Why can input states $rho_m$ be chosen to be rank-one operators in Zero-error communication? ...

"Destructive power" carried by a B-52?

First paper to introduce the "principal-agent problem"

The Nth Gryphon Number

What helicopter has the most rotor blades?

How can I prevent/balance waiting and turtling as a response to cooldown mechanics

draw a pulley system

Besides transaction validation, are there any other uses of the Script language in Bitcoin

malloc in main() or malloc in another function: allocating memory for a struct and its members

How does TikZ render an arc?

Why can't fire hurt Daenerys but it did to Jon Snow in season 1?

Any stored/leased 737s that could substitute for grounded MAXs?

Is there night in Alpha Complex?

How do I find my Spellcasting Ability for my D&D character?

How do you cope with tons of web fonts when copying and pasting from web pages?

How do Java 8 default methods hеlp with lambdas?

French equivalents of おしゃれは足元から (Every good outfit starts with the shoes)

Why not use the yoke to control yaw, as well as pitch and roll?

Random body shuffle every night—can we still function?

Plotting a Maclaurin series

Weaponising the Grasp-at-a-Distance spell

An isoperimetric-type inequality inside a cube

Should man-made satellites feature an intelligent inverted "cow catcher"?

How do I say "this must not happen"?

How to ask rejected full-time candidates to apply to teach individual courses?



Why can input states $rho_m$ be chosen to be rank-one operators in Zero-error communication?



Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)Why is $I+T$ invertible for this rank-one operator $T$?Can one prove this fact about Fredholm operators like thisWhy only densely defined operators can have an adjoint operator?Trace norm of a superposition of rank one operatorsFor a Singular Value Decomposition $X = sum_{i=1}^{k}d_iu_iv_i^{T}$, why is $u_iv_i^{T}$ a rank one matrix?If $T$ is a semigroup of bounded linear operators on a Banach space, can we conclude that each $T(t)$ has non-zero operator norm?A rank one matrix can be written in a special formCan all linear operators on functions be represented as a convolution of the input function with the operator's impulse response?Convergence of finite rank operators $(T_n)_n$: why finite?Limit of sequence of finite rank operators given by $(A_Nf)(x) = sum_{n=-N}^N hat f(n) e^{inx}$ is the identity operator, so how can it be compact?












1












$begingroup$


I have one problem in Quantum Information Theory, specially in Zero-error communication.



I am reading a paper :



Duan, Runyao; Severini, Simone; Winter, Andreas, Zero-error communication via quantum channels, noncommutative graphs, and a quantum Lovász number, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory $59$, No. $2$, $1164-1174$ $(2013)$. ZBL$1364.81059$.



And in page $5$, there is a paragraph :





Let $N : L(A) to L(B)$ be a quantum channel, i.e. a linear completely positive, trace-preserving map with Kraus operators $E_j : A to B$, so that $N(rho)$ = $sum_j E_jρE^dagger_j$. Then to send messages $m$ one has to associate them with states $rho$ such that different states $rho, sigma$ lead to orthogonal channel output states: $N(rho) perp N(sigma)$, because it is precisely the orthogonal states that can be distinguished with certainty. Clearly, these states may, w.l.o.g., be taken as pure (rank 1 operator $textbf{vv}^*$), as the orthogonality is preserved when going to any states in the support (i.e., the range) of $rho, sigma$, etc.





I totally don't understand why the last sentence is clear.



I knew that $N(rho) perp N(sigma)Leftrightarrow operatorname{Tr}[N(rho)N(sigma)] = 0$,but didn't obtain more informations from $operatorname{Tr}[N(rho)N(sigma)]=0$



Please explain why $rho, sigma$ can be replaced by pure states.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    1












    $begingroup$


    I have one problem in Quantum Information Theory, specially in Zero-error communication.



    I am reading a paper :



    Duan, Runyao; Severini, Simone; Winter, Andreas, Zero-error communication via quantum channels, noncommutative graphs, and a quantum Lovász number, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory $59$, No. $2$, $1164-1174$ $(2013)$. ZBL$1364.81059$.



    And in page $5$, there is a paragraph :





    Let $N : L(A) to L(B)$ be a quantum channel, i.e. a linear completely positive, trace-preserving map with Kraus operators $E_j : A to B$, so that $N(rho)$ = $sum_j E_jρE^dagger_j$. Then to send messages $m$ one has to associate them with states $rho$ such that different states $rho, sigma$ lead to orthogonal channel output states: $N(rho) perp N(sigma)$, because it is precisely the orthogonal states that can be distinguished with certainty. Clearly, these states may, w.l.o.g., be taken as pure (rank 1 operator $textbf{vv}^*$), as the orthogonality is preserved when going to any states in the support (i.e., the range) of $rho, sigma$, etc.





    I totally don't understand why the last sentence is clear.



    I knew that $N(rho) perp N(sigma)Leftrightarrow operatorname{Tr}[N(rho)N(sigma)] = 0$,but didn't obtain more informations from $operatorname{Tr}[N(rho)N(sigma)]=0$



    Please explain why $rho, sigma$ can be replaced by pure states.










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      1












      1








      1





      $begingroup$


      I have one problem in Quantum Information Theory, specially in Zero-error communication.



      I am reading a paper :



      Duan, Runyao; Severini, Simone; Winter, Andreas, Zero-error communication via quantum channels, noncommutative graphs, and a quantum Lovász number, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory $59$, No. $2$, $1164-1174$ $(2013)$. ZBL$1364.81059$.



      And in page $5$, there is a paragraph :





      Let $N : L(A) to L(B)$ be a quantum channel, i.e. a linear completely positive, trace-preserving map with Kraus operators $E_j : A to B$, so that $N(rho)$ = $sum_j E_jρE^dagger_j$. Then to send messages $m$ one has to associate them with states $rho$ such that different states $rho, sigma$ lead to orthogonal channel output states: $N(rho) perp N(sigma)$, because it is precisely the orthogonal states that can be distinguished with certainty. Clearly, these states may, w.l.o.g., be taken as pure (rank 1 operator $textbf{vv}^*$), as the orthogonality is preserved when going to any states in the support (i.e., the range) of $rho, sigma$, etc.





      I totally don't understand why the last sentence is clear.



      I knew that $N(rho) perp N(sigma)Leftrightarrow operatorname{Tr}[N(rho)N(sigma)] = 0$,but didn't obtain more informations from $operatorname{Tr}[N(rho)N(sigma)]=0$



      Please explain why $rho, sigma$ can be replaced by pure states.










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      I have one problem in Quantum Information Theory, specially in Zero-error communication.



      I am reading a paper :



      Duan, Runyao; Severini, Simone; Winter, Andreas, Zero-error communication via quantum channels, noncommutative graphs, and a quantum Lovász number, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory $59$, No. $2$, $1164-1174$ $(2013)$. ZBL$1364.81059$.



      And in page $5$, there is a paragraph :





      Let $N : L(A) to L(B)$ be a quantum channel, i.e. a linear completely positive, trace-preserving map with Kraus operators $E_j : A to B$, so that $N(rho)$ = $sum_j E_jρE^dagger_j$. Then to send messages $m$ one has to associate them with states $rho$ such that different states $rho, sigma$ lead to orthogonal channel output states: $N(rho) perp N(sigma)$, because it is precisely the orthogonal states that can be distinguished with certainty. Clearly, these states may, w.l.o.g., be taken as pure (rank 1 operator $textbf{vv}^*$), as the orthogonality is preserved when going to any states in the support (i.e., the range) of $rho, sigma$, etc.





      I totally don't understand why the last sentence is clear.



      I knew that $N(rho) perp N(sigma)Leftrightarrow operatorname{Tr}[N(rho)N(sigma)] = 0$,but didn't obtain more informations from $operatorname{Tr}[N(rho)N(sigma)]=0$



      Please explain why $rho, sigma$ can be replaced by pure states.







      functional-analysis quantum-information






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Mar 26 at 13:52









      luftbahnfahrer

      714315




      714315










      asked Mar 26 at 8:38









      NNNNNNNN

      6501821




      6501821






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          1












          $begingroup$

          We can see why by understanding the following claim.



          For a density operator $rhoinmathcal{S}(A)$, one may denote the image (or range) of $rho$ as $mathrm{im}(rho)$. Note that, for any vector $uinmathrm{im}(rho)$, there exists a positive real number $x$ such that $uu^*leq xrho$. Moreover, for any positive linear mapping $mathcal{N}$, it holds that $mathcal{N}(uu^*)leq x mathcal{N}(rho)$.



          Claim. Let $mathcal{N}:mathcal{L}(A)rightarrow mathcal{L}(B)$ be a channel and let $rho,sigmainmathcal{S}(A)$ be density operators satisfying $mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho)mathcal{N}(sigma))=0$. For any vectors $uinmathrm{im}(rho)$ and $vinmathrm{im}(sigma)$, it holds that $mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(uu^*)mathcal{N}(vv^*))=0$.



          Proof. From the above observations, there exist positive real numbers $x$ and $y$ satisfying $uu^*leq xrho$ and $vv^*leq ysigma$. It follows that $mathcal{N}(uu^*)leq x mathcal{N}(rho)$ and $mathcal{N}(vv^*)leq y mathcal{N}(sigma)$. Moreover,
          begin{align*}
          0leqmathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(uu^*)mathcal{N}(vv^*)) leq xy,mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho)mathcal{N}(sigma)) = 0,
          end{align*}

          which yields the desired result.





          This idea can be extended to any state in the image of $rho$ and $sigma$. Namely, if $rho_0$ and $sigma_0$ are any other density operators satisfying $mathrm{im}(rho_0)subseteqmathrm{im}(rho)$ and $mathrm{im}(sigma_0)subseteqmathrm{im}(sigma)$, there must exist positive constants $x$ and $y$ such that $rho_0leq xrho$ and $sigma_0leq ysigma$ and we find that
          begin{align*}
          0leqmathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho_0)mathcal{N}(sigma_0)) leq xy,mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho)mathcal{N}(sigma)) = 0.
          end{align*}






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Wow..... That's what I want!! Thank you very much! :)
            $endgroup$
            – NNNN
            Mar 26 at 14:59












          • $begingroup$
            umm... why does the inequality $0≤Tr(N(uu^∗)N(vv^∗))$ hold??
            $endgroup$
            – NNNN
            Mar 27 at 8:13










          • $begingroup$
            The Hilbert-Schmidt inner product of two positive semidefinite operators is nonnegative.
            $endgroup$
            – luftbahnfahrer
            Mar 27 at 13:42










          • $begingroup$
            Oh yeah.. I see!! Again, I appreciate your help!:)
            $endgroup$
            – NNNN
            Mar 27 at 14:20












          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3162898%2fwhy-can-input-states-rho-m-be-chosen-to-be-rank-one-operators-in-zero-error-c%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          1












          $begingroup$

          We can see why by understanding the following claim.



          For a density operator $rhoinmathcal{S}(A)$, one may denote the image (or range) of $rho$ as $mathrm{im}(rho)$. Note that, for any vector $uinmathrm{im}(rho)$, there exists a positive real number $x$ such that $uu^*leq xrho$. Moreover, for any positive linear mapping $mathcal{N}$, it holds that $mathcal{N}(uu^*)leq x mathcal{N}(rho)$.



          Claim. Let $mathcal{N}:mathcal{L}(A)rightarrow mathcal{L}(B)$ be a channel and let $rho,sigmainmathcal{S}(A)$ be density operators satisfying $mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho)mathcal{N}(sigma))=0$. For any vectors $uinmathrm{im}(rho)$ and $vinmathrm{im}(sigma)$, it holds that $mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(uu^*)mathcal{N}(vv^*))=0$.



          Proof. From the above observations, there exist positive real numbers $x$ and $y$ satisfying $uu^*leq xrho$ and $vv^*leq ysigma$. It follows that $mathcal{N}(uu^*)leq x mathcal{N}(rho)$ and $mathcal{N}(vv^*)leq y mathcal{N}(sigma)$. Moreover,
          begin{align*}
          0leqmathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(uu^*)mathcal{N}(vv^*)) leq xy,mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho)mathcal{N}(sigma)) = 0,
          end{align*}

          which yields the desired result.





          This idea can be extended to any state in the image of $rho$ and $sigma$. Namely, if $rho_0$ and $sigma_0$ are any other density operators satisfying $mathrm{im}(rho_0)subseteqmathrm{im}(rho)$ and $mathrm{im}(sigma_0)subseteqmathrm{im}(sigma)$, there must exist positive constants $x$ and $y$ such that $rho_0leq xrho$ and $sigma_0leq ysigma$ and we find that
          begin{align*}
          0leqmathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho_0)mathcal{N}(sigma_0)) leq xy,mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho)mathcal{N}(sigma)) = 0.
          end{align*}






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Wow..... That's what I want!! Thank you very much! :)
            $endgroup$
            – NNNN
            Mar 26 at 14:59












          • $begingroup$
            umm... why does the inequality $0≤Tr(N(uu^∗)N(vv^∗))$ hold??
            $endgroup$
            – NNNN
            Mar 27 at 8:13










          • $begingroup$
            The Hilbert-Schmidt inner product of two positive semidefinite operators is nonnegative.
            $endgroup$
            – luftbahnfahrer
            Mar 27 at 13:42










          • $begingroup$
            Oh yeah.. I see!! Again, I appreciate your help!:)
            $endgroup$
            – NNNN
            Mar 27 at 14:20
















          1












          $begingroup$

          We can see why by understanding the following claim.



          For a density operator $rhoinmathcal{S}(A)$, one may denote the image (or range) of $rho$ as $mathrm{im}(rho)$. Note that, for any vector $uinmathrm{im}(rho)$, there exists a positive real number $x$ such that $uu^*leq xrho$. Moreover, for any positive linear mapping $mathcal{N}$, it holds that $mathcal{N}(uu^*)leq x mathcal{N}(rho)$.



          Claim. Let $mathcal{N}:mathcal{L}(A)rightarrow mathcal{L}(B)$ be a channel and let $rho,sigmainmathcal{S}(A)$ be density operators satisfying $mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho)mathcal{N}(sigma))=0$. For any vectors $uinmathrm{im}(rho)$ and $vinmathrm{im}(sigma)$, it holds that $mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(uu^*)mathcal{N}(vv^*))=0$.



          Proof. From the above observations, there exist positive real numbers $x$ and $y$ satisfying $uu^*leq xrho$ and $vv^*leq ysigma$. It follows that $mathcal{N}(uu^*)leq x mathcal{N}(rho)$ and $mathcal{N}(vv^*)leq y mathcal{N}(sigma)$. Moreover,
          begin{align*}
          0leqmathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(uu^*)mathcal{N}(vv^*)) leq xy,mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho)mathcal{N}(sigma)) = 0,
          end{align*}

          which yields the desired result.





          This idea can be extended to any state in the image of $rho$ and $sigma$. Namely, if $rho_0$ and $sigma_0$ are any other density operators satisfying $mathrm{im}(rho_0)subseteqmathrm{im}(rho)$ and $mathrm{im}(sigma_0)subseteqmathrm{im}(sigma)$, there must exist positive constants $x$ and $y$ such that $rho_0leq xrho$ and $sigma_0leq ysigma$ and we find that
          begin{align*}
          0leqmathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho_0)mathcal{N}(sigma_0)) leq xy,mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho)mathcal{N}(sigma)) = 0.
          end{align*}






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Wow..... That's what I want!! Thank you very much! :)
            $endgroup$
            – NNNN
            Mar 26 at 14:59












          • $begingroup$
            umm... why does the inequality $0≤Tr(N(uu^∗)N(vv^∗))$ hold??
            $endgroup$
            – NNNN
            Mar 27 at 8:13










          • $begingroup$
            The Hilbert-Schmidt inner product of two positive semidefinite operators is nonnegative.
            $endgroup$
            – luftbahnfahrer
            Mar 27 at 13:42










          • $begingroup$
            Oh yeah.. I see!! Again, I appreciate your help!:)
            $endgroup$
            – NNNN
            Mar 27 at 14:20














          1












          1








          1





          $begingroup$

          We can see why by understanding the following claim.



          For a density operator $rhoinmathcal{S}(A)$, one may denote the image (or range) of $rho$ as $mathrm{im}(rho)$. Note that, for any vector $uinmathrm{im}(rho)$, there exists a positive real number $x$ such that $uu^*leq xrho$. Moreover, for any positive linear mapping $mathcal{N}$, it holds that $mathcal{N}(uu^*)leq x mathcal{N}(rho)$.



          Claim. Let $mathcal{N}:mathcal{L}(A)rightarrow mathcal{L}(B)$ be a channel and let $rho,sigmainmathcal{S}(A)$ be density operators satisfying $mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho)mathcal{N}(sigma))=0$. For any vectors $uinmathrm{im}(rho)$ and $vinmathrm{im}(sigma)$, it holds that $mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(uu^*)mathcal{N}(vv^*))=0$.



          Proof. From the above observations, there exist positive real numbers $x$ and $y$ satisfying $uu^*leq xrho$ and $vv^*leq ysigma$. It follows that $mathcal{N}(uu^*)leq x mathcal{N}(rho)$ and $mathcal{N}(vv^*)leq y mathcal{N}(sigma)$. Moreover,
          begin{align*}
          0leqmathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(uu^*)mathcal{N}(vv^*)) leq xy,mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho)mathcal{N}(sigma)) = 0,
          end{align*}

          which yields the desired result.





          This idea can be extended to any state in the image of $rho$ and $sigma$. Namely, if $rho_0$ and $sigma_0$ are any other density operators satisfying $mathrm{im}(rho_0)subseteqmathrm{im}(rho)$ and $mathrm{im}(sigma_0)subseteqmathrm{im}(sigma)$, there must exist positive constants $x$ and $y$ such that $rho_0leq xrho$ and $sigma_0leq ysigma$ and we find that
          begin{align*}
          0leqmathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho_0)mathcal{N}(sigma_0)) leq xy,mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho)mathcal{N}(sigma)) = 0.
          end{align*}






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          We can see why by understanding the following claim.



          For a density operator $rhoinmathcal{S}(A)$, one may denote the image (or range) of $rho$ as $mathrm{im}(rho)$. Note that, for any vector $uinmathrm{im}(rho)$, there exists a positive real number $x$ such that $uu^*leq xrho$. Moreover, for any positive linear mapping $mathcal{N}$, it holds that $mathcal{N}(uu^*)leq x mathcal{N}(rho)$.



          Claim. Let $mathcal{N}:mathcal{L}(A)rightarrow mathcal{L}(B)$ be a channel and let $rho,sigmainmathcal{S}(A)$ be density operators satisfying $mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho)mathcal{N}(sigma))=0$. For any vectors $uinmathrm{im}(rho)$ and $vinmathrm{im}(sigma)$, it holds that $mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(uu^*)mathcal{N}(vv^*))=0$.



          Proof. From the above observations, there exist positive real numbers $x$ and $y$ satisfying $uu^*leq xrho$ and $vv^*leq ysigma$. It follows that $mathcal{N}(uu^*)leq x mathcal{N}(rho)$ and $mathcal{N}(vv^*)leq y mathcal{N}(sigma)$. Moreover,
          begin{align*}
          0leqmathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(uu^*)mathcal{N}(vv^*)) leq xy,mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho)mathcal{N}(sigma)) = 0,
          end{align*}

          which yields the desired result.





          This idea can be extended to any state in the image of $rho$ and $sigma$. Namely, if $rho_0$ and $sigma_0$ are any other density operators satisfying $mathrm{im}(rho_0)subseteqmathrm{im}(rho)$ and $mathrm{im}(sigma_0)subseteqmathrm{im}(sigma)$, there must exist positive constants $x$ and $y$ such that $rho_0leq xrho$ and $sigma_0leq ysigma$ and we find that
          begin{align*}
          0leqmathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho_0)mathcal{N}(sigma_0)) leq xy,mathrm{Tr}(mathcal{N}(rho)mathcal{N}(sigma)) = 0.
          end{align*}







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Mar 26 at 16:01

























          answered Mar 26 at 14:00









          luftbahnfahrerluftbahnfahrer

          714315




          714315












          • $begingroup$
            Wow..... That's what I want!! Thank you very much! :)
            $endgroup$
            – NNNN
            Mar 26 at 14:59












          • $begingroup$
            umm... why does the inequality $0≤Tr(N(uu^∗)N(vv^∗))$ hold??
            $endgroup$
            – NNNN
            Mar 27 at 8:13










          • $begingroup$
            The Hilbert-Schmidt inner product of two positive semidefinite operators is nonnegative.
            $endgroup$
            – luftbahnfahrer
            Mar 27 at 13:42










          • $begingroup$
            Oh yeah.. I see!! Again, I appreciate your help!:)
            $endgroup$
            – NNNN
            Mar 27 at 14:20


















          • $begingroup$
            Wow..... That's what I want!! Thank you very much! :)
            $endgroup$
            – NNNN
            Mar 26 at 14:59












          • $begingroup$
            umm... why does the inequality $0≤Tr(N(uu^∗)N(vv^∗))$ hold??
            $endgroup$
            – NNNN
            Mar 27 at 8:13










          • $begingroup$
            The Hilbert-Schmidt inner product of two positive semidefinite operators is nonnegative.
            $endgroup$
            – luftbahnfahrer
            Mar 27 at 13:42










          • $begingroup$
            Oh yeah.. I see!! Again, I appreciate your help!:)
            $endgroup$
            – NNNN
            Mar 27 at 14:20
















          $begingroup$
          Wow..... That's what I want!! Thank you very much! :)
          $endgroup$
          – NNNN
          Mar 26 at 14:59






          $begingroup$
          Wow..... That's what I want!! Thank you very much! :)
          $endgroup$
          – NNNN
          Mar 26 at 14:59














          $begingroup$
          umm... why does the inequality $0≤Tr(N(uu^∗)N(vv^∗))$ hold??
          $endgroup$
          – NNNN
          Mar 27 at 8:13




          $begingroup$
          umm... why does the inequality $0≤Tr(N(uu^∗)N(vv^∗))$ hold??
          $endgroup$
          – NNNN
          Mar 27 at 8:13












          $begingroup$
          The Hilbert-Schmidt inner product of two positive semidefinite operators is nonnegative.
          $endgroup$
          – luftbahnfahrer
          Mar 27 at 13:42




          $begingroup$
          The Hilbert-Schmidt inner product of two positive semidefinite operators is nonnegative.
          $endgroup$
          – luftbahnfahrer
          Mar 27 at 13:42












          $begingroup$
          Oh yeah.. I see!! Again, I appreciate your help!:)
          $endgroup$
          – NNNN
          Mar 27 at 14:20




          $begingroup$
          Oh yeah.. I see!! Again, I appreciate your help!:)
          $endgroup$
          – NNNN
          Mar 27 at 14:20


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3162898%2fwhy-can-input-states-rho-m-be-chosen-to-be-rank-one-operators-in-zero-error-c%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Nidaros erkebispedøme

          Birsay

          Was Woodrow Wilson really a Liberal?Was World War I a war of liberals against authoritarians?Founding Fathers...