Continuous measurement with traveling-wave probes

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 68, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 9-

  Silberfarb, Andrew ^a   Deutsch, Ivan H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85037187069     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.68.013817     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. M.H. Devoret and R.J. Schoelkopf, Nature (London) 406, 1039 (2000).
2. G.J. Milburn, K. Jacobs, and D.F. Walls, Phys. Rev. A 50, 5256 (1994).
3. H.J. Carmichael, An Open Systems Approach to Quantum Optics (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1993).
4. H.M. Wiseman, Phys. Rev. A 49, 2133 (1994).
5. A.C. Doherty and K. Jacobs, Phys. Rev. A 60, 2700 (1999).
6. W.P. Smith, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 133601 (2002).
7. N.V. Morrow, S.K. Dutta, and G. Raithel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 093003 (2002).
8. H. Mabuchi, J. Ye, and H.J. Kimble, Appl. Phys. B: Lasers Opt. 68, 1095 (1999).
9. G.T. Foster, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 3149 (2000).
10. C.W. Gardiner and M.J. Collett, Phys. Rev. A 31, 3761 (1985).
11. C.W. Gardiner and P. Zoller, Quantum Noise, 2nd ed. (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2000).
12. T. Bhattacharya, S. Habib, and K. Jacobs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 4852 (2000).
13. A. Kuzmich, L. Mandel, and N.P. Bigelow, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 1594 (2000).
14. B. Julsgaard, A. Kozhekin, and E.S. Polzik, Nature (London) 413, 400 (2001).
15. M.O. Scully and M.S. Zubairy, Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997).
16. S.J. van Enk and H.J. Kimble, Quantum Inf. Comput. 2, 1 (2001).
17. J. Gea-Banacloche, Phys. Rev. A 65, 022308 (2002).
18. J.D. Bjorken and S.D. Drell, Relativistic Quantum Fields (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1965), p. 12.
19. I.H. Deutsch and J.C. Garrison, Phys. Rev. A 43, 2498 (1991).
20. In general, the atom volume of interest is its “coherence volume.” For simplicty, we treat here the case of a pure atomic wave packet, with no loss of generality.
21. T.A. Brun, Am. J. Phys. 70, 719 (2002).
22. S.J. van Enk and C.A. Fuchs, Quantum Inf. Comput. 2, 151 (2002).
23. In the case at hand, W. M. Itano has emphasized the well-known result that for a coherent state driving field the problem is unitarily equivalent to a classical driving field plus vacuum fluctuations. W.M. Itano, e-print quant-ph/0211165; See also
24. J. Gea-Banacloche, e-print quant-ph/0212027;
25. S.J. van Enk and H.J. Kimble, e-print quant-ph/0212028.
26. C. Cohen-Tannoudji, J. Dupont-Roc, and G. Grynberg, Atom-Photon Interactions (Wiley, New York, 1992).
27. J. Preskill, Quantum Computation Lecture Notes, 1998, Chap. 3 (unpublished), also see www.theory.caltech.edu/people/preskill/ph229/#lecture
28. S.J. van Enk and H.J. Kimble, Phys. Rev. A 63, 023809 (2001).
29. I.H. Deutsch, Am. J. Phys. 59, 834 (1991).
30. K.W. Chan, C.K. Law, and J.H. Eberly, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 100402 (2002).
31. V.I. Rupasov and V.I. Yudson, Sov. Phys. JETP 60, 927 (1984).
32. A. Kuzmich, N.P. Bigelow, and L. Mandel, Europhys. Lett. 42, 481 (1998).
33. Y. Takahashi, Phys. Rev. A 60, 4974 (1999).
34. I.H. Deutsch and P.S. Jessen, Phys. Rev. A 57, 1972 (1998).
35. W. Happer and B.S. Mathur, Phys. Rev. 163, 12 (1967).
36. This result generalizes under the assumption that the probe detuning is large compared to the hyperfine splitting in the (Formula presented) manifold. We can use the Lande projection theorem to make the substitution (Formula presented) where F is the total ground-state angular momentum including nuclear spin.
37. L.K. Thomsen and H.M. Wiseman, Phys. Rev. A 65, 063607 (2002).
38. J.E. Reiner, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 18, 1911 (2001).
39. D.J. Wineland, Fortschr. Phys. 46, 363 (1998).
40. W.M. Itano, Phys. Rev. A 47, 3554 (1993).