Observation of chaotic and regular dynamics in atom-optics billiards

Physical Review Letters

Volumn 86, Issue 8, 2001, Pages 1518-1521

  Friedman, Nir ^a   Kaplan, Ariel ^a   Carasso, Dina ^a   Davidson, Nir ^a  

^a WEIZMANN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHAOS THEORY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DYNAMICS; LASER BEAMS; REACTION KINETICS; RUBIDIUM; SCATTERING;

ATOM-OPTICS BILLIARDS;

QUANTUM OPTICS;

EID: 0034823536     PISSN: 00319007     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.1518     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. M. C. Gutzwiller, Chaos in Classical and Quantum Mechanics (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1990).
2. L. A. Bunimovich, Funct. Anal. Appl. 8, 254 (1974).
3. W. Bauer and G. F. Bertsch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 2213 (1990).
4. H. Alt et al., Phys. Rev. E 53, 2217 (1996).
5. R. Artuso, G. Casati, and I. Guarneri, J. Stat. Phys. 83, 145 (1996).
6. F. Vivaldi, G. Casati, and I. Guarneri, Phys. Rev. Lett. 51, 727 (1983).
7. B. Friedman and R. F. Martin, Jr., Phys. Lett. 105A, 23 (1984).
8. V. B. Kokshenev and M. C. Nemes, Physica (Amsterdam) 275A, 70 (2000).
9. S. W. McDonald and A. N. Kaufman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 42, 1189 (1979).
10. G. M. Zaslavsky, Phys. Today 52, No. 8, 39 (1999).
11. R. A. Jalabert, H. U. Baranger, and A. D. Stone, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 2442 (1990); C. M. Marcus et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 506 (1992).
12. R. A. Jalabert, H. U. Baranger, and A. D. Stone, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 2442 (1990); C. M. Marcus et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 506 (1992).
13. H.-J. Stöckmann and J. Stein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 2215 (1990): E. Doron, U. Smilansky, and A. Frenkel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 3072 (1990); S. Sridhar and E. J. Heller, Phys. Rev. A 46, R1728 (1992).
14. H.-J. Stöckmann and J. Stein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 2215 (1990): E. Doron, U. Smilansky, and A. Frenkel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 3072 (1990); S. Sridhar and E. J. Heller, Phys. Rev. A 46, R1728 (1992).
15. H.-J. Stöckmann and J. Stein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 2215 (1990): E. Doron, U. Smilansky, and A. Frenkel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 3072 (1990); S. Sridhar and E. J. Heller, Phys. Rev. A 46, R1728 (1992).
16. J. Koiller, R. Markarian, S. Oliffson Kamphorst, and S. Pinto de Carvalho, J. Stat. Phys. 83, 127 (1996).
17. N. Friedman, L. Khaykovich. R. Ozeri, and N. Davidson, Phys. Rev. A 61, 031403(R) (2000).
18. The diameter of the standing wave (∼600 μm) is much larger than the size of any of the billiards to suppress its effects on the transverse motion.
19. R. Ozeri, L. Khaykovich, and N. Davidson, Phys. Rev. A 59, R1750 (1990).
20. We define the size of the hole as its projection on a straight line at half the maximal potential.
21. The billiard's effective area is the area enclosed by the potential contour line equal to the atomic average kinetic energy. The area of the circular billiard and the stadium were found to be equal, with a precision of ∼10%.
22. Including imperfections in the beam shape in the simulations yielded similar effects of reducing the long-time stability of the circular billiard.
23. V. Rom-Kedar and D. Turaev, Physica (Amsterdam) 130D, 187 (1999).