Detection of atomic entanglement and electromagnetically induced transparency in velocity-selective coherent population trapping

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 71, Issue 3, 2005, Pages

  Kiffner, M ^a,c   Marzlin, K P ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KONSTANZ   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^c MAX PLANCK INSTITUT FÜR KERNPHYSIK   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATOMIC ENTANGLEMENT; ATOMIC GAS; LASER COOLING; VELOCITY SELECTIVE COHERENT POPULATION TRAPPING;

BACKSCATTERING; COOLING; ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD EFFECTS; GROUND STATE; HAMILTONIANS; LASER BEAM EFFECTS; LASER PULSES; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PHOTONS; RUBIDIUM;

PARTICLE OPTICS;

EID: 18544385924     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.71.033811     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. A. Aspect, E. Arimondo, R. Kaiser, N. Vansteenkiste, and C. Cohen-Tannoudji, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 826 (1988).
2. T. Esslinger, F. Sander, M. Weidemüller, A. Hemmerich, and T. W. Hänsch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 2432 (1996).
3. J. Lawall, F. Bardou, B. Saubamea, K. Shimizu, M. Leduc, A. Aspect, and C. Cohen-Tannoudji, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 1915 (1994).
4. J. Lawall, S. Kulin, B. Saubamea, N. Bigelow, M. Leduc, and C. Cohen-Tannoudji, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 4194 (1995).
5. K. Bergmann, H. Theuer, and B. W. Shore, Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 1003 (1998).
6. L. V. Hau, S. E. Harris, Z. Dutton, and C. H. Behroozi, Nature (London) 397, 594 (1999).
7. D. F. Phillips, A. Fleischhauer, A. Mair, R. L. Walsworth, and M. D. Lukin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 783 (2001).
8. M. Fleischhauer and M. D. Lukin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 5094 (2000).
9. C. Affolderbach, S. Knappe, R. Wynands, A. V. Taichenachev, and V. I. Yudin, Phys. Rev. A 65, 043810 (2002).
10. A. Aspect, E. Arimondo, R. Kaiser, N. Vansteenkiste, and C. Cohen-Tannoudji, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 6, 2112 (1989).
11. C. Cohen-Tannoudji, in Frontiers in Laser Spectroscopy, edited by R. Balian, S. Haroche, and S. Liberman (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1977).
12. S. Stenholm, Appl. Phys. 15, 287 (1977).
13. To a first approximation the population of the excited and the bright state [the one that is orthogonal to |D(p)〉] can be neglected.
14. 2, one can simply treat the two cases separately and add the two inhomogeneous solutions afterward.
15. s, have been neglected.
16. Maxwell's equations impose boundary conditions on the electric and magnetic fields E and B at z=0 and z=a which result in a reflection of the fields at these boundaries. In the paraxial approximation, this reflection is negligible and the boundary conditions for the electric field reduce to Eq. (26).
17. D. A. Steck, http://steck.us/alkalidata/
18. M. Kasevich and S. Chu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 1741 (1992).
19. 1,2 has not been taken into account in the calculations for the density operator. This amounts to omitting the changed group velocity of the pulse within the gas.
20. M. O. Scully and M. S. Zubairy, Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K., 1995).
21. C. Liou, Z. Dutton, C. H. Behroozi, and L. V. Hau, Nature (London) 409, 490 (2001).
22. M. D. Lukin, S. F. Yelin, and M. Fleischhauer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 4232 (2000).
23. s instead of the electric field itself; see, for example, J. R. Ackerhalt and P. W. Milonni, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 1, 116 (1984).
24. K.-P. Marzlin, Phys. Rev. A 64, 011405(R) (2001).
25. F. Vewinger and F. Zimmer, e-print quant-ph/0501164.