Measurement of the dc Stark shift of the [Formula Presented] transition in atomic cesium

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 59, Issue 1, 1999, Pages R16-R18

  Bennett, S C ^a   Roberts, J L ^a   Wieman, C E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0002631871     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.59.R16     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. M. A. Bouchiat and C. Bouchiat, J. Phys. (Paris) 35, 899 (1974)
2. J. Phys. (Paris)M. A. BouchiatC. Bouchiat36, 493 (1975).
3. C. S. Wood et al, Science 275, 1759 (1997).
4. V. A. Dzuba, V. V. Flambaum, and O. P. Sushkov, Phys. Lett. A 141, 147 (1989).
5. S. A. Blundell, J. Sapirstein, and W. R. Johnson, Phys. Rev. D 45, 1602 (1992).
6. R. J. Rafac and C. E. Tanner, Phys. Rev. A 58, 1087 (1998)
7. B. Hoeling et al, Opt. Lett. 21, 74 (1996)
8. L. Young et al, Phys. Rev. A 50, 2174 (1994)
9. C. E. Tanner et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2765 (1992).
10. R. N. Watts, S. L. Gilbert, and C. E. Wieman, Phys. Rev. A 27, 2769 (1983).We have attempted to determine the source of disagreement between the present work and that of Watts, Gilbert, and Wieman. Unfortunately, Watts, who carried out the primary data analysis, is deceased and the records of his analysis are no longer available.
11. J. R. P. Angel and P. G. H. Sandars, Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 305, 125 (1968).
12. H. Gould, Phys. Rev. A 14, 922 (1976).
13. A. Khadjavi and A. Lurio, Phys. Rev. 167, 128 (1968).
14. R. W. P. Drever et al, Appl. Phys. B: Photophys. Laser Chem. 31, 97 (1983).
15. Because of the limitations imposed by the need to minimize ac Stark shifts and saturation of the (Formula presented) transition, we use the (Formula presented) to (Formula presented) transition. It has a much larger signal-to-noise ratio than the other three hyperfine transitions.
16. Beam motion changes the coupling efficiency into adjacent modes of the reference cavity. These modes are not completely degenerate because the cavity is not perfectly confocal. Since the frequency at which we lock the FPE depends on which modes the input beam is coupled into, changing the coupling changes (Formula presented)
17. C. E. Wieman et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 1738 (1987).
18. We observe a variation in our measurement of (Formula presented) that depends on whether or not a cold plate near the electric field plates is cooled to (Formula presented) temperatures. Since we measure the plate separation at room temperature, our final data were taken without cooling the nearby cold plate. This variation with temperature and the strict requirements of the design of the apparatus limit us from performing a more precise measurement of the field plate separation.
19. S. C. Bennett and C. E. Wieman (unpublished).