Observation of the vacuum Rabi spectrum for one trapped atom

Physical Review Letters

Volumn 93, Issue 23, 2004, Pages

  Boca, A ^a   Miller, R ^a   Birnbaum, K M ^a   Boozer, A D ^a   McKeever, J ^a   Kimble, H J ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATOM-CAVITY SYSTEMS; ATOMIC COOLING; SPECTRAL RESPONSE; VACUUM RABI SPECTRUM;

EIGENVALUES AND EIGENFUNCTIONS; ELECTRON TRAPS; LASER BEAM EFFECTS; OPTICAL BEAM SPLITTERS; OPTICAL RESONATORS; PHOTODETECTORS; PHOTONS; SPECTRUM ANALYSIS; VACUUM;

QUANTUM OPTICS;

EID: 42749105468     PISSN: 00319007     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.233603     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. H. J. Kimble, Phys. Scr., T 76, 127 (1998).
2. E. T. Jaynes and F. W. Cummings, Proc. IEEE 51, 89 (1963).
3. J. J. Sanchez-Mondragon, N. B. Narozhny, and J. H. Eberly, Phys. Rev. Lett. 51, 550 (1983).
4. G. S. Agarwal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 53, 1732 (1984).
5. T. Pellizzari, S. A. Gardiner, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 3788 (1995).
6. L.-M. Duan and H. J. Kimble, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 127902 (2004)
7. J. I. Cirac, P. Zoller, H. J. Kimble, and H. Mabuchi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 3221 (1997).
8. H.-J. Briegel et al., in The Physics of Quantum Information, edited by D. Bouwmeester, A. Ekert, and A. Zeilinger (Springer, Berlin, 2000), p. 192.
9. H. Mabuchi and A. C. Doherty, Science 298, 1372 (2002).
10. Cavity Quantum Electrodynamics, edited by P. Berman (Academic Press, San Diego, 1994).
11. R. J. Thompson, G. Rempe, and H. J. Kimble, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 1132 (1992).
12. J. J. Childs et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2901 (1996).
13. R. J. Thompson, Q. A. Turchette, O. Carnal, and H. J. Kimble, Phys. Rev. A 57, 3084 (1998).
14. M. Brune et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 1800 (1996).
15. C. J. Hood, M. S. Chapman, T. W. Lynn, and H. J. Kimble, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 4157 (1998).
16. J. Ye, D. W. Vernooy, and H. J. Kimble, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 4987 (1999).
17. J. McKeever et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 133602 (2003).
18. P. Maunz et al., quant-ph/0406136.
19. M. Riebe et al., Nature (London) 429, 734 (2004).
20. M. D. Barrett et al., Nature (London) 429, 737 (2004).
21. A. Wallraff et al., Nature (London) 431, 162 (2004); I. Chiorescu et al., ibid. 431, 159 (2004).
22. A. Wallraff et al., Nature (London) 431, 162 (2004); I. Chiorescu et al., ibid. 431, 159 (2004).
23. See J. McKeever, Ph.D thesis, California Institute of Technology, 2004 for more technical details.
24. -) for the higher (lower) frequency mode.
25. K. L. Corwin et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 1311 (1999).
26. C1,2 = {852.4, 935.6} nm.
27. p)>.
28. -, where θ= 13° for Fig. 2; however, the theory is relatively insensitive to θ for θ 15°≲.
29. p = 0.49 ± 0.05.
30. D. Boiron et al., Phys. Rev. A 53, R3734 (1996).
31. m′F,}= {±5, 1.18U}, {±4, 1.06U}, {±3,0.97U}, {±2,0.90U}, {±1, 0.86U}, {0,0.85U}.
32. thresh ≤ 0.73.
33. probe.
34. Although the spectra are consistent with a thermal distribution, we do not exclude a more complex model involving probe-dependent heating and cooling effects.