Nonlinear magneto-optical rotation via alignment-to-orientation conversion

Physical Review Letters

Volumn 85, Issue 10, 2000, Pages 2088-2091

  Budker, D ^a,b   Kimball, D F ^a   Rochester, S M ^a   Yashchuk, V V ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIREFRINGENCE; LIGHT EMISSION; LIGHT POLARIZATION; MAGNETOOPTICAL EFFECTS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MATRIX ALGEBRA; NONLINEAR OPTICS; PERTURBATION TECHNIQUES; RUBIDIUM;

NONLINEAR MAGNETO-OPTICAL ROTATION (NMOR); STARK SHIFTS;

QUANTUM THEORY;

EID: 0034272735     PISSN: 00319007     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.2088     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. W. Gawlik, in Modern Nonlinear Optics, edited by M. Evans and S. Kielich, Advances in Chemical Physics Series Vol. LXXXV (Wiley, New York, 1994), Pt. 3.
2. D. Budker, D. J. Orlando, and V. Yashchuk, Am. J. Phys. 67, 584 (1999).
3. D. Budker, V. Yashchuk, and M. Zolotorev, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5788 (1998).
4. V. Yashchuk, D. Budker, and M. Zolotorev, in Trapped Charged Particles and Fundamental Physics, edited by D.H.E. Dubin and D. Schneider (American Institute of Physics, New York, 1999), pp. 177-181.
5. V. A. Sautenkov, M. D. Lukin, C. J. Bednar, I. Novikova, E. Mikhailov, M. Fleischhauer, V. L. Velichansky, G. R. Welch, and M. O. Scully, Phys. Rev. A 62, 023810 (2000); M. Fleischhauer, A. B. Matsko, and M. O. Scully, Phys. Rev. A 62, 013808 (2000).
6. V. A. Sautenkov, M. D. Lukin, C. J. Bednar, I. Novikova, E. Mikhailov, M. Fleischhauer, V. L. Velichansky, G. R. Welch, and M. O. Scully, Phys. Rev. A 62, 023810 (2000); M. Fleischhauer, A. B. Matsko, and M. O. Scully, Phys. Rev. A 62, 013808 (2000).
7. S. I. Kanorsky, A. Weis, J. Wurster, and T. W. Hänsch, Phys. Rev. A 47, 1220 (1993).
8. Here alignment designates the second (quadrupole) polarization moment, and orientation designates the first (dipole) polarization moment; see E. B. Alexandrov, M. P. Chaika, and G. I. Kvostenko, Interference of Atomic States (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1993).
9. M. Lombardi, J. Physique 30, 631 (1969).
10. C. Cohen-Tannoudji and J. Dupont-Roc, Opt. Commun. 1, 184 (1969).
11. M. Pinard and C. G. Aminoff, J. Phys. 43, 1327 (1982).
12. R. C. Hilborn, L. R. Hunter, K. Johnson, S. K. Peck, A. Spencer, and J. Watson, Phys. Rev. A 50, 2467 (1994).
13. R. C. Hilborn, Am. J. Phys. 63, 330 (1995).
14. This is because for closed transitions, the axis of dichroism corresponding to smaller absorption is initially parallel to the direction of the pump light polarization for F → F - 1, F transitions (atoms are pumped into a dark state), and perpendicular to the pump light polarization for F → F + 1 transitions (atoms are pumped into a bright state with greater absorption compared to the unpolarized state [A. P. Kazantsev, V. S. Smirnov, A. M. Tumaikin, and I. A. Yagofarov, Opt. Spectrosc. (USSR) 57, 116 (1984)]).
15. In our calculations, a density matrix is written for Zeeman sublevels of each ground state hyperfine level and for those of all the excited states accessible via optical transitions from this hyperfine level. The effects of repopulation pumping are included in the calculations. These calculations are based on principles similar to those applied in M. G. Kozlov, Opt. Spectrosc. (USSR) 67, 789 (1989); S. V. Fomichev, J. Phys. B 24, 4695 (1991); G. Nienhuis and F. Schuller, Opt. Commun. 151, 40 (1998), and references therein.
16. In our calculations, a density matrix is written for Zeeman sublevels of each ground state hyperfine level and for those of all the excited states accessible via optical transitions from this hyperfine level. The effects of repopulation pumping are included in the calculations. These calculations are based on principles similar to those applied in M. G. Kozlov, Opt. Spectrosc. (USSR) 67, 789 (1989); S. V. Fomichev, J. Phys. B 24, 4695 (1991); G. Nienhuis and F. Schuller, Opt. Commun. 151, 40 (1998), and references therein.
17. In our calculations, a density matrix is written for Zeeman sublevels of each ground state hyperfine level and for those of all the excited states accessible via optical transitions from this hyperfine level. The effects of repopulation pumping are included in the calculations. These calculations are based on principles similar to those applied in M. G. Kozlov, Opt. Spectrosc. (USSR) 67, 789 (1989); S. V. Fomichev, J. Phys. B 24, 4695 (1991); G. Nienhuis and F. Schuller, Opt. Commun. 151, 40 (1998), and references therein.
18. B. Schuh, S. I. Kanorsky, A. Weis, and T. W. Hänsch, Opt. Commun. 100, 451 (1993).
19. Under the stated conditions, this formula is a good approximation of the expression obtained from dressed state considerations for a two-level atom in, e.g., C. Cohen-Tannoudji, Metrologia 13, 161 (1977).
20. D. Budker, R. Y. Chiao, D. S. Hsiung, S. M. Rochester, and V. V. Yashchuk, in Quantum Electronics and Laser Science, OSA Technical Digest (Optical Society of America, Washington, D.C., 2000), p. 252.
21. D. Budker, D. F. Kimball, S. M. Rochester, and V. V. Yashchuk, Report No. LBNL PUB-5453, 1999.
22. L. M. Barkov, M. S. Zolotorev, and D. Melik-Pashayev, Sov. JETP Pis'ma 48, 144 (1988); L. M. Barkov, D. A. Melik-Pashayev, and M. S. Zolotorev, Opt. Commun. 70, 467 (1989).
23. L. M. Barkov, M. S. Zolotorev, and D. Melik-Pashayev, Sov. JETP Pis'ma 48, 144 (1988); L. M. Barkov, D. A. Melik-Pashayev, and M. S. Zolotorev, Opt. Commun. 70, 467 (1989).