

Readers of the Pontiff might be interested in a series of articles coming out in the ACMs Ubiquity publication concerning the question: “What is Computation?” Over the next 15 weeks the following articles will come out on this subject including one by a jokester:

The following articles will appear on Ubiquity once a week, beginning in November 2010.
1. What is Computation? [opening statement], by Peter J. Denning
2. Evolution of Computation, by Peter Wegner
3. Computation is Symbol Manipulation, by John Conery
4. Computation is Process, by Dennis J. Frailey
5. Computing and Computation, by Paul Rosenbloom
6. Computation and Information, by Ruzena Bajcsy
7. Computation and Fundamental Physics, by Dave Bacon
8. The Enduring Legacy of the Turing Machine, by Lance Fortnow
9. Computation and Computational Thinking, by Al Aho
10. What is the Right Computational Abstraction for Continuous Scientific Problems? by Joseph Traub
11. Computation, Uncertainty, and Risk, by Jeffrey P. Buzen
12. Natural Computation, by Erol Gelenbe
13. Biological Computation, by Melanie Mitchell
14. Is the Symposium Question Harmful? by Peter Freeman
15. Wrapping it Up [closing statement], by Peter J. Denning

I suppose this is a paper dance of some sort, but I’m guessing its one with me dancing around saying “One of these kids is not like the others.”