Source author record

Thao P. Le

Thao P. Le appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
1topics
3close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Blurred quantum Darwinism across quantum reference frames

Quantum Darwinism describes objectivity of quantum systems via their correlations with their environment--information that hypothetical observers can recover by measuring the environments. However, observations are done with respect to a frame of reference. Here, we take the formalism of [Giacomini, Castro-Ruiz, & Brukner. Nat Commun 10, 494 (2019)], and consider the repercussions on objectivity when changing quantum reference frames. We find that objectivity depends on non-degenerative relative separations, conditional state localisation, and environment macro-fractions. There is different objective information in different reference frames due to the interchangeability of entanglement and coherence, and of statistical mixing and classical correlations. As such, objectivity is subjective across quantum reference frames.

preprint2021arXiv

Reply to Comment on "Strong Quantum Darwinism and Strong Independence are Equivalent to Spectrum Broadcast Structure"

In a recent comment [Feller et. al, arXiv:2101.09186] on our Letter [Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 010403 (2019)], Feller et. al identified a mistake in our mathematical expression of "strong independence" for states that satisfy Spectrum Broadcast Structure. We concede that we wrote a mathematical condition that is necessary but not sufficient. However, we used the original and correct qualitative definition for "strong independence" throughout the paper and in our proofs, therefore the proofs and statements, aside from the aforementioned mathematical expression, remain correct.