Recently, there has been much interest in a new kind of ``unspeakable'' quantum information that stands to regular quantum information in the same way that a direction in space or a moment in time stands to a classical bit string: the former can only be encoded using particular degrees of freedom while the latter are indifferent to the physical nature of the information carriers. The problem of correlating distant reference frames, of which aligning Cartesian axes and synchronizing clocks are important instances, is an example of a task that requires the exchange of unspeakable information and for which it is interesting to determine the fundamental quantum limit of efficiency. There have also been many investigations into the information theory that is appropriate for parties that lack reference frames or that lack correlation between their reference frames, restrictions that result in global and local superselection rules. In the presence of these, quantum unspeakable information becomes a new kind of resource that can be manipulated, depleted, quantified, etcetera. Methods have also been developed to contend with these restrictions using relational encodings, particularly in the context of computation, cryptography, communication, and the manipulation of entanglement. This article reviews the role of reference frames and superselection rules in the theory of quantum information processing.Comment: 55 pages, published versio

Standard quantum computation is based on sequences of unitary quantum logic gates that process qubits. The one-way quantum computer proposed by Raussendorf and Briegel is entirely different. It has changed our understanding of the requirements for quantum computation and more generally how we think about quantum physics. This new model requires qubits to be initialized in a highly entangled cluster state. From this point, the quantum computation proceeds by a sequence of single-qubit measurements with classical feedforward of their outcomes. Because of the essential role of measurement, a one-way quantum computer is irreversible. In the one-way quantum computer, the order and choices of measurements determine the algorithm computed. We have experimentally realized four-qubit cluster states encoded into the polarization state of four photons. We characterize the quantum state fully by implementing experimental four-qubit quantum state tomography. Using this cluster state, we demonstrate the feasibility of one-way quantum computing through a universal set of one- and two-qubit operations. Finally, our implementation of Grover's search algorithm demonstrates that one-way quantum computation is ideally suited for such tasks.

We introduce a scheme for linear optics quantum computation, that makes no use of teleported gates, and requires stable interferometry over only the coherence length of the photons. We achieve a much greater degree of efficiency and a simpler implementation than previous proposals. We follow the "cluster state" measurement based quantum computational approach, and show how cluster states may be efficiently generated from pairs of maximally polarization entangled photons using linear optical elements. We demonstrate the universality and usefulness of generic parity measurements, as well as introducing the use of redundant encoding of qubits to enable utilization of destructive measurements -both features of use in a more general context.

Quantum states are the key mathematical objects in quantum theory. It is therefore surprising that physicists have been unable to agree on what a quantum state truly represents. One possibility is that a pure quantum state corresponds directly to reality. However, there is a long history of suggestions that a quantum state (even a pure state) represents only knowledge or information about some aspect of reality. Here we show that any model in which a quantum state represents mere information about an underlying physical state of the system, and in which systems that are prepared independently have independent physical states, must make predictions which contradict those of quantum theory.At the heart of much debate concerning quantum theory lies the quantum state. Does the wave function correspond directly to some kind of physical wave? If so, it is an odd kind of wave, since it is defined on an abstract configuration space, rather than the three-dimensional space we live in. Nonetheless, quantum interference, as exhibited in the famous two-slit experiment, appears most readily understood by the idea that it is a real wave that is interfering. Many physicists and chemists concerned with pragmatic applications of quantum theory successfully treat the quantum state in this way.Many others have suggested that the quantum state is something less than real [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]. In particular, it is often argued that the quantum state does not correspond directly to reality, but represents an experimenter's knowledge or information about some aspect of reality. This view is motivated by, amongst other things, the collapse of the quantum state on measurement. If the quantum state is a real physical state, then collapse is a mysterious physical process, whose precise time of occurrence is not well-defined. From the 'state of knowledge' view, the argument goes, collapse need be no more mysterious than the instantaneous Bayesian updating of a probability distribution upon obtaining new information.The importance of these questions was eloquently stated by Jaynes:But our present [quantum mechanical] formalism is not purely epistemological; it is a peculiar mixture describing in part realities of Nature, in part incomplete human information about Nature -all scrambled up by Heisenberg and Bohr into an omelette that nobody has seen how to unscramble. Yet we think that the unscrambling is a prerequisite for any further advance in basic physical theory. For, if we cannot separate the subjective and objective aspects of the formalism, * m@physics.orgwe cannot know what we are talking about; it is just that simple.[9]Here we present a no-go theorem: if the quantum state merely represents information about the real physical state of a system, then experimental predictions are obtained which contradict those of quantum theory. The argument depends on few assumptions. One is that a system has a "real physical state" -not necessarily completely described by quantum theory, but objective and independent of the observer. This assu...