Group Abstract Group Abstract

Message Boards Message Boards

6
|
1K Views
|
18 Replies
|
14 Total Likes
View groups...
Share
Share this post:
GROUPS:
Wolfram U

[WSG25] Daily Study Group: Quantum Optics and Second Quantization

A Wolfram U Daily Study Group on Quantum Optics and Second Quantization begins on Monday, April 7, 2025 at 11:00 AM CDT.

Join me (@Bruno Tenorio), @Sebastian Rodriguez and a group of fellow learners to learn about the fundamentals of quantum optics using the Wolfram Quantum Framework. Our topics for the study group include field quantization, photonic states, interferometric experiments, atom-field interactions and open quantum systems.

A basic working knowledge of Quantum Mechanics and Wolfram Language is recommended.

Please feel free to use this thread to collaborate and share ideas, materials and links to other resources with fellow learners.

April 7th-April 11th,
11:00 AM CDT

REGISTER HERE

enter image description here
POSTED BY: Bruno Tenorio
18 Replies
Sort By:

I'm trying to just evaluate today's notebook, but the evaluation is hung on the second input (QOE = QuantumEvolve [H/h, None, t];) for over 20 minutes. I'm running v 14.1 of Mathematica in Win 10 Pro. Should it be taking this long to evaluate this input?
POSTED BY: Updating Name

No it should not take that long :(. In my end it takes around 3 seconds. Maybe you didnt load the framework?
POSTED BY: Bruno Tenorio
Bob Renninger
Bob Renninger
Posted 3 days ago

I am getting an error with yesterday's lesson notebook. Please see attached file. Thanks

Attachment

Attachments:
error.jpg
POSTED BY: Bob Renninger

I can not reproduce the error you encountered and it shouldnt happen, did you run everything in order? Try changing that line to 

cohBS = Exp[(\[Alpha]coh a1[
        "Dagger"] - \[Alpha]coh\[Conjugate] a1)] @ FockState[{0,0}]// Chop
POSTED BY: Bruno Tenorio
Bob Renninger
Bob Renninger
Posted 3 days ago

The change you recommended got rid of the error, but I'm not sure the rest of the section is right. Somehow that plot doesn't look right. What do you think?

Thanks for your help. Bob

Attachments:
error2.nb
POSTED BY: Bob Renninger

The notebook from yesterday session has been updated. It should work now if you run everything. Thanks for your comment.
POSTED BY: Bruno Tenorio

Dear Bruno,

I know you already mentioned in the course how the formulas that appear in your Mathematica notebooks are written, but honestly, it wasn't clear to me. I apologize, but I'm curious, so I'm asking you to please write a little here.

When I write formulas in a notebook, I normally use CTRL-4 to start typing in LaTeX and then press Enter and the formula appears. However, in your notebooks, when I click on your formulas, an orange box appears, and when I close it, the expression becomes much smaller.

Sincerely Francisco Soto Eguibar
POSTED BY: Francisco Soto-Eguibar

Hi Francisco,

Actually i use CTRL+4 too, but i have MaTeX installed https://resources.wolframcloud.com/FunctionRepository/resources/MaTeXInstall/ so it overrides the default inline latex. MaTeX display of equations is a bit nicer and i can automatically change the size (for example setting it in my init.m file). If you do not have MaTeX it just uses the default CTRL+4 behavior, and that is what happens when you click the equation.
POSTED BY: Bruno Tenorio

Dear Bruno,

Perfect, I understand. I actually wasn't familiar with MaTex, thanks for the info.

Best regards (Gracias y muchos saludos)

Francisco Soto Eguibar
POSTED BY: Francisco Soto-Eguibar

I am posting some material that was being requested. Actually there was some detail about that tricky poll question , the wording was not explicit enough so sorry about that!
POSTED BY: Bruno Tenorio

Is there a "normal ordering" feature so that one can normal-order long sequences of multi-mode creation and destruction operators?
POSTED BY: Hubert de Guise

We have Ordering option for DisplacementOperator and SqueezeOperator, however, for doing the type of manipulation you are asking we need exact commutation relations . I would say for that purpose a rule-based approach is more suitable (maybe from other paclets?), and then pass to Wolfram QuantumFramework when you have a concrete sequence of operators.
POSTED BY: Bruno Tenorio

Allo, When I run commands such as QuantumOperator or Quantum state I don't get the same output as you. For instance: enter image description here

Is there a way to get the output to default to //TraditionalForm ?
POSTED BY: Hubert de Guise

Like was said in the class, you can use Ctrl+Shift+T, or // TraditionalForm. Defaulting to TraditionalForm can be an issue when you have a state or operator in a big Hilbert space, so i think it is good that the object is a QuantumState and only use TraditionalForm when needed.
POSTED BY: Bruno Tenorio

Thanks I musta missed that comment.
POSTED BY: Hubert de Guise

We are looking forward to this study group next week :-)
POSTED BY: Mohammad Bahrami

Looking forward to this event! For our users, we will have another quantum study group soon, too: https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3397970

Do not miss them :-)
POSTED BY: Mohammad Bahrami

Hello!

We recommend installing the Wolfram Quantum Framework in preparation for this Daily Study Group: https://resources.wolframcloud.com/PacletRepository/resources/Wolfram/QuantumFramework/

Photonic Second Quantization documentation: https://wolfr.am/1tscRdMNP
POSTED BY: Bruno Tenorio
Reply to this discussion
Community posts can be styled and formatted using the Markdown syntax.
Tag limit exceeded
Note: Only the first five people you tag will receive an email notification; the other tagged names will appear as links to their profiles.
Reply Preview
Attachments
Remove
or Discard