Quantum Information Processing

, Volume 4, Issue 6, pp 457–469 | Cite as

Lattice Quantum Algorithm for the Schrödinger Wave Equation in 2+1 Dimensions with a Demonstration by Modeling Soliton Instabilities

Article

A lattice-based quantum algorithm is presented to model the non-linear Schrödinger-like equations in 2 + 1 dimensions. In this lattice-based model, using only 2 qubits per node, a sequence of unitary collide (qubit–qubit interaction) and stream (qubit translation) operators locally evolve a discrete field of probability amplitudes that in the long-wavelength limit accurately approximates a non-relativistic scalar wave function. The collision operator locally entangles pairs of qubits followed by a streaming operator that spreads the entanglement throughout the two dimensional lattice. The quantum algorithmic scheme employs a non-linear potential that is proportional to the moduli square of the wave function. The model is tested on the transverse modulation instability of a one dimensional soliton wave train, both in its linear and non-linear stages. In the integrable cases where analytical solutions are available, the numerical predictions are in excellent agreement with the theory.

Keywords

Non-linear Schrödinger wave equation quantum algorithm soliton dynamics non-linear quantum mechanical instability quantum computing computational physics 

PACS

03.67.Lx 05.45.Yv 02.60.Cb 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Kivshar Y.S. and Agrawal G.P. (2003). Optical Solitons. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Infeld E. and Rowlands G. (2000). Nonlinear Waves, Solitons, and Chaos, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jakubowski M.H., Steiglitz K., Squier R. (1998). Phys. Rev. E 58:6752CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jakubowski M.H., Steiglitz K., Squier R. (2001). Multiple-Valued Logic 6: 439MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jeffrey Yepez, and Bruce Boghosian. (2002). Comput. Phys. Commun 146(3):280–294MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    George Vahala, Linda Vahala, and Jeffrey Yepez. (2003). Phys. Lett. A 310:187–196MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    George Vahala, Linda Vahala, and Jeffrey Yepez. (2004). Philosop. Trans. R. Soc 362(1821):1677–1690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jeffrey Yepez, Quantum Information Processing (6), (2005) (in press).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Marco Pravia, Zhiying Chen, Jeffrey Yepez, and David G. Cory. (2002). Comput. Phys. Commun 146(3):339–344MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Marco Pravia, Zhiying Chen, Jeffrey Yepez, and David G. Cory. (2003). Quantum Information Processing 2:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lisa C. Siskind, Bruce E. Hammer, Nelson L. Christensen, and Jeffrey Yepez. Quantum Information Processing 4 (6)(2005). Appearing in this special issue of QIPGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Air Force Research LaboratoryBedfordUSA
  2. 2.Department of PhysicsWilliam & MaryWilliamsburgUSA
  3. 3.College of Engineering & TechnologyOld Dominion UniversityNorfolkUSA

Personalised recommendations