arxiv: v3 [quant-ph] 29 Jan 2019

Transcription

1 OBSERVABLE-GEOMETRIC PHASES AND QUANTUM COMPUTATION ZEQIAN CHEN arxiv: v3 [quant-ph 9 Jan 19 Abstract. This paper presents an alternative approach to geometric phases from the observable point of view. Precisely, we introduce the notion of observable-geometric phases, which is defined as a sequence of phases associated with a complete set of eigenstates of the observable. The observablegeometric phases are shown to be connected with the quantum geometry of the observable space evolving according to the Heisenberg equation. It is shown that the observable-geometric phases can be used to realize a universal set of quantum gates in quantum computation. 1. Introduction The geometric phase can be used in quantum computing by implementing each of quantum gates in terms of geometric phases only [1. This scheme for computing is called geometric quantum computation. Geometric quantum computation involves adiabatic or nonadiabatic, as well as Abelian or non-abelian characteristics of the underlying quantum evolution for the quantum state. It is shown in [14, 15 that the non-adiabatic Abelian geometric phases can be used to realize a universal set of quantum gates and thus are sufficient for universal all-geometric quantum computation. Furthermore, the non-adiabatic non-abelian geometric phases are shown in [11 to achieve universality as well. We refer to [1 for a up-date review and background. Here, we present an alternative approach to the geometric phase from the observable point of view. Precisely, we introduce the concept of observable-geometric phases, which is defined as a sequence of phases associated with a complete set of eigenstates of the observable. The observable-geometric phases are shown to be connected with the geometry of the observable space evolving according to the Heisenberg equation. In contrast to that classical (Riemannian) geometry of the state space is suited to the usual geometric phases, the geometry suited for the observable-geometric phases is a quantum geometric structure over the observable space induced by a complete measurement. This quantum-geometric structure of the observable space will be described in details in Section 5. The paper is organized as follows. In Section, we will define the notion of the observable-geometric phase using the propagator of a time-dependent Hamiltonian, which is shown to be independent of of the choice of the Hamiltonian as long as the Heisenberg equations involving the Hamiltonian. Two examples are included in which qubit systems subject to an orientated magnetic field, a rotating magnetic field, and a rotating plus a constant magnetic field. Subsequently, in Section 3, we show that the observable-geometric phases can be used to realize a universal set of quantum gates in quantum computation. The quantum gate based on the observable-geometric phases can be interpreted as the Abelian geometric gates of Zhu and Wang [14, 15; indeed the two schemes lead to the same gates. However, the ZW gates are related with the classical geometry of the state space of the system, while ours are connected with the quantum-geometric structure over the observable space. We will give a summary in Section 4. Finally, we include as an appendix in Section 5 a quantum-geometric theory for the observable space consisting of all complete orthogonal decompositions. For the sake of simplicity, we only consider finite quantum systems, namely the associated Hilbert spaces H have a finite dimension. This is sufficient for quantum computation. In what follows, we always denote by B(H) the algebra of all bounded operators on H, by O(H) the set of all self-adjoint operators on H, and by U(H) the group of all unitary operators on H. Without specified otherwise, the integer d always denotes the dimension of H, and I the identity operator on H. Key words: computation. Geometric phase; Observable-geometric phase; Heisenberg equation; topological phase; quantum 1

2 Zeqian Chen. Observable-geometric phase Consider a finite quantum system with a time-dependent Hamiltonian h(t). Since the associated Hilbert space H has finite dimension d, each Hamiltonian h(t) has a discrete spectrum as well as all observables considered in the following. Indeed, the spectrum of h(t) at any given time will not be of importance. Instead, we shall consider the time evolution operator, as called propagator, generated by h(t) (cf. [8, Theorem X.69). This is a two-parameter continuous family of unitary operators such that for any t, r, s R, (.1) U(t, t) = I, U(t, r)u(r, s) = U(t, s), and (.) i d U(t, s) = h(t)u(t, s), that is, for any s R and φ H, φ s (t) = U(t, s)φ is the unique solution of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation (.3) i d φ s(t) = h(t)φ s (t) with φ s (s) = φ. Given any observable X, namely a self-adjoint operator on H, by (.) we conclude that X(t) = U(, t)x U(t, ) is the unique solution of the time-dependent Heisenberg equation (.4) i dx(t) = [X(t), h(t) with X() = X, where h(t) = U(, t)h(t)u(t, ). If there exists T > such that X(T ) = X(), the time evolution (X(t) : t R) is then called cyclic with period T, and X = X() is said to be a cyclic observable. Given an observable X with non-degenerate eigenstates ψ n for all 1 n d, assume that X(t) = U(, t)x U(t, ) is cyclic with period T, namely X(T ) = X so that U(, T )ψ n = e iθn ψ n with some θ n [, π) for every n = 1,..., d. Denoted by ψ n (t) = U(, t)ψ n for 1 n d, which are the eigenstates of X(t), we conclude that ψ n (t) satisfies the skew (time-dependent) Schrödinger equation (.5) i d ψ n(t) = h(t)ψ n (t) with ψ n () = ψ n, due to the fact that U(, t) = U(t, ) 1. Definition.1. Using the above notations, we define the geometric phases of the periodic evolution of observable X(t) by (.6) β n = θ n T ψ n h(t) ψ n which is uniquely defined up to πk (k is integer) for every n = 1,..., d. We simply call β n s the observable-geometric phases. Remark.1. 1) Note that ψ n h(t) ψ n = ψ n (t) h(t) ψ n (t) for all t, because h(t) = U(, t)h(t)u(t, ). Thus, the observable-geometric phases β n s are obtained by removing the dynamical part from the total phases of eigenstates of observable according to the evolution (.5). This is in spirit the same as the definition of the AA geometric phase [1. ) Although the observable-geometric phases is defined in spirit as similar to the AA geometric phase, but the geometric interpretation is completely different. Indeed, C W : [, T t O(t) = { ψ n (t) ψ n (t) : 1 n d} defines a closed curve in the observable space W(H) which is a set of all complete orthogonal decompositions (see Section 5 for the details). In contrast to that the AA geometric phase is associated with classical geometry on the state space, the geometric interpretation of β n s defined in (.6) is related with the geometric properties of C W determined by a quantum geometric structure over W(H). We will give the details of this geometric interpretation in Section 5.5.

3 Quantum phase 3 For illustrating the observable-geometric phases, we consider a qubit case, namely the Hilbert space H = C and the observable space is W(C ). Recall that the Pauli matrixes σ = (σ x, σ y, σ z ) are defined by σ x = ( ) 1, σ 1 y = ( ) ( ) i 1, σ i z =. 1 We will apply Eq.(.6) to qubit systems, respectively subject to an orientated magnetic field and a rotating magnetic field. Example.1. Consider that a spin- 1 particle with a magnetic moment is in a homogeneous magnetic field B = (,, B) along the z axis, whose Hamiltonian is H = µbσ z / where µ is the Bohr magneton. Given a spin observable X with two non-degenerate eigenstates ( ) ( ) cos φ (.7) ψ 1 = sin φ sin φ, ψ = cos φ in C, X(t) = U(, t)x U(t, ) satisfies Eq.(.4) with h(t) = h(t) = µbσ z / and U(t, ) = e iµbtσz/ so that ψ n (t) = U(, t)ψ n (n = 1, ), where ( ψ 1 (t) = e iµbtσz/ e ψ 1 = iµbt/ cos φ ) ( e iµbt/ sin φ, ψ (t) = e iµbtσz/ e ψ = iµbt/ sin φ ) e iµbt/ cos φ, satisfies the skew Schrödinger equation (.5), namely i dψ n(t) = µb σ z ψ n(t), n = 1,. The evolution X(t) is periodic with period T = π µb, namely X(T ) = X and precisely By (.6) we have ψ 1 (T ) = e iπ ψ 1, ψ (T ) = e iπ ψ. β 1 = π(1 + cos φ), β = π(1 cos φ), which are the geometric invariants of the curve C W : { ( ) ( π cos (, µb ) t φ 1 e iµbt sin φ sin φ ) } 1 eiµbt sin φ sin φ, 1 e iµbt sin φ 1 eiµbt sin φ cos φ in W(C ). Indeed, taking a fixed point O = { e 1 e 1, e e } W(C ), and letting Ũ(t) = e it µb cos φ ψ 1 (t) e 1 + e it µb cos φ ψ (t) e for t (, π µb ), we have that C π P : (, µb ) t Ũ(t) is the horizontal O -lift of C W with respect to ˇΩ in the principal bundle ξ O (the definitions of the canonical connection ˇΩ and the bundle ξ O refer to Section 5) so that Ũ(T ) = e iβ ψ 1 e 1 + e iβ ψ e with β = β = π(1 cos φ) (because β 1 = π β ) is the holonomy element associated with the connection ˇΩ, C W, and U = ψ n e n in ξ O. Example.. Consider a spin- 1 particle subject to a rotating background magnetic field B(t) = (B cos ωt, B sin ωt, B 1 ) with a constant angular velocity ω, where B and B 1 are constants, whose Hamiltonian is given by with ω i = µb i (i =, 1). Since h(t) = µ B(t) σ = 1 (ω σ x cos ωt + ω σ y sin ωt + ω 1 σ z ) σ x cos ωt + σ y sin ωt = e iωtσz/ σ x e iωtσz/, the Hamiltonian takes the form h(t) = e iωt σz h e iωt σz with h = 1 ω σ x 1 ω 1σ z.

4 4 Zeqian Chen If φ(t) satisfies the time-dependent Schrödinger equation (.3), then ψ(t) = e iωt σz Schrödinger equation i dψ(t) = (h 1 ωσ z)ψ(t). Because φ(t) satisfies the H = h 1 ωσ z = 1 ω σ x 1 (ω 1 + ω)σ z is time-independent, we have ψ(t) = e ith ψ() and thus φ(t) = e iωt σz e ith ψ() so that U(t, ) = e iωt σz e ith is the propagator associated with h(t). Having obtained the exact expression of the propagator U(t, ) we can next identify the cyclic evolution of observable, namely the solutions which satisfy (.4) with h(t) = U(, t)h(t)u(t, ) = e ith h e ith. Given a spin observable X with non-degenerate eigenstates ψ 1 and ψ, X(t) = U(, t)x U(t, ) is by definition cyclic with period T if and only if {ψ 1, ψ } is a complete set of eigenstates of U(, T ). The corresponding eigenvalues e iθn are the total phase factors, for U(, T )ψ n = e iθn ψ n. The corresponding observable-geometric phases are (.8) β n = θ n + ω ω ψ n σ x ψ n sin ωt + ω ω ψ n σ y ψ n (1 cos ωt ) + ω 1 ψ n σ z ψ n T for every n = 1,. As shown in Theorem 5.1, β 1, β are two geometric invariants of the curve in W(C ), and C W : [, T t {U(, t) ψ n ψ n U(t, ) : n = 1, } Ũ(T ) = e iβ1 ψ 1 e 1 + e iβ ψ e is the holonomy element associated with the connection ˇΩ, C W, and U = ψ n e n in ξ O, given an arbitrary point O = { e 1 e 1, e e } in W(C ). A special case is the period T = π/ω, namely the same period as the Hamiltonian h(t). In this case, cyclic evolutions are obtained by finding the simultaneous eigenvectors of the operator U(, π/ω) = e i π ω H e iπσz = e i π ω H. These eigenvectors are consequently also ones of the operator H = 1 ω σ x 1 (ω 1 + ω)σ z, a complete set of whose eigenvectors is ( ) ( ) cos φ ψ + = sin φ sin φ, ψ = cos φ, namely Hψ ± = ± 1 ω + (ω 1 + ω) ψ ±, where ω φ = arctan ω 1 + ω + ω + (ω 1 + ω). Then, for the cyclic evolution X(t) = U(, t)x U(t, ) starting from the initial observable X with two non-degenerate eigenstates ψ ±, the total phase factors are θ ± = π ± π ω ω + (ω 1 + ω) because U(, π/ω)ψ ± = e iθ± ψ ±. Thus, by (.8) the corresponding observable-geometric phases are β ± = π ± π ( ) ω ω + (ω 1 + ω) + ω 1 cos φ, which are two geometric invariants of the curve in W(C ). Moreover, C W : [, T t {U(, t) ψ + ψ + U(t, ), U(, t) ψ ψ U(t, )} (.9) Ũ(T ) = e iβ ψ + e 1 + e iβ ψ e with β = β + (because β = π β + ) is the holonomy element associated with the connection ˇΩ, C W, and U = ψ + e 1 + ψ e in ξ O, given an arbitrary point O = { e 1 e 1, e e } in W(C ).

5 Quantum phase 5 3. Geometric quantum computation In this section, we shall show that the observable-geometric phases can be used to realize a set of universal quantum gates. As is well-known, for a universal set of quantum gates, we need to achieve two kinds of noncommutative 1-qubit gates and one nontrivial -qubit gate (cf. [5, 7). Thus, we need to realize two noncommutative 1-qubit gates and a nontrivial -qubit gate as the geometric evolution operators on loops in the observable spaces of a qubit and -qubits, respectively. Proposition 3.1. The two 1-qubit gates e iπ 1 1 and e iσx can be respectively realized as geometric quantum gates associated with the geometry of the observable space W(C ) of a qubit, which are two well-known gates constituting a universal set of quantum gates for a single-qubit system. Proof. As in Example., a general time-dependent Hamiltonian for a qubit has only one term h(t) = µb(t) σ/, where B(t) = (B cos ωt, B sin ωt, B 1 ) denotes the total magnetic field felt by the qubit, B, B 1 and ω are constants, and µ is the Bohr magneton. Given a spin observable X with two non-degenerate eigenstates ψ + = cos φ + sin φ 1, ψ = sin φ + cos φ 1, where and 1 constitute the computational basis for the qubit, the observable evolution t U(, t)x U(t, ) is periodic with period T = π/ω provided ω φ = arctan ω 1 + ω + ω + (ω 1 + ω) with ω i = µb i (i =, 1), where U(t, ) = e iωt σz e ith with H = [ω σ x + (ω 1 + ω)σ z /. This cyclic process determines the evolution operator U(T, ) = e iθ ψ + ψ + + e iθ ψ ψ with θ = π + π ω ω + (ω 1 + ω). If we can remove the dynamical phase from the total phase θ, then the evolution operator becomes a geometric quantum gate. This can be done by using a two-loop method as in the case of the AA geometric phases (cf. [14, 15). To this end, we first allow the time-dependent Hamiltonian h(t) to go through cyclic evolution with period T = π/ω. Precisely, we consider the process where a spin observable X with two non-degenerate eigenstates ψ ± can evolve cyclically. We first decide the cyclic evolution observable X by choosing φ as above. The phases of eigenstates ψ ± acquired in this way would contain both a geometric and a dynamical component as described in (.6). In order to remove the dynamical phase accumulated in the above process, we allow X to evolve along the time-reversal path of the first-period loop during the second period. This process can be realized by reversing the effective magnetic field with B(t + T ) = B(T t) on the same loop of the first-period [, T ), and thus h(t + T ) = h(t t) for t [, T ). As a result, the total phases accumulated in the two periods will be just the observable-geometric phases, because the dynamical phase γ n (d) appearing in (.6) will be canceled. Indeed, the dynamical phase γ n (,d) with the opposite sign, namely γ (,d) γ (,d) n = = T T T n for the second period is equal to that (γ n (1,d) = γ n (1,d), since ψ n h(t) ψ n = T ψ n h(t t) ψ n = ψ n h(t + T ) ψ n T ψ n h(t) ψ n = γ (1,d) n. = T ψ n h(t) ψ n ) for the first period On the other hand, the propagator for the second period is U(t, ) = e iω(t T )σz/ e ith for t (T, T. Thus, the observable-geometric phases are β ± = π ω ω + (ω 1 + ω), namely U(T, ) = e iβ ψ + ψ + + e iβ ψ ψ with β = β. Therefore, by removing the dynamical phases, we obtain the evolution operator U(T, ) = U φ,β with the matrix representation ( e (3.1) U φ,β = iβ cos φ + e iβ sin φ ) i sin φ sin β i sin φ sin β e iβ sin φ + e iβ cos φ.

6 6 Zeqian Chen As noted above, U φ,β depends only on the geometric property of the curve C W and φ, and thus is a geometric quantum gate. We write an input state as ψ in = α + + α 1 with α ± = ψ ± () ψ in. Then U φ,β is a single-qubit gate such that ψ out = U φ,β ψ in. By computing, two operations U φ,β and U φ,β do not commute if and only if φ φ + kπ and β, β kπ, where k is an integer. By choosing B, B 1 and ω so that φ =, φ = π, and β = β = π, we get the two single-qubit gates This completes the proof. U,π/ = ie iπ 1 1, U π, π = eiσx, Next, we turn to a nontrivial -qubit gate, namely the controlled-not gate (c-not), which is defined as k m k k m for k, m =, 1, where denotes the addition modulo. Proposition 3.. The controlled-not gate can be realized as a geometric quantum gate associated with the geometry of the observable space W(C C ) of the two-qubits system. Proof. Consider a -qubit quantum system with a time-dependent Hamiltonian h(t), where the first qubit is the control qubit while the second the target one. Suppose h(t) be of the form ( ) h (t) h(t) =. h 1 (t) This is the case when the control qubit is far away from the resonance condition for the operation of the target qubit. Given an initial -qubit observable X with four non-degenerate eigenstates: and ψ () + = ( cos φ() φ() + sin 1 ), ψ () = ( sin φ() φ() + cos 1 ), ψ (1) + = 1 ( cos φ(1) φ(1) + sin 1 ), ψ (1) = 1 ( sin φ(1) φ(1) + cos 1 ), where {, 1, 1, 11 } is the computational basis, the evolution t U(, t)x U(t, ) is cyclic with period T under the suitable choices of φ () and φ (1) so that ψ (k) ± are eigenstates of U(T, ) for k =, 1. In this case, the evolution operator to describe the two-qubit gate is given by ( (3.) U(φ (), β () ; φ (1), β (1) Uφ ) = (),β ) (), U φ (1),β (1) where β (k) (φ (k) ) denotes the geometric phase (the cyclic initial observable) of the target bit when the state of the control qubit corresponds to k with k =, 1, respectively. To achieve the controlled-not gate, we take h = and h 1 (t) = µb(t) σ/ with B(t) = (B cos ωt, B sin ωt, B 1 ) as in Proposition 3.1. Then the gate in this case with T = π/ω is given by U( π ( ) I, ; φ, β) =, U φ,β where β is the total phase accumulated in the evolution when the controlled qubit is in the state 1, and φ is chose as in Proposition 3.1. By a two-loop method as above, we can remove the dynamical phase and obtain the geometric quantum gate U ( π, ; π, π ( ) I = iσ x This gate is equivalent to the controlled-not gate, up to an overall phase factor i for the target qubit. Therefore, we get a nontrivial -qubit gate in terms of the observable-geometric phases. Remark 3.1. (1) Universal quantum computing has been achieved by Zhu and Wang [14, 15 using the gates associated with the AA geometric phase, as well by Sjöqvist et al [11 using the non- Abelian geometric phase (cf. [). As shown in [1, the non-abelian geometric gates of Sjöqvist et al can be interpreted as the Abelian geometric gates of Zhu and Wang. ).

7 Quantum phase 7 () The quantum gate based on the observable-geometric phases can be also interpreted as the Abelian geometric gates of Zhu and Wang; indeed the two schemes lead to the same gates as shown in Propositions 3.1 and 3.. However, there are two differences between them: 1) the ZW gates are related with the geometry of the state space of the system, while ours are connected with the geometry of the observable space; ) the gates in the ZW scheme are all based at the simultaneous evolutions of two orthogonal basic vectors, while in our setting all gates are based at the evolution of a single observable. 4. Conclusions Geometric phases provide a new way of looking at quantum mechanics. The usual theory of the geometric phase (cf. [1, 4) is based on the Schrödinger picture, that is, the geometric phase is defined for the state. Here, we define the observable-geometric phases in the Heisenberg picture. This provide a new way of studying the geometry for the quantum system from the viewpoint of the observable. In particular, the observable-geometric phases can be used to realize a universal set of quantum gates in quantum computation. Therefore, it may not be unreasonable to hope that this new insight may have heuristic value. 5. Appendix: Quantum geometry over the observable space 5.1. Observable space. Recall that a complete orthonormal decomposition in H is a set of projections of rank one { n n : n 1} satisfying (5.1) n n = I, n m = δ nm. n 1 We denote by W(H) the set of all complete orthonormal decompositions in H. Note that a complete orthonormal decomposition O = { n n : n 1} determines uniquely a basis { n } n 1 up to phases for basic vectors. Conversely, a basis uniquely defines a complete orthonormal decomposition in H. Therefore, a complete orthonormal decomposition can be regarded as a complete measurement. Since every observable has a spectral decomposition corresponding to (at least) a complete orthonormal decomposition, the evolution of a quantum system by the Heisenberg equation (5.) i dx = [X, H for the observable X, gives rise to a curve in W(H). This is the reason why W(H) can be regarded as the observable space, whose geometry and topology induce geometric and topological phases for quantum systems. For O, O W(H), we define the distance D W (O, O ) by (5.3) D W (O, O ) = inf{ I U : U 1 O U = O, U U(H)}. It is easy to check that W(H) is a complete metric space together with the distance D W. Thus, W(H) is a topological space as a metric space. To obtain more information on W(H), we define X (H) to be the set of all ordered sequences ( n n ) n 1, where { n n : n 1} s are all complete orthonormal decompositions in H. A distance on X (H) is defined as follows: For ( n n ) n 1, ( n n ) n 1 X (H), D X (( n n ) n 1, ( n n ) n 1 ) = inf{ I U : U U(H), n = U n, n}. Then it is easy to check that D X is a distance such that X (H) is a complete metric space and W(H) = X (H) Π(d), where Π(d) denotes the permutation group of d objects, and the notation = indicates the isometric isomorphism of two metric spaces. From this identification, we find that W(H) is topologically nontrivial as its fundamental group is isomorphic to Π(d), since X (H) can be considered as a compact, simply connected manifold.

8 8 Zeqian Chen Proposition 5.1. For an arbitrary fixed basis ( e n ) n 1 of H, with { (5.4) G(U) = n 1 W(H) = {G(U) : U U(H)} } e iθn σ(n) e n : σ Π(d), θ n [, π), where n = U e n for any n 1, and the distance between two elements is defined by Proof. At first, we prove that d(g(u), G(U )) = inf{ K G : K G(U), G G(U )}. X (H) = U(H) U(1) d, from which we conclude the result, since W(H) = X (H) Π(d). Indeed, for an arbitrary fixed basis ( e n ) n 1 of H, we have that U(H) = {[U : U U(H)} with U(1) d { } [U = U U(1) d = e iθn n e n : θ n [, π), n 1 where n = U e n for n 1. Define T : X (H) U(H) U(1) N by T [( n n ) n 1 [U for any ( n n ) n 1 X (H), where U is the unitary operator so that n = U e n for n 1. Then, T is surjective and isometric, and so the required assertion follows. This completes the proof. For illustration, we consider the topology of W(H) in the qubit case of H = C. Indeed, we have and so X (C ) = U() U(1) U(1) = SU() U(1) = S, W(C ) = S Z, where we have used the fact Π() = Z. This has a simple geometrical interpretation, since every element in X (C ) has the form X n = ( n n, n n ) with n = (n x, n y, n z ) S, where ± n ± n = 1 (I ± n σ). Although X n X n in X (C ), they both correspond to the same element in W(C ). This implies that W(C ) may have non-trivial topology: There are exactly two topologically distinct classes of loops in W(C ), one corresponds to the trivial class X n X n while the other to the nontrivial class X n X n. Then the first fundamental group π 1 (W(C )) = Z, and thus the topology of the observable space W(C ) for the qubit system is nontrivial. 5.. Fibre bundles over the observable space. Following [6, a bundle is a triple (E, π, B), where E and B are two Hausdorff topological spaces, and π : E B is a continuous map which is always assumed to be surjective. The space E is called the total space, the space B is called the base space, and the map π is called the projection of the bundle. For each b B, the set π 1 (b) is called the fiber of the bundle over b. Given a topological space F, a bundle (E, π, B) is called a fiber bundle with the fiber F provided every fiber π 1 (b) for b B is homeomorphic to F. For a topological group G, a bundle (E, π, B) is called a G-bundle, denoted by (E, π, B, G), provided G acts on E from the right preserving the fibers of E such that the map f from the quotient space E/G onto B defined by f(xg) = π(x) for xg E/G is a homeomorphism, namely E P G E/G id f: = E π B

9 Quantum phase 9 where P G is the usual projection. A G-bundle (E, π, B, G) is principal if the action of G on E is free in the sense that xg = x for some x E and g G implies g = 1, and the group G is then called the structure group of the bundle (E, π, B, G) (in physical literatures G is also called the gauge group, cf. [4). Note that in a principal G-bundle (E, π, B, G) every fiber π 1 (b) for b B is homeomorphic to G by the freedom of the G-action, hence it is a fiber bundle (E, π, B, G) with the fiber G and is simply called a principal fiber bundle with the structure group G. Next, we construct principal fiber bundles over the observable space W(H). To this end, fix a point O = { e n e n : n 1} W(H). For any O W(H), we write F O O = {U U(H) : U OU = O }, that is, U FO O if and only if {U e n : n 1} is a basis such that O = {U e n e n U : n 1}. Indeed, if O = { n n : n 1}, then { } FO O = G(U) = e iθn σ(n) e n : σ Π(d), θ n [, π), n 1 where U is a unitary operator so that n = U e n for n 1. Also, define { } (5.5) G O = e iθn e σ(n) e n : σ Π(d), θ n [, π). n 1 We note that U(1) d has a unitary representation { d (5.6) U(1) d = U θ = e iθn e n e n : θ = (θ 1,..., θ d ) [, π) }, d while Π(d) has a unitary representation { d } (5.7) Π(d) = U σ = e σ(n) e n : σ Π(d). Thus, G O is a (non-abelian) subgroup of U(H) generated by U(1) d and Π(d). The (right) action of G O on FO O is defined as: For any G G O, (G, U) UG for all U FO O. Evidently, this action is free and invariant, namely FO O G = FO O for any G G O and every O W(H). Note that U(H) = FO O, O W(H) and F O O is homeomorphic to G O as topological spaces since F O O = G[U for some U such that O = {U e n e n U : n 1}. The following is then principal fiber bundles over the observable space. Definition 5.1. Given O W(H), a principal fiber bundle over W(H) associated with O is defined to be ξ O (H) = (U(H), W(H), Π O, G O ), where U(H) is the total space, and the bundle projection Π O : U(H) W(H) is defined by Π O (U) = O provided U FO O for (unique) O W(H), namely Π 1 (O) = FO O for every O W(H). We simply denote this bundle by ξ O = ξ O (H). Remark 5.1. In the sequel, we will see that the fixed point O W(H) physically plays the role of a complete measurement. Indeed, it corresponds to a von Neumann measurement. On the other hand, the point O induces a differential structure over the base space W(H) and determines the geometric structure of ξ O, namely quantum connection and parallel transportation.

10 1 Zeqian Chen For any two points O, O W(H) with O = { e n e n : n 1} and O = { e n e n : n 1}, we define a unitary operator U by U e n = e n for n 1. Then the map T : ξ O ξ O defined by T U = UU 1 for all U U(H) is an isometric isomorphism on U(H) such that T maps the fibers of ξ O onto the fibers of ξ O over the same points in the base space W(H), namely the following diagram is commutative: T U(H) U(H) Π O W(H) that is, Π O = Π O T. Thus, ξ O and ξ O are isomorphic as principal fiber bundles (cf. [6) Quantum connection. Since d = dim(h) <, ξ O has a natural differential structure, namely U(H) and W(H) are both differential manifolds. In fact, U(H) is a Lie group, while W(H) can be identified as a submanifold of the Grassmannian manifold of d-dimensional subspaces of B(H) (cf. [13). However, the classical differential structure over W(H) seems not to be applicable in the geometric interpretation of observable-geometric phases. To define the suitable concepts of quantum connection and parallel transportation over the principal fiber bundle ξ O, we need to introduce a differential structure over W(H) associated with each fixed O W(H). Indeed, we will introduce a geometric structure over ξ O in a certain operator-theoretic sense, where the differential structure on W(H) is different from the one given in [13. Let us begin with the definition of tangent vectors for G O in the operator-theoretic sense. Definition 5.. Fix O W(H). For a given U G O, an operator Q B(H) is called a tangent vector at U for G O, if there is a curve χ : ( ε, ε) t U(t) G O with χ() = U such that for every h H, the limit U(t)(h) U(h) lim = Q(h) t t in H, denoted by Q = dχ(t) t=. The set of all tangent vectors at U is denoted by T U G O, and T G O = U G O T U G O. In particular, we denote g O = T U G O if U = I. It is easy to check that given U G O with the form U = d e eiθn σ(n) e n for some σ Π(d), for every Q T U G O there exists a sequence of complex number (α n ) n 1 such that Π O (5.8) Q = n 1 α n e σ(n) e n. In particular, each element Q g O is of form (5.9) Q = n 1 α n e n e n, where (α n ) n 1 is a sequence of complex number. Thus, T U G O is a linear subspace of B(H). The following is the tangent space for the base space W(H) in the operator-theoretic sense. Definition ) Fix O W(H). A continuous curve χ : [a, b t O(t) W(H) is said to be differential at a fixed t (a, b) relative to O, if there is a nonempty subset A of B(H) satisfying that for any Q A there exist ε > so that (t ε, t + ε) [a, b and a strongly continuous curve γ : (t ε, t + ε) t U t F O(t) O such that the limit U t (h) U t (h) lim = Q(h) t t t t for any h H. In this case, A is called a tangent vector of χ at t = t and denoted by A = do(t) t=t = dχ(t) t=t. We can define the left (or, right) tangent vector of χ at t = a (or, t = b) in the usual way.

11 Quantum phase 11 ) Fix O W(H). Given O W(H), a tangent vector of W(H) at O relative to O is define to be a nonempty subset A of B(H), provided A is a tangent vector of some continuous curve χ at t =, where χ : ( ε, ε) t O(t) W(H) with χ() = O, i.e., A = do(t) t=. We denote by T O W(H) the set of all tangent vectors at O, and write T W(H) = O W(H) T OW(H). Therefore, the tangent vectors for the base space W(H) is strongly dependent on the choice of a measurement point O. Definition ) A strongly continuous curve γ : [a, b t U(t) U(H) is said to be differential at a fixed t (a, b), if there is an operator Q B(H) such that the limit U t (h) U t (h) lim = Q(h) t t t t for all h H. In this case, Q is called the tangent vector of γ at t = t and denoted by Q = dγ(t) t=t = du(t). t=t We can define the left (or, right) tangent vector of γ at t = a (or, t = b) in the usual way. Moreover, γ is called a smooth curve, if γ is differential at each point t [a, b, and for any h H, the H-valued function t dγ(t) (h) is continuous in [a, b. ) Fix O W(H). For a given P U(H), an operator Q B(H) is called a tangent vector of ξ O at P, if there exists a strongly continuous curve γ : ( ε, ε) t P t U(H) with γ() = P, such that γ is differential at t = and Q = dγ(t) t=. Denote by T P ξ O (H) the set of all tangent vectors of ξ O at P relative to O, and write T ξ O (H) = T P ξ O (H). P U(H) 3) Fix O W(H). Given P U(H), a tangent vector Q T P ξ O (H) is said to be vertical, if there is a strongly continuous curve γ : ( ε, ε) t P t F Π(P ) O with γ() = P such that γ is differential at t = and Q = dγ(t) t=. We denote by V P ξ O (H) the set of all vertically tangent vectors at P. Remark 5.. For any P U(H), the tangent space T P ξ O (H) is the same for all measurement points O since it is the tangent space of U(H) at P in the operator-theoretic sense. However, the vertically tangent space V P ξ O (H) is different from each other for distinct measurement points. In particular, every Q V P ξ O (H) with O = { e n e n : 1 n d} has the form (5.1) Q = n 1 α n P e n e n, where (α n ) n 1 is a sequence of complex number. For any fixed O W(H), recall that for each G G O, the right action R G of G O on ξ O is defined by R G (U) = UG, U U(H). This induces a map (R G ) : T P ξ O (H) T RG (P )ξ O (H) for each P U(H) such that (R G ) (Q) = QG, Q T P ξ O (H). Since R G preserves the fibers of ξ O, then (R G ) maps V P ξ O (H) into V RG (P )ξ O (H). Now, we are ready to define the concept of quantum connection over the observable space. Definition 5.5. Fix O W(H). A connection on the principal fiber bundle ξ O = (U(H), W(H), Π O, G O ) is a family of linear functionals Ω = {Ω P : P U(H)}, where for each P U(H), Ω P is a linear functional in T P ξ O (H) with values in g O, satisfying the following conditions: (1) For any P U(H) and for all vertically tangent vectors Q V P ξ O (H), one has (5.11) Ω P (Q) = P 1 Q. () Ω P depends continuously on P, in the sense that if P n converges to P as well as Q n T Pn ξ O (H) converges Q T P ξ O (H) in the operator topology of B(H), then lim n Ω Pn (Q n ) = Ω P (Q ) in g O.

12 1 Zeqian Chen (3) Under the right action of G O on ξ O (H), Ω transforms according to (5.1) Ω RG (P )[(R G ) (Q) = G 1 Ω P (Q)G, for G G O, P U(H), and Q T P ξ O (H). Such a connection is simply called an O -connection. Next, we present a canonical example of such quantum connections, which plays a crucial role in the expression of observable-geometric phases. Example 5.1. Given a fixed O = { e n e n : 1 n d} W(H), we define ˇΩ = {ˇΩ P : P U(H)} as follows: For each P U(H), ˇΩ P : T P ξ O (H) g O is defined by (5.13) ˇΩP (Q) = P 1 Q for any Q T P ξ O (H), where P 1 Q = d e n P 1 Q e n e n e n. By (5.1), one has P 1 Q = P 1 Q g O for any Q V P ξ O (H), namely ˇΩ P satisfies (5.11). The conditions () and (3) of Definition 5.5 are clearly satisfied by ˇΩ. Hence, ˇΩ is an O -connection on ξ O. In this case, we write ˇΩ P = P 1 dp for any P U(H) Quantum parallel transportation. The quantum parallel transportation in the state space was introduced in [9, 1 and studied in [3 in details. This section is devoted to the study of quantum parallel transport over the observable space. Definition 5.6. Fix a point O W(H). For a continuous curve C W : [a, b t O(t) W(H), a lift of C W with respect to O is defined to be a continuous curve such that U(t) F O(t) O for any t [a, b. C P : [a, b t U(t) U(H) Remark 5.3. Note that, a lift of C W depends on the choice of the point O ; for the same curve C W, lifts are distinct for different points O. For this reason, such a lift C P is called a O -lift of C W. Definition 5.7. Fix a point O W(H). A continuous curve C W : [a, b t O(t) W(H) is said to be smooth, if it has a O -lift C P : [a, b t U(t) U(H) which is a smooth curve. In this case, C P is called a smooth O -lift of C W. Note that, if a continuous curve C W : [a, b t O(t) W(H) is smooth, then it is differential at every point t [a, b. Indeed, suppose that C P : [a, b t U(t) U(H) is a smooth O -lift of C W. For each t [a, b, we have dc P (t) do(t), namely do(t) is a nonempty subset of B(H), and hence C W is differential. Definition 5.8. Fix O W(H) and let Ω be an O -connection on ξ O (H). Let C W : [, T t O(t) W(H) be a smooth curve. If C P : [, T t Ũ(t) is a smooth O -lift of C W such that [ d Ũ(t) (5.14) ΩŨ(t) = for every t [, T, then C P is called a horizontal lift of C W with respect to O and Ω. In this case, C P is simply called the horizontal O -lift of C W associated with Ω. And, the curve C P : t Ũ(t) is called the parallel transportation along C W with the starting point C P () = Ũ() with respect to the connection Ω on ξ O (H). The following proposition shows the existence of the horizontal lifts. Proposition 5.. Fix O W(H) and let Ω be an O -connection on ξ O (H). Let C W : [, T t O(t) W(H) be a smooth curve. For any U F O() O, there exists a unique horizontal O -lift C P of C W with the initial point C P () = U.

13 Quantum phase 13 Proof. Let Γ : [, T t U(t) U(H) be a smooth O -lift of C W with Γ() = U. To prove the [ existence, note that the condition () of Definition 5.5 implies that the function t Ω dγ(t) Γ(t) is continuous in [, T. Then, dg(t) [ dγ(t) (5.15) = Ω Γ(t) G(t) with G() = I has the unique solution in [, T. Therefore, C P (t) = Γ(t) G(t) is the required horizontal O -lift of C W for the initial point U F O() O. To prove the uniqueness, suppose ČP : [, T t Ǔ(t) U(H) be another horizontal O -lift of C W for the initial point U F O() O. Then ČP (t) = C P (t) Ǧ(t) for all t [, T, where Ǧ() = I. Since [ d Ǔ(t) dǧ(t) = ΩǓ(t) = Ǧ(t) 1, this follows that Ǧ(t) = I for all t [, T. Hence, the horizontal O -lift of C W is unique for the initial point U F O() O. Example 5.. Let C P : [, T t U(t) U(H) be a unitary evolution satisfying the Schrödinger equation (5.16) i du(t) = H(t)U(t) where H(t) are time-dependent Hamiltonian operators in H. Given a fixed O = { e n e n : 1 n d} W(H), define C W : [, T t O(t) W(H) by O(t) = U(t)O U(t) 1 for all t [, T. We define C P : [, T t Ũ(t) U(H) by Ũ(t) = d ( exp i t [ e n U(t ) 1 du(t ) e n ) U(t) e n e n O() for every t [, T, along with the initial point Ũ() = U() FO. Then C P is a smooth O -lift of C W such that [ d Ũ(t) ˇΩŨ(t) = for all t [, T, where ˇΩ is the canonical O -connection introduced in Example 5.1. Thus, C P is the horizontal O -lift of C W with respect to ˇΩ, namely C p is the parallel transportation along C W with the starting point C P () = U() with respect to the connection ˇΩ on ξ O (H) Geometric interpretation of observable-geometric phases. We are now ready to give a geometric interpretation of β n s defined as in (.6) in Section. Indeed, given a point O = { e n e n : n 1} W(H), using the notations involved in Section, we define Ũ(t) U(H) for t T by where (5.17) ψn (t) = exp Then, Ũ(t) = { i d ψ n (t) e n, t } ψ n h(s) ψ n ds ψ n (t). C P : [, T t Ũ(t) U(H) is a smooth O -lift of C W : [, T t O(t) = { ψ n (t) ψ n (t) : 1 n d}. By (.5), we have [ d Ũ(t) (5.18) ˇΩŨ(t) = for all t [, T, where ˇΩ is the canonical connection (cf. Example 5.1). This means that [, T t Ũ(t) is the parallel transportation along C W associated with the canonical connection ˇΩ on ξ O.

14 14 Zeqian Chen Therefore, C P is the horizontal O -lift of C W with respect to ˇΩ in the principal bundle ξ O such that Ũ(T ) e n = ψ n (T ) = e iβn ψ n, and so d (5.19) Ũ(T ) = e iβn ψ n e n is the holonomy element associated with the connection ˇΩ, C W, and U = d ψ n e n in ξ O. In conclusion, we have the following theorem. Theorem 5.1. (1) For every n = 1,..., d, the geometric phase β n defined in (.6) is given by T [ du(t) (5.) β n = e n i ˇΩ U(t) e n = e n i U 1 du e n, C W where C P : [, T t U(t) U(H) corresponds to any of the closed smooth O -lifts of C W with U() = U, and ˇΩ U = U 1 du is the canonical connection on ξ O (H). Thus, β n s are independent of the choice of the time parameterization of U(t), namely the speed with which U(t) traverses its closed path. It is also independent of the choice of the Hamiltonian as long as the Heisenberg equations (.4) involving these Hamiltonians describe the same closed path C W in W(H). () The set {β n : 1 n d} is independent of the choice of the starting point U. (3) The set {β n : 1 n d} is independent of the choice of the measurement point O. Therefore, this number set is considered to be a set of geometric invariants for C W. Remark 5.4. In the definition (.6), the β n s are in fact independent of the choice of measurement points O and background geometry over the fiber bundle ξ O. Proof. (1). Let C P : [, T t U(t) F O(t) O be a smooth O -lift of C W such that U(T ) = U() = U. By Proposition 5. we have Ũ(t) = U(t)G(t) for every t T, where G(t) satisfies (5.15) with Γ(t) = U(t). Then there are continuously differential functions ψ n with ψ n () = and ψ n (T ) = β n such that G(t) e n = e iψn(t) e n for all n 1. By (5.11) and (5.1), one has T [ du(t) T e n ˇΩ U(t) e n = e n G(t) dg(t) 1 e n = iβ n. This follows (5.). (). For any Ǔ F O() O there exists some G = d e eiθn σ(n) e n G O with σ Π(d) and θ n R such that Ǔ = U G. Then ČP : [, T t Ǔ(t) = Ũ(t)G is the horizontal O -lift of C W with the starting point Ǔ() = U G such that Ǔ(T ) e n = e iβ σ(n) Ǔ() en for all 1 n d. Thus, the set {β n : n 1} is invariant for any starting point U F O() O. Combining this fact with (5.) yields {β n : n 1} = { i e n C P } ˇΩŪ [dū e n : n = 1,..., d for any closed smooth O -lift C P of C W. Therefore, the observable-geometric phases are independent of the choice of the starting point and only depends on the geometry of the curve C W with respect to the O -connection ˇΩ. (3). Let C P : [, T t Ũ(t) be the horizontal O -lift of C W with respect to Ω with the starting point Ũ() = U. For any O = { e n e n : 1 n d} W(H) there exists some U U(H) such that O = U O U 1 with e n = U e n for n = 1,..., d. Then Ω = {Ω P : P U(H)} is a O - connection on ξ O, where Ω P (Q) = U Ω P U (QU )U 1 for any P U(H) and for all Q T P ξ O (H). By computation, we conclude that C P : [, T t Ũ (t) = Ũ(t)U 1 is the horizontal O -lift of C W with respect to Ω with the starting point Ũ () = U U 1. Therefore, Ũ (T ) e n = Ũ(T )U 1 e n = Ũ(T ) e n = e iβnũ() e n = e iβnũ () e n, and hence the set of the geometric phases of C W with respect to Ω is the same as that of Ω. Acknowledgments This work is partially supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No and No , and also in part supported by MOST under Grant No. 17YFA345.

15 Quantum phase 15 References [1 Y. Aharonov, J. Anandan, Phase change during a cyclic quantum evolution, Physical Review Letters 58 (1987), [ J. Anandan, Non-adiabatic non-abelian geometric phase, Physical Letters A 133 (1988), [3 J. Anandan, The geometric phase, Nature 36 (199), [4 A. Bohm, A. Mostafazadeh, H. Koizumi, Q. Niu, J. Zwanziger, The Geometric Phase in Quantum Systems, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 3. [5 D. Deutsch, A. Barenco, A. Ekert, Universality in quantum computation, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A 449 (1995), [6 C. J. Isham, Morden Differential Geometry for Physicists (Second Edition), World Scientific, Singapore, [7 S. Lloyd, Almost any quantum logic gate is universal, Physical Review Letters 75 (1995), [8 M. Reed, B. Simon, Method of Mordern Mathematical Physics, Vol. II, Academic Press, Cambridge, 198. [9 B. Simon, Holonomy, the quantum adiabatic theorem, and Berry s phase, Physical Review Letters 51 (1983), [1 E. Sjöqvist, V. Azimi Mousolou, C.M. Canali, Conceptual aspects of geometric quantum computation, Quantum Information Process 15 (16), [11 E. Sjöqvist, D.M. Tong, L.M. Andersson, B. Hessmo, M. Johansson, K. Singh, Non-adiabatic holonomic quantum computation, New J. Phys. 14 (1), 1335: 1-1. [1 P. Zanardi, M. Rasetti, Holonomic quantum computation, Physical Letters A 64 (1999), [13 P. Zanardi, L. C. Venuti, Quantum coherence generating power, maximally abelian subalgebras, and Grassmannian geometry, Journal of Mathematical Physics 59 (18), 13: 1-1. [14 S.L. Zhu, Z.D. Wang, Implementation of universal quantum gates based on nonadiabatic geometric phases, Physical Review Letters 89 (), 979: 1-4; Erratum, ibid. 89 (), [15 S.L. Zhu, Z.D. Wang, Universal quantum gates based on a pair of orthogonal cyclic states: application to NMR systems, Physical Review A 67 (3), 319: 1-9. State Key Laboratory of Resonances and Atomic and Molecular Physics, Wuhan Institute of Physics and Mathematics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 3 West District, Xiao-Hong-Shan, Wuhan 4371, China.