Multilevel quantum beats: An analytical approach

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 54, Issue 6, 1996, Pages 5299-5312

  Leichtle, C ^a   Averbukh, I Sh ^a   Schleich, W P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ULM   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0000281183     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.54.5299     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Over the last few years numerous papers about this subject appeared, mainly in atomic physics and molecular physics. For a review of electronic wave packets in Rydberg atoms, see, e.g., G. Alber and P. Zoller, Phys. Rep. 199, 231 (1990).
2. For a review of vibrational wave packets in molecular physics see, e.g., M. Gruebele and A. Zewail, Phys. Today 43, 24 (1990);
3. B. Garraway, S. Stenholm and K.-A. Suominen, Phys. World 6, 46 (1993);
4. and B. Garraway and K.-A. Suominen, Rep. Prog. Phys. 58, 365 (1995).
5. General aspects of the dynamics of wave packets in atomic, molecular, and quantum optical systems are discussed in a review article by I. Sh. Averbukh and N. F. Perel'man, Usp. Fiz. Nauk 161, 41 (1991) [Sov. Phys. Usp. 34, 572 (1991)].
6. M. Nauenberg, C. R. Stroud, Jr., and J. Yeazell, Sci. Am. 270, 24 (1994).
7. A. H. Zewail, Femtochemistry (World Scientific, Singapore, 1994), Vols. 1 and 2.
8. J. Manz and L. Wöste, Femtosecond Chemistry (VCH, Weinheim, 1995), Vols. 1 and 2.
9. J. Parker, Jr. and C. R. Stroud, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 716 (1986).
10. G. Alber, H. Ritsch and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. A 34, 1058 (1986);
11. G. Alber and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. A 37, 337 (1988).
12. M. Nauenberg, Phys. Rev. A 40, 1139 (1989);
13. M. Nauenberg, Comments At. Mol. Phys. 25, 151 (1990)
14. J. Phys. B 23, L385 (1990).
15. Z. Daci, Jr.ć Gaeta and C. R. Stroud, Phys. Rev. A 42, 6308 (1990).
16. A. Peres, Phys. Rev. A 47, 5196 (1993).
17. S. D. Boris, S. Brandt, H. D. Dahmen, T. Stroh and M. L. Larsen, Phys. Rev. A 48, 2574 (1993).
18. A semiclassical treatment of fractional revivals and full revivals based on the use of multiple reference trajectories is given in I. M. Suarez Barnes, M. Nauenberg, M. Nockleby and S. Tomsovic, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 1961 (1993).
19. whereas the approach by M. Mallalieu, Jr. and C. R. Stroud, Phys. Rev. A 51, 1827 (1995) is based on the classical-path representation.
20. R. Bluhm and V. A. Kostelecký, Phys. Rev. A 49, 4628 (1994);
21. R. Bluhm and V. A. Kostelecký, Phys. Rev. A 50, R4445 (1994);
22. R. Bluhm and V. A. Kostelecký, Phys. Rev. A 51, 4767 (1995).
23. P. A. Braun and V. I. Savichev, Phys. Rev. A 49, 1704 (1994).
24. A. ten Wolde, L. D. Noordam, H. G. Muller, and H. B. van Linden van den Heuvell, in Fundamentals of Laser Interactions, edited by F. Ehlotzky (Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 1989).
25. J. A. Yeazell, M. Mallalieu and C. R. Stroud, Jr., Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 2007 (1990);
26. J. A. Yeazell, Jr. and C. R. Stroud, Phys. Rev. A 43, 5153 (1991).
27. D. R. Meacher, P. E. Meyler, I. G. Hughes and P. Ewart, J. Phys. B 24, L63 (1991).
28. J. Wals, H. H. Fielding, J. F. Christian, L. C. Snoek, W. J. van der Zande, and H. B. van Linden van den Heuvell, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 3783 (1994);
29. J. Wals, H. H. Fielding, and H. B. van Linden van den Heuvell, Phys. Scr. T58, 62 (1995).
30. L. Marmet, H. Held, G. Raithel, J. A. Yeazell and H. Walther, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 3779 (1994);
31. G. Raithel, H. Held, L. Marmet and H. Walther, J. Phys. B 27, 2849 (1994).
32. For the use of fractional revivals to demonstrate the self-interference of an electron, see M. Noel, Jr. and C. R. Stroud, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 1252 (1995).
33. M. Gruebele and A. H. Zewail, J. Chem. Phys. 98, 883 (1993).
34. Ch. Meier, V. Engel and J. S. Briggs, J. Chem. Phys. 95, 7337 (1991);
35. Ch. Meier and V. Engel, Chem Phys. Lett. 212, 691 (1993).
36. S. I. Vetchinkin, A. S. Vetchinkin, V. V. Eryomin and I. M. Umanskii, Chem. Phys. Lett. 215, 11 (1993);
37. S. I. Vetchinkin and V. V. Eryomin, Chem. Phys. Lett. 222, 394 (1994).
38. T. Baumert, V. Engel, C. R. Röttgermann, W. T. Strunz and G. Gerber, Chem. Phys. Lett. 191, 639 (1992);
39. T. Baumert and G. Gerber, Isr. J. Chem. 34, 103 (1994).
40. I. Fischer, D. M. Villeneuve, M. J. J. Vrakking and A. Stolow, J. Chem. Phys. 102, 5566 (1995);
41. M. J. J. Vrakking, D. M. Villeneuve and A. Stolow, Phys. Rev. A 54, R37 (1996).
42. For the revivals in the Jaynes-Cummings model, see, for example, J. H. Eberly, N. B. Narozhny and J. J. Sanchez-Mondragon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 44, 1323 (1980);
43. N. B. Narozhny, J. J. Sanchez-Mondragon and J. H. Eberly, Phys. Rev. A 23, 236 (1981);
44. H. I. Yoo and J. H. Eberly, Phys. Rep. 118, 239 (1985).
45. B. Yurke and D. Stoler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 13 (1986);
46. B. Yurke and D. Stoler, Physica B 151, 298 (1988).
47. A. Miranowicz, R. Tanás and S. Kielich, Quantum Opt. 2, 253 (1990).
48. J. Eiselt and H. Risken, Phys. Rev. A 43, 346 (1991).
49. I. Sh. Averbukh, Phys. Rev. A 46, R2205 (1992).
50. M. Fleischhauer and W. P. Schleich, Phys. Rev. A 47, 4258 (1993).
51. P. F. Gorá and C. Jedrzejek, Phys. Rev. A 48, 3291 (1993);
52. P. F. Gorá and C. Jedrzejek, Phys. Rev. A 49, 3046 (1994).
53. G. Rempe, H. Walther and N. Klein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 353 (1987).
54. M. Brune, F. Schmidt-Kaler, A. Maali, J. Dreyer, E. Hagley, J.M. Raimond and S. Haroche, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 1800 (1996).
55. For the phenomenon of Jaynes-Cummings revivals in the quantum motion of ions in a Paul trap, see C. A. Blockley, D. F. Walls and H. Risken, Europhys. Lett. 17, 509 (1992);
56. J. I. Cirac, R. Blatt, A. S. Parkins and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. A 49, 1202 (1994);
57. W. Vogel and R. L. de Matos Filho, Phys. Rev. A 52, 4214 (1995).
58. The Jaynes-Cummings revivals in the Paul trap have been observed experimentally by D. M. Meekhof, C. Monroe, B. E. King, W. M. Itano and D. J. Wineland, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 1796 (1996).
59. In the context of classical optics, a similar phenomenon is known as the Talbot effect: Here, it represents the self-imaging of a grating, which is illuminated by plane waves, in the near field. This effect was first observed by H. F. Talbot, Philos. Mag. 9, 401 (1836).
60. and explained much later by L. Rayleigh, Philos. Mag. 11, 196 (1881). Just recently, this effect was also demonstrated for atomic waves;
61. see M. S. Chapman, C. S. Ekstrom, T. D. Hammond, J. Schmiedmayer, B. E. Tannian, S. Wehinger and D. E. Pritchard, Phys. Rev. A 51, R14 (1995).
62. S. Dyrting and G. J. Milburn, Phys. Rev. A 47, R2484 (1993);
63. W.-Y. Chen and G. J. Milburn, Phys. Rev. A 51, 2328 (1995).
64. Omitted end note.
65. Omitted end note.
66. I. Sh. Averbukh and N. F. Perel'man, Phys. Lett. A 139, 449 (1989);
67. Zh. Éksp. Teor. Fiz. 96, 818 (1989) [Sov. Phys. JETP 69, 464 (1989)].
68. Omitted end note.
69. This method was already employed successfully by different authors; see, e.g., 6,7,30.
70. R. Courant and D. Hilbert, Methods of Mathematical Physics (Interscience Publishers, New York, 1953).
71. For a similar technique to treat the integral, fractional, and fractal Talbot effect, see M. V. Berry (unpublished) and M. V. Berry and S. Klein (unpublished).
72. Here we follow the definition of M. V. Berry and K. E. Mount, Rep. Prog. Phys. 35, 315 (1972) or J. Heading, An Introduction to Phase Integral Methods (Methuen, London, 1962). In contrast, C. M. Bender and S. A. Orszag, Advanced Mathematical Methods for Scientists and Engineers (McGraw-Hill, Singapore, 1984), p. 116 refer to the anti-Stokes lines defined by arg(z)=±π/3 and arg(z)=π as Stokes lines.
73. Omitted end note.
74. In the case of Rydberg atoms with eigenfrequencies ω(n)∝-1/(Formula presented) as well as in the Jaynes-Cummings model with Rabi frequencies ω(n)∝(Formula presented) we have (Formula presented)=+1.
75. Omitted end note.
76. For the prediction of higher-order (fractional) revivals beyond the time scale (Formula presented), see O. Knospe and R. Schmidt, Phys. Rev. A 54, 1154 (1996).