Electromagnetically induced transparency with squeezed vacuum

Physical Review Letters

Volumn 92, Issue 20, 2004, Pages

  Akamatsu, Daisuke ^a   Akiba, Keiichirou ^a   Kozuma, Mikio ^a,b  

^a TOKYO INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Japan)

^b JAPAN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY AGENCY   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATOMIC PHYSICS; COHERENT LIGHT; ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVES; GAS DYNAMICS; MAGNETIC FIELD EFFECTS; MAGNETIC SHIELDING; PHOTODETECTORS; PHOTONS; PROBES; RUBIDIUM; SECOND HARMONIC GENERATION; SPECTRUM ANALYZERS; SPURIOUS SIGNAL NOISE; TRANSPARENCY; VACUUM;

ELECTROMAGNETICALLY INDUCED TRANSPARENCY (EIT); QUADRATURE SQUEEZING; QUANTUM INTERFERENCE; SQUEEZED VACUUM;

QUANTUM OPTICS;

EID: 17044442089     PISSN: 00319007     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.203602     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. S.E. Harris, Phys. Today 50, No. 7, 36 (1997).
2. H. Schmidt and A. Imamoglu, Opt. Lett. 21, 1936 (1996).
3. L. V. Hau et al., Nature (London) 397, 594 (1999).
4. A. B. Matsko et al., Phys. Rev. A 64, 043809 (2001).
5. D. F. Phillips et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 783 (2001).
6. C. Liu et al., Nature (London) 409, 490 (2001).
7. A. B. Matsko et al., Adv. At Mol. Opt. Phys. 46, 191 (2001).
8. M. Fleischhauer and M. D. Lukin, Phys. Rev. A 65, 022314 (2002).
9. atom.
10. M. Kitagawa and M. Ueda, Phys. Rev. A 47, 5138 (1993).
11. D. K. Serkland et al., Opt. Lett. 20, 1649 (1995).
12. In this experiment, the probe and control lights were derived from the same laser. Therefore the resolution when measuring the EIT transparency width is not limited by the laser spectral width (less than 50 kHz).
13. We believe the reduction of the squeezing from -0.9 to -0.18 dB was caused by the following reasons: An absorption loss in EIT at the center frequency of the spectrum analyzer is estimated to be 36% by classical experimental results [(B) in Fig. 2(b)]. Reflection losses at the end facets of the cell and the Glan laser prism are 16% and 7%, respectively. Thus total optical loss is 54%, which corresponds to 0.51 dB reduction of squeezing [see Eq. (2)]. The rest 0.21 dB will be explained by the reduction in homodyne detection efficiency due to the distortion of the spatial profile of the squeezed vacuum which was caused by imperfect overlapping between control light and squeezed vacuum.
14. In order to perform this experiment, the bandwidth of the squeezed vacuum should be much larger than the transparency width of the EIT (2.6 MHz), i.e., the wideband squeezing is required.
15. B. Yurke, Phys. Rev. A 32, 300 (1985).
16. iφ sinhr. From these equations, Eq. (2) can be derived.