LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Young, Rupert C D; Birch, Philip M; Chatwin, Chris R (2016)
Publisher: Society of Photo-optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE)
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: TK8300, TK7800, QA75, TK7885, QC0350
Previously we have examined the similarities of the quantum Fourier transform to the classical coherent optical implementation of the Fourier transform (R. Young et al, Proc SPIE Vol 87480, 874806-1, -11). In this paper, we further consider how superposition states can be generated on coherent optical wave fronts, potentially allowing coherent optical processing hardware architectures to be extended into the quantum computing regime. In particular, we propose placing the pixels of a Spatial Light Modulator (SLM) individually in a binary superposition state and illuminating them with a coherent wave front from a conventional (but low intensity) laser source in order to make a so-called ‘interaction free’ measurement. In this way, the quantum object, i.e. the individual pixels of the SLM in their superposition states, and the illuminating wavefront would become entangled. We show that if this were possible, it would allow the extension of coherent processing architectures into the quantum computing regime and we give an example of such a processor configured to recover one of a known set of images encrypted using the well-known coherent optical processing technique of employing a random Fourier plane phase encryption mask which classically requires knowledge of the corresponding phase conjugate key to decrypt the image. A quantum optical computer would allow interrogation of all possible phase masks in parallel and so immediate decryption.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1. Young R., Birch P., Chatwin C., “Coherent optical implementations of the fast Fourier transform and their comparison to the optical implementation of the quantum Fourier transform”, Proc SPIE Vol 87480, 874806-1,- 11, (2013).
    • 2. Goodman J.W., Introduction to Fourier Optics, McGraw-Hill, Second Edition, (1996).
    • 3. Vander Lugt A., “Signal detection by complex spatial filtering”, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, Vol. IT-10, pp. 139-145, (1964).
    • 4. Grover L. K., “Quantum computers can search arbitrarily large databases by a single query”, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol. 79, 4709-4712, (1997).
    • 5. Shor P. W., “Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer”, SIAM J. Comput., Vol. 26(5), pp. 1484-1509, (1997).
    • 6. Hijmans T. W., Huussen T. N., Spreeuw R., J., C., “Time and frequency-domain solutions in an optical analogue of Grover's search algorithm”, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B, Vol.24 (2), 214-220, (2007).
    • 7. Bhattacharia N., van Linden H. B., van den Heuvall, Spreeuw R., J. C., ”Implementation of quantum search algorithm using classical Fourier optics”, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol. 88, 137901, (2002).
    • 8. Shor P. W., “Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer”, SIAM J. Comput., Vol. 26(5), pp. 1484-1509, (1997).
    • 9. Ekert A., Jozsa R., “Shor's quantum algorithm for factorizing numbers”, Rev. Mod. Phys., Vol. 68, pp. 733-753, (1996).
    • 10. Chuang I. L., Laflamme R., Shor P. W., Zurek W. H., “Quantum computers, factoring and decoherence”, Science, Vol. 270, 1633-1635, (1995).
    • 11. Politi, A., Matthews J., O'Brien J., “Shor's factoring algorithm on a photonic chip”, Science, Vol. 325, 1221, (2009).
    • 12. Elitzur, A. C., Vaidman, L., “Quantum mechanical interaction-free measurements”, Foundations of Physics, Vol. 23, 987-997, (1993).
    • 13. Kwiat P. G., Weinfurter H., Herzog T., Zeillinger A., Kasevich M. A., “Interaction-free measurements“, Phys. Rev. Lett., 74(24), 4763, (1995).
    • 14. Kwiat P. G., http://web.archive.org/web/19990222174102/www.p23.lanl.gov/Quantum/kwiat/ifmfolder/ifmtext.html, Accessed: January 2016.
    • 15. Refregier P., Javidi B., “Optical image encryption based on input plane and Fourier plane random encoding”, Opt. Lett., Vol. 20(7), 767-769, (1995).
    • 16. Marshall, W., Simon, C., Penrose R., Bouwmeester D., “Towards quantum superposition of a mirror”, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol. 91(13), 130401-1, -4, (2003).
    • 17. Gaidarzhy A., Zolfagharkhani, G., Badzey R. L., Mohanty P., “Evidence for quantized displacement in macroscopic nanomechanical oscillators”, Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol. 94(3), 030402-1, -4, (2005).
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article