Dichotomy of the exciton wave function in semiconductors under intense laser fields

Journal of Applied Physics

Volumn 103, Issue 11, 2008, Pages

  Lima, F M S ^a   Nunes, O A C ^a   Amato, M A ^a   Fonseca, A L A ^a   Da Silva, E F ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRASILIA   (Brazil)

^b FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF PERNAMBUCO   (Brazil)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DIFFERENCE EQUATIONS; ELECTRIC CONDUCTIVITY; EQUATIONS OF MOTION; EXCITONS; FOURIER TRANSFORMS; FUNCTION EVALUATION; LASER OPTICS; LASERS; MATHEMATICAL TRANSFORMATIONS; NUMERICAL METHODS; PULSED LASER DEPOSITION; SEMICONDUCTOR MATERIALS; WAVE FUNCTIONS;

DINGER EQUATION; ELECTRONIC MOTIONS; FLOQUET; FOURIER; HOLE EFFECTIVE MASSES; INTENSE LASER FIELDS; LASER FREQUENCIES; LINEARLY POLARIZED; NONPERTURBATIVE THEORY; RADIATION FIELDS; SEMICLASSICAL (SC);

SEMICONDUCTOR LASERS;

EID: 45149085515     PISSN: 00218979     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.2937087     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. J. Gersten and M. H. Mittleman, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.10.74 10, 74 (1974); M. H. Mittleman, Phys. Lett. PYLAAG 0375-9601 10.1016/0375-9601(74)90104-2 47A, 55 (1974).
2. M. Pont, N. R. Walet, M. Gavrila, and C. W. McCurdy, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.61.939 61, 939 (1988); M. Pont, N. R. Walet, and M. Gavrila, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.41.477 41, 477 (1990).
3. M. Gavrila, in Atoms in Intense Laser Fields, edited by, M. Gavrila, (Academic Press, Boston, 1992).
4. M. Gavrila, J. Phys. B JPAPEH 0953-4075 35, R147 (2002).
5. Q. Su, J. H. Eberly, and J. Javaneinen, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.64.862 64, 862 (1990).
6. K. C. Kulander, K. J. Schafer, and J. L. Krause, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.66.2601 66, 2601 (1991).
7. O. Latinne, C. J. Joachain, and M. Dörr, Europhys. Lett. 26, 333 (1994). 0295-5075
8. M. Pont and M. Gavrila, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.65.2362 65, 2362 (1990).
9. M. Dörr and R. M. Potvliege, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.43.3729 43, 3729 (1991); M. Dörr, J. Phys. B 26, L275 (1993). 0022-3700
10. I. Simbotim, M. Stroe, and M. Gavrila, Laser Phys. 14, 482 (2004). 1054-660X
11. A. M. Popov, O. V. Tikhonova, and E. A. Volkova, J. Phys. B JPAPEH 0953-4075 32, 3331 (1999); O. V. Smirnova, Sov. Phys. JETP 90, 609 (2000). 0038-5646
12. R. Kundliya and M. Mohan, Phys. Lett. A PYLAAG 0375-9601 291, 22 (2001). For models beyond the dipole approximation, see, e.g., N. J. Kylstra, in Intense Laser-Atom Interactions: Beyond the Dipole Approximation., NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Super-Intense Laser-Atom Physics, edited by, B. Piraux, and, K. Rzazewski, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 2001, pp. 345-354. For relativistic models, see, e.g. Y. I. Salamin, S. X. Huc, K. Z. Hatsagortsyana, and C. H. Keitel, Phys. Rep. PRPLCM 0370-1573 10.1016/j.physrep.2006.01.002 427, 41 (2006).
13. P. Salieres, A. L'Huillier, P. Antoine, and M. Lewenstein, in Advances in Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics, edited by, B. Bederson, and, H. Walther, (Academic Press, New York, 1999), Vol. 41, p. 83.
14. B. E. Cole, Nature (London) NATUAS 0028-0836 10.1038/35065032 410, 60 (2001).
15. S. Geltman, Chem. Phys. Lett. CHPLBC 0009-2614 10.1016/0009-2614(95) 00315-U 237, 286 (1995).
16. C. Figueira de Morisson Faria, A. Fring, and R. Schrader, J. Phys. B 31, 449 (1998). 0022-3700
17. N. J. van Druten, R. C. Constantinescu, J. M. Schins, H. Nieuwenhuize, and H. G. Muller, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.55.622 55, 622 (1997).
18. Although the atomic units of power (P0) and area-i.e., a02, where a0 2 / (m0 k e2) is the atomic Bohr radius-can be taken to form an a.u. of intensity I0 = P0 / a02 (≈6.4× 1015 W/ cm2), we found it useful to adopt here the "electromagnetic" a.u., which corresponds to the intensity of a linearly polarized electromagnetic plane wave with an amplitude equal to an a.u. of electric field (E0). This results in Iγ = 0 c E0 / a02 = I0 / (8π ), where k e2 / (c) ≈ 1/ 137 is the (dimensionless) fine-structure constant. Note that the interaction of an electromagnetic field of intensity Iγ with a hydrogen atom in the ground state produces a force in the electron equal to the Coulomb attraction exerted on it by the nucleus.
19. P. Lambropoulos, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett. 55.2141 55, 2141 (1985).
20. G. Ramian, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A NIMAER 0168-9002 10.1016/0168-9002(92)91056-F 318, 225 (1992).
21. E. J. Minehara, M. Sawamura, and R. Hajima, Free Electron Lasers 2003 (Elsevier Science, North Holland, 2004).
22. H. Haug and S. W. Koch, Quantum Theory of the Optical and Electronic Properties of Semiconductors, 4th ed. (World Scientific, Singapore, 2004).
23. J. Cerne, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.1131 77, 1131 (1996); J. Kono, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett. 79.1758 79, 1758 (1997); K. B. Nordstrom, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.81.457 81, 457 (1998).
24. W. Xu, Appl. Phys. Lett. APPLAB 0003-6951 10.1063/1.2364855 89, 171107 (2006).
25. A. L. A. Fonseca, M. A. Amato, and O. A. C. Nunes, Phys. Status Solidi B PSSBBD 0370-1972 10.1002/pssb.2221860233 186, K57 (1994).
26. J. L. Nie, W. Xu, and L. B. Lin, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B IJPBEV 0217-9792 10.1142/S021797920301834X 17, 2487 (2003).
27. A. Leitenstorfer, S. Hunsche, J. Shah, M. C. Nuss, and W. H. Knox, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.61.16642 61, 16642 (2000); K. P. H. Lui and F. A. Hegmann, Appl. Phys. Lett. APPLAB 0003-6951 10.1063/1.1375841 78, 3478 (2001); R. -B. Liu and B. -F. Zhu, Physica E (Amsterdam) 17, 191 (2003). 1386-9477
28. R. -B. Liu and B. -F. Zhu, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.66.033106 66, 033106 (2002).
29. F. M. S. Lima, M. A. Amato, L. S. F. Olavo, O. A. C. Nunes, A. L. A. Fonseca, and E. F. da Silva, Jr., Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.75.073201 75, 073201 (2007).
30. P. C. M. Planken, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.51.9643 51, 9643 (1995); A. G. Markelz, N. G. Asmar, B. Brar, and E. G. Gwinn, Appl. Phys. Lett. APPLAB 0003-6951 10.1063/1.117842 69, 3975 (1996); Y. P. Gousev, Appl. Phys. Lett. APPLAB 0003-6951 10.1063/1.124503 75, 757 (1999); R. A. Lewis, L. V. Bradley, and M. Henini, Solid State Commun. SSCOA4 0038-1098 10.1016/S0038-1098(02)00084-4 122, 223 (2002); N. Mori, Physica B (Amsterdam) 314, 431 (2002). 0921-4526
31. Nowadays, excitons in semiconductors are routinely observed in photoluminescence experiments, in which a series of narrow lines at frequencies below the band gap resonance in the band-to-band absorption spectrum can be resolved. These lines are particularly pronounced at low temperatures.
32. Wannier-Mott excitons are weakly bound electron-hole pairs, with an average relative distance large in comparison with a lattice constant.
33. For simplicity, we shall restrict our study to nondegenerate, parabolic, isotropic bands. This is a good approximation for carriers with small wave numbers in most III-V semiconductors. This is particularly true for electrons in GaAs, in which the minimum of the conduction band (at K=0) has a 6 symmetry.
34. The zero energy reference level was taken at the top of the valence band.
35. G. Bastard, Wave Mechanics Applied to Semiconductor Heterostructures (Les Editions de Physique, Paris, 1988), pp. 128-132.
36. It should be emphasized that, similarly to what is usually done by atomic physicists, we adopted in our computational programs a system of units that is more natural for working with excitons in semiconductors, namely the "excitonic" effective system of units. In this system, one has =e=μ= k/ r =1, which simplifies Eq. to [-1 / 2 ∇2 - 1/r] (r) = ε̃ (r), where ε̃ is the energy in e.u. The unit of energy is 1 Ht (=2 Ry) and the unit of length is 1 aB. This makes all mathematical expressions related to the SCD equation assume a more simple form, with the additional advantage of reducing the rounding-off errors in numerical computations since numbers whose scientific notation presents either very small or very large exponents are rare when e.u.'s are adopted.
37. In bulk GaAs at low temperatures, e.g., the electron and hole effective masses are 0.0665 m0 and 0.45 m0, respectively, where m0 is the electron rest mass. The relative dielectric constant r decreases from 13.18 to 10.90 with the increase of the ac-field frequency. We adopted the high-frequency value in this work.
38. M. H. Mittleman, Theory of Laser-Atom Interactions (Plenum, New York, 1982).
39. I. Y. Berson, J. Phys B 8, 3078 (1975). 0026-8976
40. V. C. Reed and K. Burnett, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.42.3152 42, 3152 (1990); V. C. Reed and K. Burnett, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.43.6217 43, 6217 (1991).
41. M. Gavrila and J. Z. Kaminski, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.52.613 52, 613 (1984).
42. This approximation works only if the relative coordinate is limited to the size of the two-body system, which makes exp (±iKr) only slightly different from units. This condition can be written as 〈 Kr 〉 1. Since 〈 Kr 〉 ≈ μ/ m K aB and K= ω /c, where is the refractive index of the hosting material, one has ω m /μ × c/ ( aB). Note that the dipole approximation is actually an idealization for the pulsed beams used in most experiments since in practice they have a certain inhomogeneity in both space and time.
43. H. A. Kramers, Collected Scientific Papers (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1956), p. 866.
44. W. C. Henneberger, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett. 21.838 21, 838 (1968).
45. The physical irrelevance of the ponderomotive shift in a region of almost uniform field is consistent with the fact that the A2 term may be eliminated by a contact transformation, as discussed in detail in P. W. Milonni and J. R. Ackerhalt, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.39.1139 39, 1139 (1989).
46. The operator U, the Hermitian adjoint of U, can be easily found by exchanging i by -i in Eq..
47. At this point, the translation operator property exp (±i / αp) f (r) =f (r±α) is used thoroughly.
48. In the laboratory frame, the solution of the SCD equation in the momentum gauge is (r,t) =U ̃ (r,t) = ̃ (r-α (t),t) exp [-i e2 / (2μ) A2 dt] ≈ ̃ 0 (r-α (t),t) exp (-it), where (EKH + EFK) /. As customary, we have neglected the rapidly oscillating phase factor exp [-i e2 A02 / (8ωμ) sin (2ωt)] in this approximation. It is then apparent that the energy spectrum for the SCD equation in the laboratory frame is shifted with respect to that given by Eq. just by EFK.
49. The shift from the laboratory to the Kramers accelerated frame of reference is only an interpretation of the K-H unitary transformation and no assumptions concerning the validity of Eq. are needed.
50. For a given laser source, whose frequency is and output power is I, the following practical formulas are useful: F0 (in kV/cm) ≈0.868 I / r 4 and α0 (in e.u.) ≈7.31 r -5 /4 I / 2, for in THz and I in kW / cm2. The inclusion of r in these formulas agrees with the distinction made by Liu and Zhu between the intensity of the laser source (our I) and the laser intensity inside the semiconductor material (see Ref.).
51. E. A. Coddington and N. Levinson, Theory of Ordinary Differential Equations (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1955).
52. For those interested in developing Fourier-Floquet computational calculations of higher orders, it will be advantageous to adopt the following integral expression for these coefficients: m (r; α0) = im / π -1 +1 V (r+ α0 uk) Tm (u) / 1- u2 du, where Tm (u) are Chebyshev polynomials.
53. M. Pont and R. Shakeshaft, Phys. Rev. A 44, R4110 (1991). 1050-2947
54. K. Burnett, V. C. Reed, and P. L. Knight, J. Phys. B JPAPEH 0953-4075 26, 561 (1993).
55. M. Protopapas, C. H. Keitel, and P. L. Knight, Rep. Prog. Phys. RPPHAG 0034-4885 10.1088/0034-4885/60/4/001 60, 389 (1997).
56. In GaAs, e.g., this opens an ample range of valid frequencies, as given by 0.4 THz 1727 THz, where a refractive index of 3.3 was assumed. The upper limit can be smaller, however, due to the nonresonance condition.
57. Note that the origin of the coordinates for the relative electron-hole position (i.e., the point at which r=0) is kept at the hole position. This is in agreement with our definition of r.
58. As pointed out by Gavrila and Kaminski (see Ref.), it is indeed possible to write 0 (r; α0) in terms of K (x), the complete elliptic integral of the first kind, as given by 0 (r; α0) =- (2/π) (k e2 / r) (1/ r+ r-) K [(1/ 2) 1- r + r -], where r± =r± α0 k. Since K (0) = π /2, then 0 (r; α0) →V (r), the field-free potential energy, for α0 r. Note that 0 (r; α0) has 1/ r singularities at the endpoints of the charge distribution (at ± α0 k), as well as a logarithmic singularity along the line segment between them, due to the behavior of K (x) for x→1.
59. In fact, we found computationally advantageous to make use of the elliptic integral expression for 0 (r; α0) given in Ref..
60. Within the Born-Oppenheimer approximation, this potential energy reads -k e2 ([1/ r+ (R̃ /2) ] + [1/ r- (R̃ /2) ]), where R̃ is the internuclear distance.
61. F. Ehlotzky, Can. J. Phys. 63, 907 (1985) 0008-4204; F. Ehlotzky, Phys. Lett. A PYLAAG 0375-9601 10.1016/0375-9601(88)90051-5 126, 524 (1988).
62. J. P. Lowe and K. A. Peterson, Quantum Chemistry, 3rd ed. (Elsevier, North Holland, 2006), Chap..
63. + eigenvalue problem is separable in confocal elliptic coordinates, a feature related to the conservation of a quantity that is a generalization of the one-center Runge-Lenz vector, as shown in B. R. Judd, Angular Momentum Theory for Diatomic Molecules (Academic Press, New York, 1975), Chap.. Once the separation is carried out, the problem becomes exactly solvable, but we preferred to follow a variational scheme instead of a direct numerical solution. The advantage is that our variational treatment allows a better understanding of the wave function dichotomy with only a small loss in accuracy.
64. The reader should remember that Z= 1/2 for each "nucleus."
65. J. C. Slater, Quantum Theory of Matter, 2nd ed. (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968), pp. 368-400.
66. + molecule are simply φ (r,R) = B± (Β=1) [φ± (r,R) ± φ- (r,R)], where the + (-) sign is for the gerade (ungerade) state and φ± (r,R) are 1s hydrogen AOs centered at r± (R/2).
67. For more details on this coordinates system see, e.g., J. C. Slater, Quantum Theory of Molecules and Solids (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1963), Vol. 1, Appendix 1. See also B. H. Bransden and C. J. Joachain, Physics of Atoms and Molecules, 2nd ed. (Prentice Hall, New York, 2003), pp. 490-495. A practical manner to evaluate two-center integrals is found in Appendix 10.
68. + molecule in the limit R→0 is -0.8 Ry, somewhat above the exact value of -1 Ry (the energy of the 2p AO for the He+ ion). Thus, the exact value projected for the exciton binding energy in the absence of a laser field is -0.25 Ry, instead of -0.20 Ry. Though this small difference can be important in some circumstances (e.g., when exact numerical results for small values of α0 are sought), it is not relevant here since we are more interested in the correct qualitative behavior of the energy eigenvalues and their corresponding eigenfunctions for large values of α0. Anyway, exact numerical solutions for Eq. valid for all α0 are being worked out by the authors.
69. M. Abo-Bakr, J. Feikes, K. Holldack, P. Kuske, W. B. Peatman, U. Schade, and G. Wustefeld, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.90. 094801 90, 094801 (2003).
70. As pointed out by Pont and Gavrila (see Ref.), a hydrogenlike system does not suddenly appear in a region under ILF, but instead it is exposed to subcritical fields during the ramp up of the laser pulse, and these fields can in effect ionize a large number of atoms.
71. L. C. M. Miranda, Solid State Commun. SSCOA4 0038-1098 10.1016/0038-1098(83)90799-8 45, 783 (1983).
72. Y. Mizumoto, Y. Kayanuma, A. Srivastava, J. Kono, and A. H. Chin, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.74.045216 74, 045216 (2006).
73. The lowerature condition is crucial, because thermal ionization can mask the laser ionization process. Thermal ionization is expected to be efficient at temperatures above Tmax, given by 3/ 2 kB Tmax = 1/4 Ry. In GaAs one has Tmax =12.8 K, which is easily attainable in the laboratory.