Skip to content
Shadow Theory

Section 3 9 October 2026

A smooth copy–return map on the complete configuration

Reading position 4 of 14

3 A smooth copy–return map on the complete configuration

Write ϕ(x)=(2π)−1/2e−x2/2\phi(x)=(2\pi)^{-1/2}e^{-x^2/2} and Φ(x)=∫−∞xϕ(y) dy\Phi(x)=\int_{-\infty}^x\phi(y)\,dy. A writer coordinate qq and a distinct archive coordinate zz have prescribed oscillator ground-state densities gσ(q)=σ−1ϕ(q/σ)g_\sigma(q)=\sigma^{-1}\phi(q/\sigma) and ha(z)=a−1ϕ(z/a)h_a(z)=a^{-1}\phi(z/a). Their quantum widths satisfy σ2=ℏ/(2mω)\sigma^2=\hbar/(2m\omega) and a2=ℏ/(2MΩ)a^2=\hbar/(2M\Omega). The internal two-state degree of freedom is a fibre, with no additional sampled configuration coordinate. The balanced entrance wave is

Ψin(q,z)=gσ(q)ha(z)(∣0⟩+∣1⟩)/2. \Psi_{\rm in}(q,z)=\sqrt{g_\sigma(q)h_a(z)} (|0\rangle+|1\rangle)/\sqrt2. (3.1)

Equation (3.1) specifies the quantum stock. The actual configuration law will be a separate input to the preparation theorem.

The prescribed Hamiltonian admits exact translated packets. If φ\varphi is the ground envelope of an oscillator and d(t)d(t) is a translation, then

ψd(q,t)=φ(q−d(t))exp⁡{imd˙(t)q/ℏ+iθd(t)},θ˙d=−ω/2−m(d˙)2/(2ℏ), \psi_d(q,t)=\varphi(q-d(t)) \exp\{im\dot d(t)q/\hbar+i\theta_d(t)\},\qquad \dot\theta_d=-\omega/2-m(\dot d)^2/(2\hbar), (3.2)

solves the Schrödinger equation with potential

Vd(q,t)=12mω2(q−d(t))2−md¨(t)q. V_d(q,t)=\tfrac12m\omega^2(q-d(t))^2-m\ddot d(t)q. (3.3)

This follows by differentiating (3.2): the transport term −iℏd˙φ′-i\hbar\dot d\varphi' cancels the cross kinetic term, the inertial linear term cancels −md¨q-m\ddot d q, and the remaining scalar terms give the displayed phase. The density and current are exactly gσ(q−d)g_\sigma(q-d) and d˙ gσ(q−d)\dot d\,g_\sigma(q-d). For an infinitely differentiable control, define

s(t)=∫0te−1/[r(1−r)] dr∫01e−1/[r(1−r)] dr,0<t<1, s(t)=\frac{\displaystyle\int_0^t e^{-1/[r(1-r)]}\,dr} {\displaystyle\int_0^1 e^{-1/[r(1-r)]}\,dr},\qquad 0<t<1, (3.4)

and extend it by 00 for t≤0t\leq0 and 11 for t≥1t\geq1. Every positive-order derivative vanishes at both joins. On a stage of duration T>0T>0, take d(t)=d0+(d1−d0)s(t/T)d(t)=d_0+(d_1-d_0)s(t/T) after translating the time origin. The resulting potential is smooth in time and space. The polynomial 35t4−84t5+70t6−20t735t^4-84t^5+70t^6-20t^7, joined to constants, is an alternative C3C^3 schedule giving a C1C^1 time-dependent potential. Both schedules give the same endpoint map below. Every finite translation has finite prescribed coefficients; no uniform bound as T↓0T\downarrow0 is asserted.

The protocol consists of a writer stage, a copy stage, and a return stage. The writer traps move conditionally on ∣0⟩,∣1⟩|0\rangle,|1\rangle to −Dσ,+Dσ-D\sigma,+D\sigma. With the writer packets stationary, the archive traps move to −Aa,+Aa-Aa,+Aa. With the archive packets stationary, the writer traps return to the origin. Orthogonality of the internal columns makes the full positional density the sum of their positive densities. The inactive coordinate has zero current in each stage: during copying every writer envelope is real with only a qq-independent phase; during return every archive envelope is real with only a zz-independent phase. The active velocity is a convex combination of the two trap velocities. It is smooth, locally Lipschitz and bounded on each finite time interval, so every finite entrance point has a unique global stage trajectory.

Hereafter the intermediate physical positions are standardized, so qq means q/σq/\sigma and zz means z/az/a. Let

FD(q)=12{Φ(q+D)+Φ(q−D)},wD(q)=11+e2Dq,Hw,A(z)=wΦ(z+A)+(1−w)Φ(z−A),wA(z)=11+e2Az,MA(z)=12{Φ(z+A)+Φ(z−A)}.\begin{align}F_D(q)&=\tfrac12\{\Phi(q+D)+\Phi(q-D)\},& w_D(q)&=\frac{1}{1+e^{2Dq}},\tag{3.5}\\ H_{w,A}(z)&=w\Phi(z+A)+(1-w)\Phi(z-A),& w_A(z)&=\frac{1}{1+e^{2Az}},\notag\\ M_A(z)&=\tfrac12\{\Phi(z+A)+\Phi(z-A)\}.&& \notag\end{align}

In this section MAM_A denotes a CDF; its derivative is the archive reference density. The analysis coordinates are u=Φ(q0)u=\Phi(q_0) and v=Φ(z0)v=\Phi(z_0). They are changes of mathematical variables; the control does not evaluate a CDF.

Theorem 3.1 (Complete Gaussian endpoint map)

For D,A>0D,A>0, define

q=FD−1(u),z=HwD(q),A−1(v),r=wA(z)Φ(q+D)+(1−wA(z))Φ(q−D),b=MA(z).\begin{align}q&=F_D^{-1}(u),& z&=H_{w_D(q),A}^{-1}(v),\tag{3.6}\\ r&=w_A(z)\Phi(q+D)+(1-w_A(z))\Phi(q-D),& b&=M_A(z). \notag\end{align}

The exact guidance endpoint map in entrance and final reference coordinates is TD,A(u,v)=(r,b)T_{D,A}(u,v)=(r,b). It is a smooth bijection of (0,1)2(0,1)^2 with determinant one. Its inverse is

z=MA−1(b),q=[wA(z)Φ( ⋅+D)+(1−wA(z))Φ( ⋅−D)]−1(r),u=FD(q),v=HwD(q),A(z).\begin{align}z&=M_A^{-1}(b),& q&=[w_A(z)\Phi(\,\cdot+D)+(1-w_A(z))\Phi(\,\cdot-D)]^{-1}(r), \tag{3.7}\\ u&=F_D(q),&v&=H_{w_D(q),A}(z). \notag\end{align}

At the endpoint the writer quantum wave is again a common ground envelope, factorized from the coherent archive–internal state.

Proof

In a one-dimensional continuity equation with vanishing current at −∞-\infty, the CDF FtF_t obeys ∂tFt=−jt\partial_tF_t=-j_t. Along q˙=jt/ρt\dot q=j_t/\rho_t, dFt(q(t))/dt=0dF_t(q(t))/dt=0. Applying this identity first to the writer gives q=FD−1(u)q=F_D^{-1}(u). During copying qq is fixed, so the conditional archive weights are the fixed numbers wD(q),1−wD(q)w_D(q),1-w_D(q) and its conditional CDF is conserved. During return zz is fixed; the conditional writer weights are wA(z),1−wA(z)w_A(z),1-w_A(z). Its final CDF is the ready CDF, giving rr. The final archive reference CDF is MAM_A, giving bb.

Strict positivity gives every inverse in (3.7) and the implicit-function theorem gives smoothness. Put

ρ(q,z)=12{ϕ(q+D)ϕ(z+A)+ϕ(q−D)ϕ(z−A)}. \rho(q,z)=\tfrac12\{\phi(q+D)\phi(z+A)+\phi(q-D)\phi(z-A)\}.

The triangular input transformation (q,z)↦(u,v)(q,z)\mapsto(u,v) has Jacobian FD′(q)∂zHwD(q),A(z)=ρ(q,z)F_D'(q)\partial_zH_{w_D(q),A}(z)=\rho(q,z). The triangular output transformation (q,z)↦(r,b)(q,z)\mapsto(r,b) has Jacobian

MA′(z){wA(z)ϕ(q+D)+(1−wA(z))ϕ(q−D)}=ρ(q,z). M_A'(z)\{w_A(z)\phi(q+D)+(1-w_A(z))\phi(q-D)\}=\rho(q,z).

Their ratio is one. Finally, with the phases from each stage retained, the wave is

gσ(q) eiθ0ha(z+Aa)∣0⟩+eiθ1ha(z−Aa)∣1⟩2. \sqrt{g_\sigma(q)}\, \frac{e^{i\theta_0}\sqrt{h_a(z+Aa)}|0\rangle+ e^{i\theta_1}\sqrt{h_a(z-Aa)}|1\rangle}{\sqrt2}.

This proves factorization as well as the claimed complete map.

□

To repeat the map, supply fresh internal qubits in ∣+⟩|+\rangle and fresh archive oscillators, and retain the old qubits as internal memories. An exact smooth internal swap also rotates the archive holding projectors. If V(t)V(t) is a spatially constant interpolation from the identity to SWAP, set

H(t)=V(t)HholdV(t)†+iℏV˙(t)V(t)†. H(t)=V(t)H_{\rm hold}V(t)^\dagger+i\hbar\dot V(t)V(t)^\dagger. (3.8)

Direct differentiation shows that the wave is V(t)V(t) times the holding wave. Thus all positional densities and currents are preserved during the swap. One choice is V(t)=exp⁡[−is(t)π(I−SWAP)/2]V(t)=\exp[-is(t)\pi(I-\mathrm{SWAP})/2]. After each swap, all previously written archive currents are zero and future operations fix their coordinates. The complete jjth cycle is therefore TD,AT_{D,A} on the current writer and the jjth unused archive, with every other configuration coordinate fixed. This exact holding and conjugated-control specification is part of the prescribed parent.

3.1 Finite separation and retained fine information

The comparison map is the invertible, area-preserving baker map

B(u,v)=(2u−s,(v+s)/2),s=⌊2u⌋, B(u,v)=(2u-s,(v+s)/2),\qquad s=\lfloor2u\rfloor, (3.9)

defined off its null branch cut. It is a comparison of complete maps, not an instruction to translate actual points rigidly according to a branch sign at finite overlap.

Proposition 3.2 (A finite fine-archive obstruction)

Let the initial writer quantile be uniform and the initial archive quantile be a fixed v0∈(0,1)v_0\in(0,1). At every finite D,A>0D,A>0,

TV⁡(Law⁡(r,b),U⊗Law⁡(b))=1. \pTV\bigl(\pLaw(r,b),\pUnif\otimes\pLaw(b)\bigr)=1.

The same conclusion holds conditionally if a regular initial archive quantile is copied exactly into separately retained memory.

Proof

The copy equation is v0=wD(q)Φ(z+A)+(1−wD(q))Φ(z−A)v_0=w_D(q)\Phi(z+A)+(1-w_D(q))\Phi(z-A). Its implicit derivative is

dzdq=−wD′(q)[Φ(z+A)−Φ(z−A)]∂zHwD(q),A(z)>0. \frac{dz}{dq}=-\frac{w_D'(q)[\Phi(z+A)-\Phi(z-A)]} {\partial_zH_{w_D(q),A}(z)}>0.

Indeed wD′<0w_D'<0 and both remaining factors are positive. From (v0,z)(v_0,z) one recovers

w=v0−Φ(z−A)Φ(z+A)−Φ(z−A),q=12Dlog⁡1−ww. w=\frac{v_0-\Phi(z-A)}{\Phi(z+A)-\Phi(z-A)},\qquad q=\frac{1}{2D}\log\frac{1-w}{w}.

Thus bb determines z,q,rz,q,r. The actual joint measure is carried by a measurable graph, whereas its own bb marginal times a nonatomic uniform rr law gives that graph measure zero. This gives total variation one. Conditioning on an exactly retained initial vv gives the same proof.

□
Lemma 3.3 (Uniform sectional map comparison)

Choose c>0c>0, D>cD>c, 0<η<1/20<\eta<1/2, and k>0k>0 such that

γ=e−2Dc≤η/2,Φ(−k)≤η/2,A>k. \gamma=e^{-2Dc}\leq\eta/2,\qquad \Phi(-k)\leq\eta/2, \qquad A>k.

Put aD=Φ(−(D+c))a_D=\Phi(-(D+c)), tA=Φ(−(2A−k))t_A=\Phi(-(2A-k)) and ρA=e−2A(A−k)\rho_A=e^{-2A(A-k)}, and assume γ+tA<η\gamma+t_A<\eta. Then K=B−1TD,AK=B^{-1}T_{D,A} has coordinatewise displacement at most

δ=max⁡{(aD+ρA)/2,γ+tA} \delta=\max\{(a_D+\rho_A)/2,\gamma+t_A\} (3.10)

outside a set of area at most

β=2η+Φ(−(D−c)). \beta=2\eta+\Phi(-(D-c)). (3.11)

On this good set the archive sign agrees with the writer sign just before copying. The bounds hold on every fixed spectator fibre.

Proof

Use the good set ∣FD−1(u)∣≥c|F_D^{-1}(u)|\geq c and v∈[η,1−η]v\in[\eta,1-\eta]. For q≤−cq\leq-c, 1−wD(q)≤γ1-w_D(q)\leq\gamma. The copy equation gives

Φ(z+A)≤1−η1−γ≤1−η/2,z≤−A+k. \Phi(z+A)\leq\frac{1-\eta}{1-\gamma}\leq1-\eta/2, \qquad z\leq-A+k.

Consequently 1−wA(z)≤ρA1-w_A(z)\leq\rho_A and Φ(z−A)≤tA\Phi(z-A)\leq t_A. Since 2u=Φ(q+D)+Φ(q−D)2u=\Phi(q+D)+\Phi(q-D),

∣r−2u∣≤aD+ρA,0≤b−v/2≤(γ+tA)/2. |r-2u|\leq a_D+\rho_A, \qquad 0\leq b-v/2\leq(\gamma+t_A)/2.

The latter inequality and v≤1−ηv\leq1-\eta imply b<1/2b<1/2; also z<0z<0. The left inverse-baker formula (r,b)↦(r/2,2b)(r,b)\mapsto(r/2,2b) therefore gives (3.10). Reflection proves the right case. The excluded writer-band length is exactly Φ(−(D−c))−Φ(−(D+c))\Phi(-(D-c))-\Phi(-(D+c)), bounded as in (3.11). The two archive ends have total length 2η2\eta.

□