Reply II to 'Comment on 'Some implications of the quantum nature of laser fields for quantum computations''
Journal Article
·
· Physical Review. A
- Department of Physics, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 (United States)
I show that there is no contradiction between the results in my original paper [Phys. Rev. A 65, 022308 (2002)] and Itano's claims in the previous Comment. The error probabilities I calculated from quantum field fluctuations can equivalently be obtained by considering the probability of spontaneous emission by the atom into the field modes that make up the laser pulse.
- OSTI ID:
- 20640430
- Journal Information:
- Physical Review. A, Vol. 68, Issue 4; Other Information: DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.68.046303; (c) 2003 The American Physical Society; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); ISSN 1050-2947
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
Decoherence of a two-state atom driven by coherent light
Reply I to 'Comment on 'Some implications of the quantum nature of laser fields for quantum computations''
Reply to 'Comment on 'Quantum key distribution for d-level systems with generalized Bell states''
Journal Article
·
Sat Jan 01 00:00:00 EST 2005
· Physical Review. A
·
OSTI ID:20640430
Reply I to 'Comment on 'Some implications of the quantum nature of laser fields for quantum computations''
Journal Article
·
Wed Oct 01 00:00:00 EDT 2003
· Physical Review. A
·
OSTI ID:20640430
Reply to 'Comment on 'Quantum key distribution for d-level systems with generalized Bell states''
Journal Article
·
Thu Dec 15 00:00:00 EST 2005
· Physical Review. A
·
OSTI ID:20640430