Elements of Quantum Computing

Module 5 — Lecture Notes

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

SAS – Department of Physics

VIT Chennai

Syllabus
Introduction to qubits • Single-qubit states and the Bloch Sphere •
Two-qubit systems
Quantum entanglement and Bell states • Single-qubit gates: Pauli and
Hadamard
Two-qubit gates: CNOT • Generation of entangled states

Academic Year 2025–26

These notes are intended for classroom use and may form the basis of a future book chapter.
Preface

These lecture notes accompany Module 5 of the first-year [Link] course Introductory
Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Computing. The module bridges the physical principles
of quantum mechanics, covered in earlier modules, with the emerging field of quantum
information and computation.
Quantum computing is not simply a faster version of classical computing — it is a
fundamentally different computational paradigm that exploits three uniquely quantum
phenomena:
• Superposition: a quantum system can exist in multiple states simultaneously.
• Entanglement: distant quantum systems can exhibit correlations with no classical
analogue.
• Interference: quantum amplitudes can add constructively or destructively, enabling
algorithmic speed-ups.

Prerequisites. Students should be comfortable with: complex numbers and linear alge-
bra (vectors, matrices, inner products, eigenvectors), Dirac bra-ket notation, the postulates
of quantum mechanics (wave functions, Hilbert spaces, observables, measurement, time
evolution), and the two-level system (spin- 21 , two-level atom).

Structure of these notes. Each chapter corresponds to one topic in the syllabus. Within
each chapter you will find: motivational discussion, rigorous mathematical development,
worked examples, key-insight boxes, and end-of-chapter exercises. The notes are written
so that they can be read independently of any single textbook, while remaining consistent
with the standard references listed in the bibliography.

Notation. We follow the Dirac notation throughout. The computational basis states
are |0⟩ and |1⟩. The identity operator on a single qubit is I (or I2 ). Tensor products are
denoted ⊗. All vectors are column vectors; their adjoints (conjugate transposes) are row

2
vectors (bras).

Contents

Preface 2

1 Introduction to Qubits 6
1.1 Classical Bits versus Quantum Bits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.1.1 Physical Realisations of a Qubit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.1.2 Measurement and Born Rule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.1.3 Superposition: A Non-Classical Feature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.1.4 Global Phase and Relative Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.1.5 Important Single-Qubit States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

2 Single-Qubit States and the Bloch Sphere 10

2.1 Parameterising the Pure State Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2 The Bloch Sphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.2.1 Key Points on the Bloch Sphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3 The Density Operator and Mixed States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3.1 Geometric Meaning of Unitary Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

3 Two-Qubit Systems 14
3.1 The Tensor Product . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.1.1 Column Vector Representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.2 General Two-Qubit State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.3 Product States and Separability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.4 Operators on Two-Qubit Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.5 Measurement on Two-Qubit Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

4 Quantum Entanglement and Bell States 18

4.1 Quantum Entanglement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.1.1 The Reduced Density Matrix and Entanglement . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.1.2 Entanglement Entropy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.2 The Bell States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.2.1 Properties of Bell States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.3 Bell’s Theorem and Non-locality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

3
4 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

4.3.1 The CHSH Inequality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

5 Single-Qubit Gates: Pauli and Hadamard 22

5.1 Quantum Gates: General Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.2 The Pauli Matrices and Gates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.2.1 Algebraic Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.2.2 The X Gate (Quantum NOT / Bit-Flip Gate) . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
5.2.3 The Z Gate (Phase-Flip Gate) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
5.2.4 The Y Gate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
5.3 The Hadamard Gate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
5.3.1 Action of the Hadamard Gate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
5.3.2 The n-Qubit Hadamard Transform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
5.4 Quantum Circuit Diagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
5.5 Other Important Single-Qubit Gates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

6 Two-Qubit Gates: The CNOT Gate 29

6.1 Motivation: Need for Entangling Gates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6.2 The CNOT Gate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6.2.1 Truth Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6.2.2 Circuit Symbol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6.2.3 Properties of the CNOT Gate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6.3 CNOT on Superposition States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
6.4 CNOT in the Hadamard Basis and Phase Kickback . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
6.5 Universality of CNOT and Single-Qubit Gates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

7 Generation of Entangled States 34

7.1 The Bell State Generation Circuit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
7.1.1 Derivation for All Four Inputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
7.2 Bell Measurement: The Inverse Circuit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
7.3 Application: Quantum Teleportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
7.3.1 Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
7.4 Application: Superdense Coding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
7.5 Generating the GHZ State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
7.5.1 GHZ Generation Circuit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
7.6 Summary of Entangled State Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

8 Module Summary and Outlook 42

8.1 Summary of Key Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
8.2 Quick Reference: Gate Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
8.3 Important Relations at a Glance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

 Contents | 5

8.4 Looking Ahead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

A Mathematical Background: Linear Algebra Review 46

A.1 Inner Products and Norms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
A.2 Tensor Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
A.3 Unitary Matrices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
A.4 Spectral Theorem and Exponential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

B Solved Problems 48

Bibliography and Further Reading 49

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

Chapter 1

Introduction to Qubits

1.1 Classical Bits versus Quantum Bits

The bit is the fundamental unit of classical information. A classical bit has exactly two
possible values: 0 or 1. These are realised physically as high/low voltages, magnetic
polarisations, optical on/off states, and so on. Classical computation is built upon
deterministic (or probabilistic) manipulation of bits using logic gates.
A quantum bit or qubit is the quantum-mechanical analogue of a classical bit. It is a
two-level quantum system whose state space is a two-dimensional complex Hilbert space
H∼= C2 . The two computational basis states are written in Dirac notation as:
   
1 0
|0⟩ ≡   , |1⟩ ≡   .
0 1

These are orthonormal: ⟨0|0⟩ = ⟨1|1⟩ = 1 and ⟨0|1⟩ = 0.

Definition 1.1 The Qubit

A qubit is the fundamental unit of quantum information. Its most general pure state
is a normalised vector in C2 :

|ψ⟩ = α |0⟩ + β |1⟩ , α, β ∈ C, |α|2 + |β|2 = 1. (1.1)

The complex numbers α and β are called probability amplitudes.

6
 1.1. Classical Bits versus Quantum Bits | 7

The constraint |α|2 + |β|2 = 1 is the normalisation condition. It ensures that the total
probability of all measurement outcomes equals one.

1.1.1 Physical Realisations of a Qubit

The abstract qubit can be implemented in many physical systems. Table 1.1 lists several
prominent examples.

Table 1.1: Physical realisations of a qubit.

Physical System State |0⟩ State |1⟩

Electron spin- 12 Spin-up |↑⟩ Spin-down |↓⟩

Photon polarisation Horizontal |H⟩ Vertical |V ⟩

Two-level atom / ion Ground state |g⟩ Excited state |e⟩

Superconducting transmon Ground level |0⟩ First excited level |1⟩

Quantum dot Spin-down Spin-up

Nuclear spin (NMR) |↑⟩ along field |↓⟩ along field

Photon number (Fock) Vacuum |0⟩ Single photon |1⟩

1.1.2 Measurement and Born Rule

When we measure a qubit |ψ⟩ = α |0⟩ + β |1⟩ in the computational basis {|0⟩ , |1⟩}, the
outcomes are probabilistic:

Postulate 1.1 Born Rule for a Qubit

P (outcome 0) = |α|2 , P (outcome 1) = |β|2 .

After measuring outcome 0, the state collapses to |0⟩; after outcome 1, it collapses to
|1⟩.

Crucially, while |α|2 + |β|2 = 1 demands normalisation, the individual amplitudes α, β are
complex numbers and carry phase information that is physically meaningful (it governs
interference) yet invisible to a single measurement.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

8 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

1.1.3 Superposition: A Non-Classical Feature

A classical bit can only be in state 0 or state 1. A qubit, however, can be in a superposition
— both |0⟩ and |1⟩ simultaneously — until it is measured. This is not merely a statement
of ignorance; the superposition is a genuine quantum state that participates in interference
and entanglement.

Classical vs. Quantum Information

A classical register of n bits stores one of 2n possible strings. An n-qubit quantum
register can exist in a superposition of all 2n basis states simultaneously. However,
a single measurement of such a register yields only n classical bits of outcome. The
quantum advantage comes from processing the full superposition coherently via
quantum gates before measurement.

1.1.4 Global Phase and Relative Phase

Consider two states that differ by a global phase factor eiϕ :

|ψ⟩ = α |0⟩ + β |1⟩ , |ψ ′ ⟩ = eiϕ α |0⟩ + eiϕ β |1⟩ = eiϕ |ψ⟩ .

Since all physical predictions depend on |⟨·|ψ⟩|2 , the global phase eiϕ is unobservable.
We say |ψ⟩ and eiϕ |ψ⟩ represent the same physical state.
A relative phase, by contrast, is physically meaningful. The states

|0⟩ + |1⟩ |0⟩ − |1⟩

√ and √
2 2

have identical measurement probabilities in the computational basis (50% each), yet they
are distinguishable by measuring in a rotated basis and give different interference patterns.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

 1.1. Classical Bits versus Quantum Bits | 9

1.1.5 Important Single-Qubit States

Table 1.2: Six canonical single-qubit states forming three mutually unbiased bases.

State Vector form Definition Bloch axis

 
1
|0⟩   Computational basis state 0 +Z
0
 
0
|1⟩   Computational basis state 1 −Z
1
 
1 1 |0⟩ + |1⟩
|+⟩ √   √ +X
2 1 2
 
1 1 |0⟩ − |1⟩
|−⟩ √   √ −X
2 −1 2
 
1 1 |0⟩ + i |1⟩
|i⟩ √   √ +Y
2 i 2
 
1 1 |0⟩ − i |1⟩
|−i⟩ √   √ −Y
2 −i 2

Example 1.1 Measurement Probabilities

√
3 i
Find the probability of measuring |0⟩ and |1⟩ for the state |ψ⟩ = |0⟩ + |1⟩.
√ 2 2
3 i
Solution. α = ,β= .
2 2
2
3 2 i
2 1
P (0) = |α| = , P (1) = |β| = = .
4 2 4
3 1
Check: P (0) + P (1) = 4
+ 4
= 1. The state is normalised. ✓

Exercises
Q1. Verify that |+⟩ and |−⟩ are orthonormal.
q
Q2. A qubit is in state |ψ⟩ = √13 |0⟩ − 23 |1⟩. Find the probability of each computa-
tional basis outcome and verify normalisation.
Q3. Explain why the states |0⟩ and eiπ/4 |0⟩ are physically identical.
Q4. Is the state |χ⟩ = 1+i
2
|0⟩ + 21 |1⟩ normalised? If not, normalise it.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

Chapter 2

Single-Qubit States and the Bloch Sphere

2.1 Parameterising the Pure State Space

The general normalised qubit state |ψ⟩ = α |0⟩ + β |1⟩ has four real degrees of freedom
(Re α, Im α, Re β, Im β). Two constraints reduce this:
1. Normalisation: |α|2 + |β|2 = 1 removes one degree of freedom.
2. Global phase: states differing by an overall phase eiφ0 are physically equivalent,
removing one more.
We are left with two real parameters. Writing α = cos(θ/2) and β = eiφ sin(θ/2), the
most general single-qubit pure state (up to global phase) is:

Definition 2.1 Bloch Parameterisation

θ θ
|ψ⟩ = cos |0⟩ + eiφ sin |1⟩ , θ ∈ [0, π], φ ∈ [0, 2π). (2.1)
2 2

Note: cos(θ/2) ≥ 0 for θ ∈ [0, π], so we have fixed the global phase of the |0⟩ component
to be real and non-negative. The parameter φ is the relative phase between the two
components.

10
 2.2. The Bloch Sphere | 11

2.2 The Bloch Sphere

The two angles (θ, φ) are the polar and azimuthal angles of a point on the unit sphere in
R3 . This sphere is called the Bloch sphere.

Definition 2.2 Bloch Sphere and Bloch Vector

The Bloch sphere is the unit sphere in R3 whose surface points are in one-to-one
correspondence with pure qubit states. The Bloch vector associated with |ψ⟩ is:

⃗r = (sin θ cos φ, sin θ sin φ, cos θ), |⃗r| = 1. (2.2)

|0⟩ (North Pole)

|ψ⟩ |−⟩

θ
|−i⟩

|+i⟩
φ y

|+⟩

|1⟩ (South Pole)

Figure 2.1: The Bloch sphere. Every point on its surface represents a unique pure state
of a qubit. The north pole is |0⟩, the south pole is |1⟩, and the six labelled equatorial
points correspond to the eigenstates of the three Pauli operators. The red arrow is an
arbitrary Bloch vector ⃗r corresponding to state |ψ⟩.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

12 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

2.2.1 Key Points on the Bloch Sphere

Table 2.1: Correspondence between qubit states, Bloch angles, and Bloch vectors.

State θ φ Bloch vector ⃗r Location

|0⟩ 0 — (0, 0, +1) North pole

|1⟩ π — (0, 0, −1) South pole

|+⟩ π/2 0 (+1, 0, 0) +x equator1

|−⟩ π/2 π (−1, 0, 0) −x equator

|i⟩ π/2 π/2 (0, +1, 0) +y equator

|−i⟩ π/2 3π/2 (0, −1, 0) −y equator

2.3 The Density Operator and Mixed States

The Bloch sphere surface represents pure states (states of maximal quantum information).
Quantum systems may also exist in mixed states — statistical mixtures of pure states —
described by a density operator:

Definition 2.3 Density Operator

The density operator ρ of a qubit can be written in terms of the Bloch vector
⃗r = (rx , ry , rz ) as:

1 I + ⃗r · ⃗σ
ρ = (I + rx σx + ry σy + rz σz ) = , (2.3)
2 2
where ⃗σ = (σx , σy , σz ) are the Pauli matrices. For a pure state, |⃗r| = 1 (surface). For
a mixed state, |⃗r| < 1 (interior). The maximally mixed state ρ = I/2 corresponds to
⃗r = ⃗0 (centre).

1
Convention: with the parameterisation ⃗r = (sin θ cos φ, sin θ sin φ, cos θ), the x- and y-axes are as
labelled in Fig. 2.1. Different textbooks may assign x and y differently.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

 2.3. The Density Operator and Mixed States | 13

2.3.1 Geometric Meaning of Unitary Operations

Any single-qubit unitary U acts on the Bloch sphere as a rotation. Specifically, the
unitary
θ θ
U = e−i(θ/2)n̂·⃗σ = cos I − i sin (n̂ · ⃗σ )
2 2
rotates the Bloch vector by angle θ about the axis n̂. This beautiful geometric picture
makes it easy to visualise the effect of quantum gates.

Example 2.1 Bloch Vector of a Rotated State

√
Verify that |+⟩ = (|0⟩ + |1⟩)/ 2 has Bloch vector (0, 1, 0) using Eq. (2.3).
Solution. The density matrix of |+⟩ is:
   
1 1  1 1 1

ρ = |+⟩ ⟨+| = 1 1 =  .
2 1 2 1 1
     
0 1 0 −i 1 0
Using (2.3) with σx =  , σy =  , σz =  :
1 0 i 0 0 −1
 
I + rx σx + ry σy + rz σz 1 1 + rz rx − iry 
=  .
2 2 rx + iry 1 − rz

Comparing with ρ: 1 + rz = 1, rx − iry = 1, rx + iry = 1, 1 − rz = 1. From

these: rz = 0, rx = 1, ry = 0. Wait — let us recheck. The definition here uses the
convention ⃗r = (sin θ cos φ, sin θ sin φ, cos θ) with the |+⟩ state at θ = π/2, φ = 0,
giving r = (0, 1, 0) only if x and y axes are swapped, as noted in Table 2.1. We find
⃗r = (1, 0, 0) in the (rx , ry , rz ) convention of Eq. (2.3), which corresponds to the +x
axis on the Bloch sphere. ✓

Exercises
Q1. Find the Bloch vector of |ψ⟩ = 1+i
2
|0⟩ + √12 |1⟩. (Hint: first check normalisation.)
Q2. Show that for any pure state |ψ⟩, Tr(ρ2 ) = 1, while for the maximally mixed state
ρ = I/2, Tr(ρ2 ) = 21 .
Q3. What state corresponds to θ = π/3, φ = π/4? Write it in the form α |0⟩ + β |1⟩.
Q4. Explain in geometric terms what it means to apply a unitary gate U to a qubit.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

Chapter 3

Two-Qubit Systems

3.1 The Tensor Product

To describe a system of two qubits, we combine their individual Hilbert spaces using the
tensor product (also called the Kronecker product in the matrix context).

Definition 3.1 Two-Qubit Hilbert Space

If qubit A has Hilbert space HA ∼
= C2 and qubit B has Hilbert space HB ∼
= C2 , then
the composite two-qubit system lives in:

HAB = HA ⊗ HB ∼
= C2 ⊗ C 2 ∼
= C4 . (3.1)

The computational basis for the two-qubit system consists of the four orthonormal
states:
|00⟩ , |01⟩ , |10⟩ , |11⟩ , (3.2)

where |ab⟩ ≡ |a⟩A ⊗ |b⟩B means qubit A is in state |a⟩ and qubit B is in state |b⟩.

14
 3.2. General Two-Qubit State | 15

3.1.1 Column Vector Representations

Using the standard ordered basis {|00⟩ , |01⟩ , |10⟩ , |11⟩}:
       
1 0 0 0
       
0 1 0 0
|00⟩ =  , |01⟩ = 
 , |10⟩ = 
 , |11⟩ =  . (3.3)
     
0 0 1 0
       
0 0 0 1

The tensor product of two single-qubit column vectors is computed via the Kronecker
product:  
   
αγ
 
α γ
  ⊗  =
 αδ 
 . (3.4)

β δ βγ 
 
A B
βδ

3.2 General Two-Qubit State

The most general pure state in C4 is:

|cab |2 = 1.
X
|Ψ⟩ = c00 |00⟩ + c01 |01⟩ + c10 |10⟩ + c11 |11⟩ , (3.5)
a,b∈{0,1}

3.3 Product States and Separability

Definition 3.2 Product State and Entangled State

A two-qubit state |Ψ⟩ is called a product state (or separable state) if it can be
written as a tensor product of single-qubit states:

|Ψ⟩ = |ψ⟩A ⊗ |ϕ⟩B for some |ψ⟩ , |ϕ⟩ ∈ C2 .

If no such decomposition exists, |Ψ⟩ is called an entangled state.

Test for a product state. Write |Ψ⟩ = c00 |00⟩ + c01 |01⟩ + c10 |10⟩ + c11 |11⟩. This is a

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

16 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

product state if and only if :

c00 c11 = c01 c10 . (3.6)

This condition follows from the requirement that the 2 × 2 coefficient matrix M with
Mab = cab has rank 1, which is equivalent to det M = c00 c11 − c01 c10 = 0.

Example 3.1 Identifying Product States

(a) Is |Ψ1 ⟩ = 21 (|00⟩ + |01⟩ + |10⟩ + |11⟩) a product state?
Solution. c00 = c01 = c10 = c11 = 12 . Check: c00 c11 = 14 = c01 c10 . ⇒ Product state.
Indeed, |Ψ1 ⟩ = |+⟩ ⊗ |+⟩.
(b) Is |Ψ2 ⟩ = √12 (|00⟩ + |11⟩) a product state?
Solution. c00 = √12 , c01 = 0, c10 = 0, c11 = √12 . Check: c00 c11 = 12 ̸= 0 = c01 c10 . ⇒
Entangled state.

3.4 Operators on Two-Qubit Systems

If operator A acts on qubit A and operator B acts on qubit B, the combined operator on
HAB is A ⊗ B, computed as the Kronecker product of matrices. For a 2 × 2 matrix A:
 
a11 B a12 B 
A⊗B = . (3.7)
a21 B a22 B

Example 3.2 Computing X ⊗ Z

      
0 · 
1 0 1 0  0 0 1 0
    1·  
0 1  1 0   0 −1 0 −1  0 0 0 −1
 
X ⊗Z = ⊗ =     = 
 .

1 0 0 −1 1 0 1 0  1 0 0 0
 

1 ·  0·    
0 −1 0 −1 0 −1 0 0

3.5 Measurement on Two-Qubit Systems

For a two-qubit state |Ψ⟩ = a,b cab |ab⟩, measuring both qubits in the computational basis
P

yields outcome (a, b) with probability |cab |2 . Measuring only qubit A and finding outcome

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

 3.5. Measurement on Two-Qubit Systems | 17

a yields outcome with probability:

|cab |2 ,
X
P (a) =
b

√cab |b⟩ (properly normalised).

P
after which the state of qubit B collapses to b
P (a)

Exercises
Q1. Compute |+⟩ ⊗ |−⟩ explicitly as a column vector and express it as a superposition
of computational basis states.
Q2. Determine whether √13 (|00⟩ + |01⟩ + |10⟩) is a product state.
Q3. Compute the matrix Z ⊗ Z and find its eigenvalues.
Q4. For the state |Ψ⟩ = 12 |00⟩ + 2i |01⟩ + 12 |10⟩ + −1
2
|11⟩, find: (a) the probability of
measuring qubit A in state |0⟩; (b) the post-measurement state of qubit B given
that outcome.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

Chapter 4

Quantum Entanglement and Bell States

4.1 Quantum Entanglement

Quantum entanglement is one of the most profound and counter-intuitive aspects of

quantum mechanics. It refers to correlations between quantum subsystems that cannot be
explained by any classical local theory — correlations that, as John Bell showed in 1964,
go beyond anything achievable with shared classical information alone.

Definition 4.1 Quantum Entanglement

A pure state |Ψ⟩ ∈ HA ⊗ HB is entangled if it cannot be written as a product state:

|Ψ⟩ ̸= |ψ⟩A ⊗ |ϕ⟩B for any |ψ⟩ ∈ HA , |ϕ⟩ ∈ HB .

Entangled states have non-separable quantum correlations between the subsystems.

4.1.1 The Reduced Density Matrix and Entanglement

A quantitative signature of entanglement is revealed through the reduced density matrix.
For a bipartite pure state |Ψ⟩AB , the reduced density matrix of subsystem A is obtained
by tracing out subsystem B:

ρA = TrB (|Ψ⟩ ⟨Ψ|) . (4.1)

18
 4.2. The Bell States | 19

Result 4.1 Entanglement Criterion via Reduced Density Matrix

A pure bipartite state |Ψ⟩AB is entangled if and only if ρA = TrB (|Ψ⟩ ⟨Ψ|) is a mixed
state, i.e., Tr(ρ2A ) < 1.
Equivalently: |Ψ⟩AB is entangled iff the Schmidt rank of its Schmidt decomposition
is greater than one.

4.1.2 Entanglement Entropy

The degree of entanglement in a pure bipartite state is quantified by the von Neumann
entropy of the reduced density matrix:
X
S(ρA ) = −Tr(ρA log2 ρA ) = − λi log2 λi , (4.2)
i

where λi are the eigenvalues of ρA . For a product state, S = 0; for a maximally entangled
two-qubit state, S = 1 ebit (the maximum for a two-qubit system).

4.2 The Bell States

The four Bell states (also known as EPR pairs, after Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen)
are the four maximally entangled two-qubit states. They form an orthonormal basis —
the Bell basis — for the two-qubit Hilbert space C4 .

Definition 4.2 The Four Bell States

E 1  
Φ+ = √ |00⟩ + |11⟩ , (4.3)
2
E 1  
Φ− = √ |00⟩ − |11⟩ , (4.4)
2
E 1  
Ψ+ = √ |01⟩ + |10⟩ , (4.5)
2
E 1  
Ψ− = √ |01⟩ − |10⟩ . (4.6)
2

4.2.1 Properties of Bell States

1. Orthonormality. The Bell states form an orthonormal set:
D E D E D E D E
Φ± Φ± = Ψ± Ψ± = 1, Φ+ Φ− = Φ+ Ψ± = · · · = 0.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

20 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

2. Completeness. They span all of C4 :

ED ED ED ED
Φ+ Φ+ + Φ− Φ− + Ψ+ Ψ+ + Ψ− Ψ− = I4 .

3. Maximal entanglement. Each Bell state has ρA = I/2 (maximally mixed reduced
state), hence S(ρA ) = 1 ebit.
4. Perfect measurement correlations. In |Φ+ ⟩: measuring either qubit in Z gives ±1
equiprobably, but the two outcomes are always equal. In |Ψ+ ⟩: outcomes are always
opposite.
5. The singlet state |Ψ− ⟩ is special: it is rotationally invariant, meaning it takes the
same form in any orthonormal basis.

Example 4.1 Reduced Density Matrix of |Φ+ ⟩

Compute ρA = TrB (|Φ+ ⟩ ⟨Φ+ |).
Solution.
ED 1   1 
Φ+ Φ+ = |00⟩+|11⟩ ⟨00|+⟨11| = |00⟩ ⟨00|+|00⟩ ⟨11|+|11⟩ ⟨00|+|11⟩ ⟨11| .
2 2
Tracing out qubit B (using TrB (|a⟩ ⟨b| ⊗ |c⟩ ⟨d|) = |a⟩ ⟨b| · ⟨c|d⟩):

1
 
ρA = |0⟩ ⟨0| ⟨0|0⟩ + |0⟩ ⟨1| ⟨1|0⟩ + |1⟩ ⟨0| ⟨0|1⟩ + |1⟩ ⟨1| ⟨1|1⟩
2 | {z } | {z } | {z } | {z }
1 0 0 1
1  I
= |0⟩ ⟨0| + |1⟩ ⟨1| = .
2 2
This is the maximally mixed state. Qubit A alone contains no information about which
Bell state we have — all the information is encoded non-locally in the correlations. ✓

4.3 Bell’s Theorem and Non-locality

Bell’s 1964 theorem proves that the correlations between measurement outcomes of
entangled particles cannot be reproduced by any local hidden variable (LHV) theory
— a theory where particles carry pre-determined outcomes for all possible measurements.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

 4.3. Bell’s Theorem and Non-locality | 21

4.3.1 The CHSH Inequality

The Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) inequality is an experimentally testable form of
Bell’s theorem. Let Alice and Bob each choose between two measurement settings. Define
the CHSH quantity:

S = |E(a, b) − E(a, b′ ) + E(a′ , b) + E(a′ , b′ )|, (4.7)

where E(a, b) is the correlation of outcomes for settings a, b. Any LHV theory obeys:

S ≤ 2.

For the singlet state |Ψ− ⟩ with optimal measurement settings, quantum mechanics predicts:
√
SQM = 2 2 ≈ 2.83.

Experiments consistently confirm the quantum prediction, ruling out LHV theories (Aspect
et al., 1982; many loophole-free tests since 2015).

Entanglement: Key Points

• Entanglement is a purely quantum resource with no classical analogue.
• Measuring one qubit of an entangled pair instantaneously determines the state of
the other, regardless of their separation.
• No faster-than-light communication: local measurement outcomes are individ-
ually random; correlations are only revealed by comparing outcomes via a classical
channel.
• Entanglement is a consumable resource: performing operations on it (e.g., telepor-
tation) uses it up.
• Bell state |Ψ− ⟩ is the singlet: antisymmetric, rotationally invariant, used in E91
quantum cryptography.

Exercises
Q1. Verify that ⟨Φ+ |Ψ+ ⟩ = 0.
Q2. Express the computational basis states |00⟩ , |01⟩ , |10⟩ , |11⟩ in terms of the Bell
basis states.
Q3. Calculate the reduced density matrix ρB = TrA (|Ψ− ⟩ ⟨Ψ− |) and the entanglement
entropy S(ρB ).
Q4. For the state |Ψ+ ⟩, what is the probability of measuring qubit A in state |+⟩?
What is the post-measurement state of qubit B?

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

Chapter 5

Single-Qubit Gates: Pauli and Hadamard

5.1 Quantum Gates: General Principles

A quantum gate is a unitary transformation U acting on one or more qubits. Unitarity

(U U † = U † U = I) ensures:
• Norm preservation: ∥U |ψ⟩ ∥ = ∥ |ψ⟩ ∥.
• Reversibility: U −1 = U † exists for every quantum gate.
• Determinism in the absence of measurement: quantum evolution is entirely
deterministic (measurement introduces randomness).
Single-qubit gates are 2 × 2 unitary matrices. The most general single-qubit unitary (up
to global phase) is a rotation of the Bloch vector:

θ θ
U (n̂, θ) = e−iθn̂·⃗σ/2 = cos I − i sin (nx σx + ny σy + nz σz ), (5.1)
2 2
where n̂ = (nx , ny , nz ) is the rotation axis (unit vector) and θ is the rotation angle.

22
 5.2. The Pauli Matrices and Gates | 23

5.2 The Pauli Matrices and Gates

Definition 5.1 Pauli Matrices

The three Pauli matrices (and their quantum gate counterparts X, Y , Z) are:
     
0 1 0 −i 1 0
X = σx =  , Y = σy =  , Z = σz =  . (5.2)
1 0 i 0 0 −1

Together with the 2 × 2 identity I, they form a basis for the space of all 2 × 2 Hermitian
matrices.

5.2.1 Algebraic Properties

The Pauli matrices satisfy the following fundamental relations:

Table 5.1: Algebraic properties of Pauli matrices.

Property Statement

Hermitian σi† = σi

Unitary σi† σi = I

Involutory σi2 = I

Traceless Tr(σi ) = 0

Determinant det(σi ) = −1

Eigenvalues ±1 for each σi

Anticommutation {σi , σj } ≡ σi σj + σj σi = 2δij I

Commutation (Lie algebra) [σi , σj ] = 2iϵijk σk

Product rule σi σj = δij I + iϵijk σk

where ϵijk is the Levi-Civita symbol: ϵxyz = ϵyzx = ϵzxy = +1, etc.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

24 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

Explicit Products

XY = iZ, Y Z = iX, ZX = iY,

Y X = −iZ, ZY = −iX, XZ = −iY. (5.3)

5.2.2 The X Gate (Quantum NOT / Bit-Flip Gate)

Definition 5.2 The X Gate

 
0 1
X= , X |0⟩ = |1⟩ , X |1⟩ = |0⟩ .
1 0
X is the quantum analogue of the classical NOT gate: it flips |0⟩ ↔ |1⟩.

Action on a general state: X(α |0⟩ + β |1⟩) = β |0⟩ + α |1⟩.

On the Bloch sphere: X is a 180ř rotation about the x̂-axis.
Eigenstates of X: |+⟩ with eigenvalue +1 and |−⟩ with eigenvalue −1.

5.2.3 The Z Gate (Phase-Flip Gate)

Definition 5.3 The Z Gate

 
1 0
Z= , Z |0⟩ = |0⟩ , Z |1⟩ = − |1⟩ .
0 −1
Z leaves |0⟩ unchanged and flips the sign (phase) of |1⟩.

Action on a general state: Z(α |0⟩ + β |1⟩) = α |0⟩ − β |1⟩.

On the Bloch sphere: Z is a 180ř rotation about the ẑ-axis.
Eigenstates of Z: |0⟩ with eigenvalue +1 and |1⟩ with eigenvalue −1.

5.2.4 The Y Gate

Definition 5.4 The Y Gate

 
0 −i
Y = , Y |0⟩ = i |1⟩ , Y |1⟩ = −i |0⟩ .
i 0
Y simultaneously flips the qubit and introduces imaginary phases. Note that Y =
iXZ = −iZX.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

 5.3. The Hadamard Gate | 25

Action: Y (α |0⟩ + β |1⟩) = −iβ |0⟩ + iα |1⟩ = i(α |1⟩ − β |0⟩).

On the Bloch sphere: Y is a 180ř rotation about the ŷ-axis.

|0⟩

Z: rotate ẑ, 180ř

X: rotate x̂, 180ř

|1⟩

Figure 5.1: Bloch sphere rotations for the X and Z gates. Both are 180ř rotations about
their respective axes.

5.3 The Hadamard Gate

The Hadamard gate H is arguably the most important single-qubit gate in quantum
computing. It creates superpositions from basis states and is the fundamental tool of
quantum parallelism.

Definition 5.5 The Hadamard Gate

 
1 1 1
H=√  . (5.4)
2 1 −1

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

26 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

5.3.1 Action of the Hadamard Gate

1
H |0⟩ = √ (|0⟩ + |1⟩) = |+⟩ , (5.5)
2
1
H |1⟩ = √ (|0⟩ − |1⟩) = |−⟩ . (5.6)
2

The Hadamard gate maps between the Z-basis and the X-basis:

H |0⟩ = |+⟩ , H |1⟩ = |−⟩ , H |+⟩ = |0⟩ , H |−⟩ = |1⟩ .

Key properties:
1. Hermitian and unitary: H † = H and H 2 = I.
√
2. Geometrically: H is a 180ř rotation about the axis n̂ = (x̂ + ẑ)/ 2 (the bisector of
the x- and z-axes on the Bloch sphere).
3. Conjugation relations: HXH = Z, HZH = X, HY H = −Y .
4. Eigenvalues: ±1, with eigenstates cos(π/8) |0⟩ + sin(π/8) |1⟩ and − sin(π/8) |0⟩ +
cos(π/8) |1⟩.

5.3.2 The n-Qubit Hadamard Transform

Applying H to each of n qubits initialised in |0⟩ creates a uniform superposition of all

2n computational basis states:
n −1
⊗n ⊗n 1 2X
H |0⟩ =√ n |x⟩ . (5.7)
2 x=0

This is the foundation of quantum parallelism: by applying a unitary Uf to this

superposition, a quantum computer evaluates the function f on all 2n inputs simultaneously
in a single step.

Example 5.1 Conjugation HXH = Z

Verify algebraically that HXH = Z.
Solution.     
1 1 1  0 1 1  1 1
HX = √ =√ .
2 1 −1 1 0 2 −1 1

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

 5.4. Quantum Circuit Diagrams | 27

       
1 1 1 1 1 1  1 2 0  1 0 
HXH = √  ·√ = = = Z. ✓
2 −1 1 2 1 −1 2 0 −2 0 −1

5.4 Quantum Circuit Diagrams

Quantum circuits are read left to right. Single-qubit gates are depicted as labelled boxes
on a horizontal wire (representing the qubit’s time evolution). Below is a simple circuit
applying H then X then measuring:

|0⟩ H X Z
Figure 5.2: A simple single-qubit circuit: the state |0⟩ has H, X, and Z applied in sequence,
followed by a measurement in the computational basis. The double line after the meter
symbol represents a classical bit carrying the measurement outcome.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

28 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

5.5 Other Important Single-Qubit Gates

Table 5.2: Important single-qubit gates, their matrices, and Bloch sphere actions.

Gate Matrix Action on |0⟩ , |1⟩ Bloch rotation

 
1 0
I 


 I |0⟩ = |0⟩ , I |1⟩ = |1⟩ Identity
0 1
 
0 1
X 


 X |0⟩ = |1⟩ , X |1⟩ = |0⟩ Rx (180ř)
1 0
 
0 −i
Y 


 Y |0⟩ = i |1⟩ , Y |1⟩ = −i |0⟩ Ry (180ř)
i 0
 
1 0
Z 


 Z |0⟩ = |0⟩ , Z |1⟩ = − |1⟩ Rz (180ř)
0 −1
 
1 1
H √1   H |0⟩ = |+⟩ , H |1⟩ = |−⟩ Rxz (180ř)
2  
1 −1
 
1 0
S 


 S |0⟩ = |0⟩ , S |1⟩ = i |1⟩ Rz (90ř)
0 i
 
1 0 
T 


 T |0⟩ = |0⟩ , T |1⟩ = eiπ/4 |1⟩ Rz (45ř)
iπ/4
0 e

Note the hierarchy: T 2 = S, S 2 = Z, T 4 = Z, T 8 = I.

Exercises
Q1. Verify that H † H = I and H 2 = I.
Q2. Compute HY H and show it equals −Y .
Q3. Show that XY X = −Y and XZX = −Z.
Q4. Find the eigenstates of the Hadamard gate H.
Q5. Using the general rotation formula (5.1), express X, Y , Z, and H as rotations of
the Bloch sphere (give n̂ and θ for each).

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

 5.5. Other Important Single-Qubit Gates | 29

Q6. Apply H ⊗ H to |00⟩ and express the result in the computational basis. Is it
entangled?

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

Chapter 6

Two-Qubit Gates: The CNOT Gate

6.1 Motivation: Need for Entangling Gates

Single-qubit gates, no matter how many we apply, can never create entanglement from a
product state. To build a universal quantum computer and to generate entangled states,
we need gates that act on two or more qubits and can create non-separable correlations.
The most fundamental such gate is the Controlled-NOT (CNOT) gate.

6.2 The CNOT Gate

Definition 6.1 The CNOT Gate

The CNOT (Controlled-NOT) gate acts on two qubits: a control qubit (c) and a
target qubit (t). Its action on the computational basis is:

CNOT |c, t⟩ = |c, c ⊕ t⟩ , (6.1)

where ⊕ denotes addition modulo 2 (XOR). In words: if the control is |1⟩, flip the
target; if the control is |0⟩, do nothing.

30
 6.2. The CNOT Gate | 31

The 4 × 4 matrix (in the basis |00⟩ , |01⟩ , |10⟩ , |11⟩) is:
 
1 0 0 0
 
0 1 0 0
CNOT =  . (6.2)
 
0 0 0 1
 
0 0 1 0

6.2.1 Truth Table

Table 6.1: Truth table for the CNOT gate. The control qubit is unchanged; the target is
flipped iff the control is |1⟩.

Input Output

Control (c) Target (t) Control Target (c ⊕ t)

|0⟩ |0⟩ |0⟩ |0⟩

|0⟩ |1⟩ |0⟩ |1⟩

|1⟩ |0⟩ |1⟩ |1⟩

|1⟩ |1⟩ |1⟩ |0⟩

6.2.2 Circuit Symbol

Control: |c⟩ |c⟩

Target: |t⟩ |c ⊕ t⟩
Figure 6.1: Circuit symbol for the CNOT gate. The solid dot (•) marks the control qubit;
the ⊕ circle marks the target qubit where the conditional NOT is applied.

6.2.3 Properties of the CNOT Gate

1. Unitary: CNOT† CNOT = I4 .
2. Hermitian and involutory: CNOT† = CNOT and CNOT2 = I4 (it is its own
inverse).

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

32 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

3. Reversible: applying CNOT twice returns to the initial state.

4. Entanglement-generating: CNOT can create and destroy entanglement.
5. Classical limit: on computational basis states alone, CNOT implements the classical
reversible XOR gate.

6.3 CNOT on Superposition States

The true quantum power of CNOT emerges when the control qubit is in a superposition.

Example 6.1 CNOT Creates Entanglement

Apply CNOT to the state |+⟩ ⊗ |0⟩.
Solution.
1 1
|+⟩ ⊗ |0⟩ = √ (|0⟩ + |1⟩) ⊗ |0⟩ = √ (|00⟩ + |10⟩).
2 2
Applying CNOT (using linearity and Eq. (6.1)):

1 1 1 E
CNOT · √ (|00⟩ + |10⟩) = √ (CNOT |00⟩ + CNOT |10⟩) = √ (|00⟩ + |11⟩) = Φ+ .
2 2 2

A product state has become the maximally entangled Bell state |Φ+ ⟩! This demon-
strates why CNOT is essential for quantum information processing.

Example 6.2 CNOT Destroys Entanglement

Apply CNOT to the Bell state |Φ+ ⟩ = √1 (|00⟩ + |11⟩).
2
Solution.
E 1 1 1
CNOT Φ+ = √ (CNOT |00⟩+CNOT |11⟩) = √ (|00⟩+|10⟩) = √ (|0⟩+|1⟩)⊗|0⟩ = |+⟩⊗|0⟩ .
2 2 2

The Bell state has been converted back to a product state. CNOT is its own inverse:
applying it to the output of the previous example recovers the input. ✓

6.4 CNOT in the Hadamard Basis and Phase Kickback

When we conjugate CNOT by Hadamard gates on both qubits, the roles of control and
target are interchanged:

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

 6.5. Universality of CNOT and Single-Qubit Gates | 33

(H ⊗ H) CNOT (H ⊗ H) = CNOTreversed , (6.3)

where CNOTreversed has the target qubit as the new control and the control qubit as the
new target.
A related phenomenon is phase kickback: when the target qubit is an eigenstate of the
gate being controlled, the eigenvalue “kicks back” as a phase onto the control qubit.

Example 6.3 Phase Kickback with CNOT

Consider the state |+⟩ ⊗ |−⟩. Apply CNOT (control on qubit 1, target on qubit 2).
Solution.
1 1 1
|+⟩ ⊗ |−⟩ = √ (|0⟩ + |1⟩) ⊗ √ (|0⟩ − |1⟩) = (|00⟩ − |01⟩ + |10⟩ − |11⟩).
2 2 2

Applying CNOT:

CNOT : |00⟩ → |00⟩ , |01⟩ → |01⟩ , |10⟩ → |11⟩ , |11⟩ → |10⟩ .

1 1 1 1
CNOT·|+⟩⊗|−⟩ = (|00⟩−|01⟩+|11⟩−|10⟩) = (|00⟩−|01⟩−|10⟩+|11⟩) = √ (|0⟩−|1⟩)⊗ √ (|0⟩−|1⟩)
2 2 2 2
The phase of |−⟩ (eigenvalue −1 of X) has “kicked back” from the target to the control:
qubit 1 changed from |+⟩ to |−⟩, while qubit 2 was unchanged. This is the phase
kickback mechanism, central to Grover’s algorithm and quantum phase estimation.

6.5 Universality of CNOT and Single-Qubit Gates

Result 6.1 Universal Gate Set

Any unitary operation on n qubits can be decomposed (to arbitrary precision) into a
sequence of:
1. Single-qubit gates from the set {H, T } (or any entangling single-qubit rotation),
and
2. Two-qubit CNOT gates.
Thus, {H, T, CNOT} forms a universal gate set for quantum computation.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

34 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

Classical Analogy
In classical computing, NAND is a universal gate (any Boolean function can be
built from NANDs). In quantum computing, no single gate is universal; we need a
combination of single-qubit and entangling two-qubit gates.

Exercises
Q1. Verify by direct matrix multiplication that CNOT2 = I4 .
Q2. Apply CNOT to |−⟩ ⊗ |0⟩. Is the result entangled?
Q3. Prove the identity (H ⊗ H)CNOT(H ⊗ H) = CNOTreversed by matrix multiplica-
tion.
Q4. Apply CNOT to all four Bell states and identify the results.
Q5. Construct the controlled-Z (CZ) gate matrix. How does it differ from CNOT?

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

Chapter 7

Generation of Entangled States

7.1 The Bell State Generation Circuit

We now bring together the Hadamard and CNOT gates to show how all four Bell states
can be systematically generated from the four computational basis states.

Result 7.1 Bell State Generation

The circuit consisting of H on the first qubit followed by a CNOT (first qubit as
control, second as target) maps each computational basis state to a distinct Bell state:

H⊗I CNOT
|x, y⟩ −−→ −−−→ Bell state, (7.1)

according to Table 7.1.

|x⟩ H
|βxy ⟩
|y⟩
Figure 7.1: The Bell state generation circuit. Input |x⟩ |y⟩ (x, y ∈ {0, 1}) yields Bell
state |βxy ⟩. The circuit consists of a Hadamard gate on qubit 1 followed by a CNOT with
qubit 1 as control.

35
36 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

7.1.1 Derivation for All Four Inputs

Input |00⟩:

H⊗I 1 1
|00⟩ −−→ √ (|0⟩ + |1⟩) ⊗ |0⟩ = √ (|00⟩ + |10⟩)
2 2
CNOT 1 E
−−−→ √ (|00⟩ + |11⟩) = Φ+ = |β00 ⟩ .
2

Input |01⟩:

H⊗I 1
|01⟩ −−→ √ (|01⟩ + |11⟩)
2
CNOT 1 E
−−−→ √ (|01⟩ + |10⟩) = Ψ+ = |β01 ⟩ .
2

Input |10⟩:

H⊗I 1
|10⟩ −−→ √ (|00⟩ − |10⟩)
2
CNOT 1 E
−−−→ √ (|00⟩ − |11⟩) = Φ− = |β10 ⟩ .
2

Input |11⟩:

H⊗I 1
|11⟩ −−→ √ (|01⟩ − |11⟩)
2
CNOT 1 E
−−−→ √ (|01⟩ − |10⟩) = Ψ− = |β11 ⟩ .
2

Table 7.1: Input computational basis state → output Bell state for the generation circuit.

x y Bell state |βxy ⟩ Explicit form

0 0 |Φ+ ⟩ √1 (|00⟩ + |11⟩)

2

0 1 |Ψ+ ⟩ √1 (|01⟩ + |10⟩)

2

1 0 |Φ− ⟩ √1 (|00⟩
2
− |11⟩)

1 1 |Ψ− ⟩ √1 (|01⟩
2
− |10⟩)

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

 7.2. Bell Measurement: The Inverse Circuit | 37

7.2 Bell Measurement: The Inverse Circuit

Since the Bell generation circuit is unitary (hence invertible), we can run it in reverse to
map Bell states back to computational basis states. This is called the Bell measurement
circuit.

x
H
|βxy ⟩ y

Figure 7.2: The Bell measurement circuit: CNOT followed by H on the first qubit,
then measurement in the computational basis. The outcome (x, y) identifies which Bell
state was input.

7.3 Application: Quantum Teleportation

Quantum teleportation (Bennett et al., 1993) transmits an unknown qubit state from
Alice to Bob using one pre-shared Bell pair and two classical bits of communication.
Critically, the quantum state is not copied (in accordance with the no-cloning theorem); it
is transferred.

7.3.1 Protocol
Resources: Alice holds an unknown qubit |ψ⟩C = α |0⟩ + β |1⟩, and Alice and Bob share
the Bell pair |Φ+ ⟩AB .
Step 1 — Initial three-qubit state:
E
|Ψ0 ⟩ = (α |0⟩ + β |1⟩)C ⊗ Φ+
AB
1
= √ (α |000⟩ + α |011⟩ + β |100⟩ + β |111⟩)CAB . (7.2)
2

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

38 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

Step 2 — Alice applies CNOTCA (C control, A target):

1  
|Ψ1 ⟩ = √ α |000⟩ + α |011⟩ + β |110⟩ + β |101⟩ . (7.3)
2

Step 3 — Alice applies H to qubit C:

1

|Ψ2 ⟩ = |00⟩ (α |0⟩ + β |1⟩) + |01⟩ (α |1⟩ + β |0⟩)
2 
+ |10⟩ (α |0⟩ − β |1⟩) + |11⟩ (α |1⟩ − β |0⟩) . (7.4)
CA,B

Step 4 — Alice measures qubits C and A: She gets outcome (m1 , m2 ) ∈ {00, 01, 10, 11},
each with probability 14 .
Step 5 — Alice sends (m1 , m2 ) to Bob via a classical channel.
Step 6 — Bob applies correction X m2 Z m1 :

Table 7.2: Bob’s correction operations and resulting state after applying X m2 Z m1 .

m1 m2 Bob’s state before correction Correction Bob’s state after

0 0 α |0⟩ + β |1⟩ I α |0⟩ + β |1⟩ = |ψ⟩

0 1 α |1⟩ + β |0⟩ X α |0⟩ + β |1⟩ = |ψ⟩

1 0 α |0⟩ − β |1⟩ Z α |0⟩ + β |1⟩ = |ψ⟩

1 1 α |1⟩ − β |0⟩ XZ α |0⟩ + β |1⟩ = |ψ⟩

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

 7.4. Application: Superdense Coding | 39

In all cases, Bob recovers the original state |ψ⟩ = α |0⟩ + β |1⟩.

m1
|ψ⟩C H

m2
Alice’s half
|Φ+ ⟩
Bob’s half X m2 Z m1 |ψ⟩

Figure 7.3: Quantum teleportation circuit. The double lines represent classical communi-
cation. Alice measures qubits C (the unknown state) and her half of the Bell pair; she
sends the 2-bit outcome to Bob, who applies the appropriate Pauli corrections to recover
|ψ⟩ on his qubit.

Teleportation Key Points

• The unknown state |ψ⟩ does not travel through space — only two classical bits
travel.
• The entangled Bell pair is the quantum channel enabling teleportation.
• After Alice’s measurement, her qubit no longer contains |ψ⟩ — the no-cloning
theorem is not violated.
• Two classical bits are always required; the protocol is not faster than light.
• The teleported state appears on Bob’s qubit only after he receives and applies the
classical correction.

7.4 Application: Superdense Coding

Superdense coding (Bennett and Wiesner, 1992) is in some sense the dual of teleportation:
using one pre-shared Bell pair, Alice can communicate two classical bits to Bob by
sending just one qubit.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

40 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

Table 7.3: Superdense coding protocol: Alice’s operation and the resulting Bell state.

Bits to send (m1 , m2 ) Alice’s operation Resulting state

0 0 I |Φ+ ⟩

0 1 X |Ψ+ ⟩

1 0 Z |Φ− ⟩

1 1 iY = ZX |Ψ− ⟩

Protocol:
1. Alice and Bob share |Φ+ ⟩.
2. Alice applies one of {I, X, Z, iY } to her qubit, encoding two bits (see Table 7.3).
3. Alice sends her qubit to Bob (one qubit of physical communication).
4. Bob performs a Bell measurement (CNOT followed by H on Alice’s qubit, then
measurement of both qubits), reading off the two classical bits.

7.5 Generating the GHZ State

The Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state is the canonical maximally entangled

three-qubit state:
1  
|GHZ⟩ = √ |000⟩ + |111⟩ . (7.5)
2

7.5.1 GHZ Generation Circuit

Starting from |000⟩, apply H to the first qubit, then CNOT with qubit 1 as control and
qubit 2 as target, then CNOT with qubit 1 as control and qubit 3 as target:

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

 7.5. Generating the GHZ State | 41

|0⟩ H

|0⟩ |GHZ⟩

|0⟩
Figure 7.4: GHZ state generation circuit: H on qubit 1, then CNOT12 , then CNOT13 .

Derivation:

H1 1 1
|000⟩ −→ √ (|0⟩ + |1⟩) ⊗ |0⟩ ⊗ |0⟩ = √ (|000⟩ + |100⟩)
2 2
CNOT12 1
−−−−−→ √ (|000⟩ + |110⟩)
2
CNOT13 1
−−−−−→ √ (|000⟩ + |111⟩) = |GHZ⟩ .
2

Properties of the GHZ State

• Measuring any one qubit in |0⟩ collapses the remaining two to |00⟩; measuring in
|1⟩ collapses them to |11⟩ — all-or-nothing correlations.
• The GHZ state exhibits genuine three-qubit entanglement: it cannot be written
as a product of any single qubit with any two-qubit state.
• It provides an all-versus-nothing proof of non-locality (without inequalities), stronger
than Bell’s original argument.
• Entanglement entropy of any single qubit: S = 1 ebit.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

42 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

7.6 Summary of Entangled State Generation

Table 7.4: Summary: generating entangled states with H and CNOT.

Target state Input Gates applied Output

|Φ+ ⟩ |00⟩ H1 , CNOT12 √1 (|00⟩ + |11⟩)

2

|Ψ+ ⟩ |01⟩ H1 , CNOT12 √1 (|01⟩ + |10⟩)

2

|Φ− ⟩ |10⟩ H1 , CNOT12 √1 (|00⟩

2
− |11⟩)

|Ψ− ⟩ |11⟩ H1 , CNOT12 √1 (|01⟩

2
− |10⟩)

|GHZ⟩ |000⟩ H1 , CNOT12 , CNOT13 √1 (|000⟩ + |111⟩)

2

Exercises
Q1. Verify the derivation of |Ψ− ⟩ from input |11⟩ through the Bell generation circuit.
Q2. Trace through the quantum teleportation protocol for the specific state |ψ⟩ = |+⟩.
What does Bob measure and what correction does he apply?
Q3. In superdense coding, show that Alice’s operation X on her qubit of |Φ+ ⟩ gives
|Ψ+ ⟩.
Q4. Design a circuit (using H and CNOT) to generate the W-state |W ⟩ = √13 (|001⟩ +
|010⟩ + |100⟩). (Hint: this requires ancilla and single-qubit rotations.)
Q5. Show that the GHZ state is genuinely three-way entangled by proving it cannot
be written as |ϕ⟩A ⊗ |χ⟩BC for any choice of |ϕ⟩ and |χ⟩.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

Chapter 8

Module Summary and Outlook

43
44 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

8.1 Summary of Key Concepts

Module 5 — Complete Summary

Qubit
A two-level quantum system |ψ⟩ = α |0⟩ + β |1⟩, |α|2 + |β|2 = 1. Measurement
yields 0 or 1 with probabilities |α|2 and |β|2 .
Bloch Sphere
Pure qubit states ↔ points on the unit sphere via |ψ⟩ = cos(θ/2) |0⟩ +
eiφ sin(θ/2) |1⟩. Unitary gates ↔ rotations.
Two-Qubit Systems
Hilbert space C2 ⊗ C2 ∼ = C4 ; computational basis {|00⟩ , |01⟩ , |10⟩ , |11⟩}. States
are product if and only if c00 c11 = c01 c10 .
Entanglement
Non-separability; reduced density matrix is mixed; quantified by von Neumann
entropy. Bell states |Φ+ ⟩ , |Φ− ⟩ , |Ψ+ ⟩ , |Ψ− ⟩: maximally entangled, orthonormal
basis.
Pauli Gates
X (bit-flip, 180řRx ), Y (180řRy ), Z (phase-flip, 180řRz ). All involutory, Hermitian,
traceless.
Hadamard Gate
H |0⟩ = |+⟩, H |1⟩ = |−⟩; H 2 = I; creates superpositions; maps X ↔ Z bases.
CNOT Gate
|c, t⟩ → |c, c ⊕ t⟩; entangles product states; with single-qubit gates forms a univer-
sal gate set.
Bell State Generation
H on qubit 1 + CNOT12 applied to |xy⟩ gives Bell state |βxy ⟩.
Teleportation & Superdense Coding
Entanglement as a resource: 2 classical bits needed to teleport 1 qubit; 1 qubit (+
1 ebit) suffices to send 2 classical bits.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

 8.2. Quick Reference: Gate Actions | 45

8.2 Quick Reference: Gate Actions

Table 8.1: Quick reference: single-qubit gate actions on the six canonical states.

Gate |0⟩ |1⟩ |+⟩ |−⟩ |i⟩ |−i⟩

X |1⟩ |0⟩ |+⟩ |−⟩ |−⟩∗ |i⟩∗

Y i |1⟩ −i |0⟩ i |−⟩ −i |+⟩ i |i⟩ −i |−i⟩

Z |0⟩ − |1⟩ |−⟩ |+⟩ |−i⟩ |i⟩

|i⟩+|−i⟩ |i⟩−|−i⟩
H |+⟩ |−⟩ |0⟩ |1⟩ √
2
√
2

8.3 Important Relations at a Glance

HXH = Z, HZH = X, HY H = −Y. (8.1)

X 2 = Y 2 = Z 2 = H 2 = I. (8.2)
XY = iZ, Y Z = iX, ZX = iY. (8.3)
  E
CNOT |+⟩ ⊗ |0⟩ = Φ+ . (8.4)
CNOT2 = I4 , CNOT is Hermitian. (8.5)
H ,CNOT
Bell generation: |xy⟩ −−1−−−−−→
12
|βxy ⟩ . (8.6)
H ,CNOT ,CNOT
GHZ generation: |000⟩ −−1−−−−− √1 (|000⟩
12 13
−−−−−→ 2
+ |111⟩). (8.7)

8.4 Looking Ahead

The concepts from this module are the foundation for more advanced topics in quantum
information and computing:
• Quantum algorithms: Deutsch-Jozsa (uses H ⊗n and phase kickback), Grover’s
√
search (O( N ) queries using amplitude amplification), Shor’s factoring algorithm

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

46 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

(quantum Fourier transform + period finding).

• Quantum error correction: The three-qubit bit-flip code uses CNOT gates to
encode one logical qubit into three physical qubits; more powerful codes (Steane,
Surface) correct arbitrary single-qubit errors.
• Quantum cryptography: BB84 uses the Z- and X-basis states; E91 uses Bell pairs
and the CHSH inequality.
• Quantum communication: Quantum repeaters, entanglement swapping, and
quantum networks.
• Variational quantum algorithms: QAOA and VQE, which are near-term applica-
tions for optimisation and quantum chemistry.
• Quantum fault tolerance: The threshold theorem guarantees that arbitrarily
long quantum computations are possible if the per-gate error rate is below a critical
threshold (roughly 1%).

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

Chapter A

Mathematical Background: Linear Alge-

bra Review

A.1 Inner Products and Norms

The inner product of |ϕ⟩ and |ψ⟩ in Cn is:

n
ϕ∗i ψi ∈ C.
X
⟨ϕ|ψ⟩ =
i=1

Properties: ⟨ϕ|ψ⟩ = ⟨ψ|ϕ⟩∗ (conjugate symmetry); ⟨ψ|ψ⟩ ≥ 0 with equality iff |ψ⟩ = 0;
linearity in the second argument.
q
The norm is ∥ |ψ⟩ ∥ = ⟨ψ|ψ⟩.

A.2 Tensor Products

Kronecker product of A ∈ Mm×n and B ∈ Mp×q :

 
a B · · · a1n B
 11
 . .. 
A ⊗ B =  .. .  ∈ Mmp×nq .

 
am1 B · · · amn B

47
48 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

Key properties: (A ⊗ B)(C ⊗ D) = (AC) ⊗ (BD) when dimensions match; (A ⊗ B)† =

A† ⊗ B † ; Tr(A ⊗ B) = Tr(A)Tr(B).

A.3 Unitary Matrices

U is unitary iff U U † = U † U = I. Properties:

• Preserves inner products: ⟨ϕ| U † U |ψ⟩ = ⟨ϕ|ψ⟩.
• Eigenvalues have modulus 1: |λ| = 1.
• If U is also Hermitian (U † = U ), then U 2 = I and eigenvalues are ±1.

A.4 Spectral Theorem and Exponential

Every Hermitian operator A = A† on Cn has a spectral decomposition:

X
A= λi |ai ⟩ ⟨ai | ,
i

with real λi and orthonormal eigenvectors |ai ⟩. The operator exponential:

eiAθ = cos θ I + i sin θ A if A2 = I.

This identity directly gives the rotation formula (5.1) for single-qubit gates, since each
Pauli matrix squares to I.

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics

Chapter B

Solved Problems

Problem 1. Verify that {|Φ+ ⟩ , |Φ− ⟩ , |Ψ+ ⟩ , |Ψ− ⟩} are orthonormal.

Solution. We check ⟨Φ+ |Φ− ⟩:
D E 1   1  
Φ+ Φ− = √ ⟨00| + ⟨11| · √ |00⟩ − |11⟩
2 2
1 
= ⟨00|00⟩ − ⟨00|11⟩ + ⟨11|00⟩ − ⟨11|11⟩
2
1
= (1 − 0 + 0 − 1) = 0.✓
2

Similarly, ⟨Φ+ |Φ+ ⟩ = 21 (1 + 1) = 1. All other pairs are verified analogously.

Problem 2. For the state |ψ⟩ = 35 |0⟩ + 4i5 |1⟩, find (a) the normalisation, (b) the
measurement probabilities, (c) the Bloch vector.
9 16
Solution. (a) |α|2 + |β|2 = 25
+ 25
= 1. Normalised. ✓
9 16
(b) P (0) = 25
, P (1) = 25
.
(c) We have α = 35 and β = 4i5 . Comparing with cos(θ/2) |0⟩+eiφ sin(θ/2) |1⟩: cos(θ/2) = 35 ,
so sin(θ/2) = 45 , giving θ = 2 arccos(3/5). The phase: eiφ = i, so φ = π/2. Bloch vector:
⃗r = (sin θ cos(π/2), sin θ sin(π/2), cos θ) = (0, sin θ, cos θ). With cos θ = 1 − 2 sin2 (θ/2) =
1 − 2 · (16/25) = 1 − 32/25 = −7/25 and sin θ = 2 sin(θ/2) cos(θ/2) = 2 · 45 · 35 = 24 25
:
24 7 2 2 2
⃗r = (0, 25 , − 25 ). Verify |⃗r| = (24/25) + (7/25) = (576 + 49)/625 = 625/625 = 1. ✓

Problem 3. Apply the Bell generation circuit to |11⟩ and verify the output is |Ψ− ⟩.
Solution. (Full derivation given in Chapter 7. The student should reproduce it indepen-
dently.)

49
Bibliography and Further Reading

50
Bibliography

[1] M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information,

10th Anniversary Edition, Cambridge University Press, 2010. [The standard reference
for all topics in this module.]
[2] J. Preskill, Lecture Notes for Physics 219/Computer Science 219: Quantum Compu-
tation, Caltech, 1997–2022. Available at [Link]
ph229/ [Freely available; excellent depth and clarity.]
[3] N. D. Mermin, Quantum Computer Science: An Introduction, Cambridge University
Press, 2007. [Accessible text for students with a CS background.]
[4] M. M. Wilde, Quantum Information Theory, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press,
2017. [Rigorous treatment of information-theoretic aspects.]
[5] J. J. Sakurai and J. Napolitano, Modern Quantum Mechanics, 3rd ed., Cambridge
University Press, 2020. [Standard QM text; good for Dirac notation and spin.]
[6] J. S. Bell, “On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox,” Physics Physique Fizika 1,
195–200 (1964). [Original paper proving Bell’s theorem.]
[7] A. Aspect, J. Dalibard, and G. Roger, “Experimental Test of Bell’s Inequalities Using
Time-Varying Analyzers,” Physical Review Letters 49, 1804 (1982). [First experiment
with time-varying settings; strong violation of Bell inequalities.]
[8] C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Crépeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, and W. K. Wootters,
“Teleporting an unknown quantum state via dual classical and Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen
channels,” Physical Review Letters 70, 1895 (1993). [Original quantum teleportation
paper.]
[9] C. H. Bennett and S. J. Wiesner, “Communication via one- and two-particle operators
on Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen states,” Physical Review Letters 69, 2881 (1992). [Original
superdense coding paper.]

51
52 | Module 5: Elements of Quantum Computing

[10] D. M. Greenberger, M. A. Horne, and A. Zeilinger, “Going beyond Bell’s theorem,” in

Bell’s Theorem, Quantum Theory and Conceptions of the Universe, ed. M. Kafatos,
Kluwer, 1989. [Original GHZ state paper.]
[11] IBM Quantum Experience: [Link] [Online quan-
tum computing platform; students can run circuits on real quantum hardware.]
[12] Qiskit Documentation: [Link] [Open-source quan-
tum computing SDK; implements all gates and circuits discussed in this module.]

BAPHY105 – Engineering Physics