Spin-mixing dynamics of a spinor Bose-Einstein condensate

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 60, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 1463-1470

  Pu, H ^a   Law, C K ^b   Raghavan, S ^c   Eberly, J H ^c   Bigelow, N P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER   (United States)

^b CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0000306645     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.60.1463     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. C. J. Myatt, E. A. Burt, R. W. Ghrist, E. A. Cornell, and C. E. Wieman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 586 (1997).
2. M. R. Matthews, D. S. Hall, D. S. Jin, J. R. Ensher, C. E. Wieman, E. A. Cornell, F. Dalfovo, C. Minniti, and S. Stringari, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 243 (1998).
3. C. K. Law, H. Pu, N. P. Bigelow, and J. H. Eberly, Phys. Rev. A 58, 531 (1998).
4. C. M. Savage, J. Ruostekoski, and D. F. Walls, Phys. Rev. A 57, 3805 (1998).
5. D. S. Hall, M. R. Matthews, J. R. Ensher, C. E. Wieman, and E. A. Cornell, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1539 (1998)
6. Phys. Rev. Lett.D. S. Hall, M. R. Matthews, C. E. Wieman, and E. A. Cornell, 81, 1543 (1998).
7. D. M. Stamper-Kurn, M. R. Andrews, A. P. Chikkatur, S. Inouye, H.-J. Miesner, J. Stenger, and W. Ketterle, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 2027 (1998)
8. J. Stenger, S. Inouye, D. M. Stamper-Kurn, H.-J. Miesner, A. P. Chikkatur, and W. Ketterle, Nature (London) 396, 345 (1998).
9. Tin-Lun Ho, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 742 (1998).
10. T. Ohmi and K. Machida, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 67, 1822 (1998).
11. Elena V. Goldstein and Pierre Meystre, Phys. Rev. A 59, 1509 (1999).
12. C. K. Law, H. Pu, and N. P. Bigelow, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5257 (1998).
13. Weiping Zhang and D. F. Walls, Phys. Rev. A 57, 1248 (1998).
14. Liwei Wang, R. R. Puri, and J. H. Eberly, Phys. Rev. A 46, 7192 (1992).
15. Ying Wu, Phys. Rev. A 54, 4534 (1996).
16. Because of the discreteness of the energy spectrum, we will see revivals at much longer time scales which are not shown in the figure. Therefore, the “steady state” shown in Figs. 112233 is not really steady. However, we define our steady state to be the state at which the system stays for a time much longer than any other time scale.
17. K. Huang, Statistical Mechanics (Wiley, New York, 1987).
18. The states satisfying condition (23) are also stationary states for a condensate with (Formula presented) since it represents the eigenstate (Formula presented), even though in this case (Formula presented).
19. G. P. Agrawal, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 7, 1072 (1990)
20. J. Opt. Soc. Am. BW. J. Firth, A. Fitzgerald, and C. Paré, 7, 1087 (1990).
21. E. V. Goldstein and P. Meystre, Phys. Rev. A 55, 2935 (1997)
22. H. Pu and N. P. Bigelow, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 1130 (1998)
23. P. Öhberg and S. Stenholm, Phys. Rev. A 57, 1272 (1998)
24. Phys. Rev. AD. Gordon and C. M. Savage, 58, 1440 (1998)
25. Phys. Rev. AB. D. Esry and C. H. Greene, 59, 1457 (1999).
26. J. Williams, R. Walser, J. Cooper, E. Cornell, and M. Holland, Phys. Rev. A 59, R31 (1999).
27. In the case of a condensate trapped in a double-well potential, coherent oscillations of relative population between the two wells will also occur due to the atom-atom interactions, a phenomenon analogous to the spin-mixing dynamics of the spinor condensate. See, for example, G. J. Milburn, J. Corney, E. Wright, and D. F. Walls, Phys. Rev. A 55, 4318 (1997)
28. Phys. Rev. AS. Raghavan, A. Smerzi, S. Fantoni, and S. R. Shenoy, 59, 620 (1999).