Quantum Bit Commitment
It is an interesting question in quantum cryptography if unconditionally secure bit commitment protocols exist on the quantum level, that is, protocols which are (at least asymptotically) binding and concealing even if there are no restrictions on the computational resources. One could hope that there might be a way to exploit the intrinsic properties of quantum mechanics, as in the protocols for unconditionally secure key distribution.
However, this is impossible, as Dominic Mayers showed in 1996 (see for the original proof). Any such protocol can be reduced to a protocol where the system is in one of two pure states after the commitment phase, depending on the bit Alice wants to commit. If the protocol is unconditionally concealing, then Alice can unitarily transform these states into each other using the properties of the Schmidt decomposition, effectively defeating the bindingness property.
One subtle assumption of the proof is that the commit phase must be finished at some point in time. This leaves room for protocols that require a continuing information flow until the bit is unveiled or the protocol is cancelled, in which case it is not binding anymore.
Read more about this topic: Commitment Scheme
Famous quotes containing the words quantum, bit and/or commitment:
“The receipt to make a speaker, and an applauded one too, is short and easy.—Take of common sense quantum sufficit, add a little application to the rules and orders of the House, throw obvious thoughts in a new light, and make up the whole with a large quantity of purity, correctness, and elegancy of style.”
—Philip Dormer Stanhope, 4th Earl Chesterfield (1694–1773)
“Scarlett O’Hara: Oh, oh, Rhett. For the first time I’m finding out what it is to be sorry for something I’ve done.
Rhett Butler: Dry your eyes. If you had it all to do over again, you’d do no differently. You’re like the thief who isn’t the least bit sorry he stole, but he’s terribly, terribly sorry he’s going to jail.”
—Sidney Howard (1891–1939)
“American families, however, without exception, experience a double message in our society, one that claims a commitment to families and stresses the importance of raising bright, stable, productive citizens, yet remains so bound by an ideal of “rugged individualism” that parents receive little support in their task from the public or private sectors.”
—Bernice Weissbourd (20th century)