Laser-focused nanofabrication: Beating of two atomic resonances

Applied Physics Letters

Volumn 80, Issue 23, 2002, Pages 4443-4445

  Jurdik, E ^a   Hohlfeld, J ^a   Van Kempen, H ^a   Rasing, Th ^a   McClelland, J J ^b  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

^b NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATOM DEPOSITION; ATOMIC RESONANCES; CALIBRATION STANDARD; LENGTH METROLOGY; NANOLINES; OPTICAL MICROSCOPES;

ATOMS; RESONANCE;

CHROMIUM;

EID: 79956057000     PISSN: 00036951     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.1485104     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. J. P. Gordon and A. Ashkin, Phys. Rev. A 21, 1606 (1980). pra PLRAAN 1050-2947
2. G. Timp, R. E. Behringer, D. M. Tennant, J. E. Cunningham, M. Prentiss, and K. K. Berggren, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 1636 (1992). prl PRLTAO 0031-9007
3. J. J. McClelland, R. E. Scholten, E. C. Palm, and R. J. Celotta, Science 262, 877 (1993). sci SCIEAS 0036-8075
4. R. Gupta, J. J. McClelland, Z. J. Jabbour, and R. J. Celotta, Appl. Phys. Lett. 67, 1378 (1995). apl APPLAB 0003-6951
5. U. Drodofsky, J. Stuhler, T. Schulze, M. Drewsen, B. Brezger, T. Pfau, and J. Mlynek, Appl. Phys. B: Lasers Opt. 65, 755 (1997). alp APBOEM 0946-2171
6. R. W. McGowan, D. M. Giltner, and S. A. Lee, Opt. Lett. 20, 2535 (1995). opl OPLEDP 0146-9592
7. F. Lison, H.-J. Adams, D. Haubrich, M. Kreis, S. Nowak, and D. Meschede, Appl. Phys. B: Lasers Opt. 65, 419 (1997). alp APBOEM 0946-2171
8. R. Gupta, J. J. McClelland, P. Marte, and R. J. Celotta, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 4689 (1996). prl PRLTAO 0031-9007
9. B. Brezger, T. Schulze, P. O. Schmidt, R. Mertens, T. Pfau, and J. Mlynek, Europhys. Lett. 46, 148 (1999). eul EULEEJ 0295-5075
10. E. Jurdik, J. Hohlfeld, A. F. van Etteger, A. J. Toonen, W. L. Meerts, H. van Kempen, and T. Rasing, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B (to be published).
11. H. J. Metcalf and P. van der Straten, Laser cooling and trapping, 1st ed. (Springer, Berlin, 1999).
12. The difference between the collimation results for the two transitions can be explained as follows. The J=3→4 transition is ideal for laser manipulation because no population traps are produced during laser cooling. The situation is, however, different for cooling at J=3→3. The atoms can be optically pumped into magnetic sublevels that do not couple to the local laser field anymore. While in the former case, the cooling was due to the well-known Sisyphus polarization gradient scheme; in the latter case, a nonzero magnetic field was applied in the cooling region and we therefore anticipate a magnetically induced laser cooling mechanism (for details, see Ref. 11).
13. Unless otherwise specified, all quoted uncertainties are intended to be interpreted as one standard deviation combined random and systematic errors.
14. J. J. McClelland, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 12, 1761 (1995). job JOBPDE 0740-3224
15. E. Jurdik, T. Rasing, H. van Kempen, C. C. Bradley, and J. J. McClelland, Phys. Rev. B 60, 1543 (1999). prb PRBMDO 0163-1829
16. H. E. Bennett and J. M. Bennett, in Handbook of Optics, edited by W. G. Driscoll and W. Vaughan, 1st ed. (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1978), pp. 10-1-10-164.
17. J. J. McClelland (unpublished).