Expand this Topic clickable element to expand a topic
Skip to content
Optica Publishing Group

Interaction-induced Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick model in a Bose-Einstein condensate inside an optical cavity

Open Access Open Access

Abstract

In this paper we present an experimentally feasible scheme to simulate a generalized Lipkin-Meskov-Glick model in a Bose-Einstein condensate coupled dispersively with an ultrahigh-finesse optical cavity. This obtained Hamiltonian has a unique advantage in that all parameters can be controlled independently by using Feshbach resonance technique, a pump laser along cavity axis and an external driving laser. By the proper choice of parameters, the macroscopic quantum coherent effect with a large amplitude can be successfully achieved. Comparing with the exist schemes, our proposal has a cleaner, perhaps significantly improved to observe this whole coherent effect. Finally, we predict a novel interaction-induced topological transition, which is an abrupt variation from π to zero of the Berry phase.

©2009 Optical Society of America

1. Introduction

Interacting spin models have been regarded as the basic models to investigate the fundamental quantum phenomena in modern physics. Recently, they have become the important tools to process quantum information and implement quantum computing as well as to explore the complex topological order that supports exotic anyonic excitations [1]. However, the observations of these predicted quantum effects remain a huge experimental challenge since the parameters are not accessible to control and the scaling to many qubits is not well achieved in physical quantum systems. Due to the controllability of system parameters and long decoherence times, the ultracold atoms has been regarded as a promising candidate for simulating interacting spin models [2, 3, 4].

The exactly-solvable Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick (LMG) model, which was originally introduced in nuclear physics [5], has now become a basic model to describe magnetic properties of a collective spin system with long-rang interactions. By changing the effective magnetic field, this model has a rich phase diagram in both ground- and excited- states, independent of the system-size [6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11]. In quantum information it can be used to test the fundamental relation between many-body entanglement and quantum phase transition [12, 13]. In this paper we propose an experimentally-feasible scheme to realize a generalized LMG model when a two-component Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC) interacts dispersively with an ultrahigh-finesse optical cavity. One of advantages in this device is that the strong coupling of a BEC to the quantized field of an ultrahigh-finesse optical cavity has been achieved experimentally [14, 15]. This not only gives rise to a new regime of cavity quantum electradynamics, in which all atoms occupying a single mode of a matter-wave field can couple identically to the photon induced by the cavity mode, but also opens possibilities to a wealth of new phenomena that can be expected in the cavity-mediated many-body physics of quantum gas [16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21].

It will be shown that all parameters in our realized LMG model can be controlled independently by the s-wave scattering lengths via Feshbach resonance technique, a pump laser along cavity axis and an external driving laser. By the proper choice of parameters, the macroscopic quantum coherent effect with a large amplitude can be successfully achieved. Comparing with the exist schemes, our proposal has a cleaner, perhaps significantly improved to observe this whole coherent effect. More intriguingly, a novel interaction-induced topological transition, which is an abrupt variation from π to zero of the Berry phase, is predicted. A topological transition in a quantum system is characterized by a topological invariant that takes on different quantized values in different quantum phases [22].

The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 is devoted to introducing the LMG model. Section 3 is devoted to presenting our proposed scheme for simulating a generalized LMG model with controllable parameters. Section 4 is devoted to realizing a macroscopic quantum coherence effect with a large amplitude. Section 5 is devoted to predicting an interactioninduced topological transition. Conclusions and remarks are given in Section 6.

2. The Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick model

In this section we briefly introduce the LMG model, which describes a set of N spins half mutually interacting in the anisotropic x-y plane embedded in a perpendicular magnetic filed. The corresponding Hamiltonian is given by [5]

HLMG=νi<j(σxiσxj+γσyiσyi)hiσzi,

where σα(α=x,y,z) is the Pauli spin operator, v is the interacting energy, γ is the anisotropy parameter, and h is the magnitude of magnetic field. By using the collective spin operator Sα=∑iσiα with the total spin number S, Hamiltonian (1) can be written, apart from a constant v(1+γ)/2, as

HLMG=2ν(Sx2+γSy2)2hSz,

Hamiltonian (2) commutes with S 2 and the exp(iπSz), and thus, possesses a parity (spin-flip) symmetry. Apart from a constant -2vγ S 2, Hamiltonian (2) can be rewritten as HLMG=-2v(1+γ)S 2 x+2vγS 2 z-2hSz.

It has been known that Hamiltonian (2) exhibits a second-order phase transition in the ferromagnetic regime (v>0). For small interaction strength the system is in the normal phase, where the ground state is unique and polarized in the direction of the magnetic field. When the interaction strength is increased above a critical value vc=h, the system enters the broken phase, in which the ground state becomes doubly degenerate. In the antiferromagnetic regime (v<0), Hamiltonian (2) has a first-order phase transition at a critical point hc=0 [6, 7].

 figure: Fig. 1.

Fig. 1. (Color online) Schematic diagram for our considerations. The coherent dynamics of the ultracold atoms and the cavity field can be driven by both applying a pump laser along cavity axis and a classical driving laser.

Download Full Size | PDF

3. Theoretical scheme and hamiltonian

Figure 1 shows our proposed scheme for simulating Hamiltonian (2). The BEC, consisting of N two-level 87Rb ultracold atoms with a transition |F=1〉(|1〉)→|F′=2〉(|2〉) of the D 2 line, is created in a time-averaged, orbiting potential magnetic trap. The wavelength of such transition is near 780 nm. In order to effectively strong coherent atom-photon dynamics, the wavelength of empty cavity should be experimentally stabilized to the almost identical wavelength of the D 2 line [14, 15]. Moreover, for the optical cavity with the length 178 µm and the TME00 mode 25 µm, the maximum coupling strength between an ultracold atom and the cavity field is g=2π×11.4 MHz [14, 15], which is larger than the cavity field decay rate κ=2π×1.3 MHz and the ultracold atom dipole decay rate γ=2π×3.0 MHz. It means that the strong coupling regime has been achieved.

When a pump laser along cavity axis and an external driving laser of the ultracold atom is used to continuously control these coherent dynamics, the total time-dependent Hamiltonian can be written as

H(t)=Hph+Hat+Hatph+Hpu+Hdr.

Here, the Hamiltonian for the photon is given by Hph=ωa a (h̄=1 hereafter), where a and a are the photon annihilation and creation operators with frequency ω. The ultracold atomic Hamiltonian for the elastic two-body collisions with the δ-functional type potential is governed by

Hat=d3r[ω12Ψ2(r)Ψ2(r)+q1,2Ψ1(r)Ψ2(r)Ψ1(r)Ψ2(r)]
+l=1,2d3r{Ψl(r)[22mR+Vl(r)]Ψl(r)+ql2Ψl(r)Ψl(r)Ψl(r)Ψl(r)},

where Ψl(r) is the boson field operator with [Ψl(r),Ψ l(r′)]=δl rr′, Vl(r) is the single magnetic trapped potential with frequency ωi(i=x,y, z), mR and ω 12 are the mass and the resonance frequency of the ultracold atoms, respectively, ql=4πρl/mR (q 1,2=4πρ 1,2/mR) denotes the intraspecies (interspecies) interactions among the ultracold atoms with ρl(ρ 1,2) being the intraspecies (interspecies) s-wave scattering length. In experiment, these scattering lengths can be controlled by the Feshbach resonance technique. The BEC-field interaction in the dipole approximation via Hamiltonian

Hatph=g˜d3rΨ1(r)Ψ2(r)(a+a)+H.c.

with g̃ being the BEC-cavity coupling strength [23]. The coherent dynamics of the ultracold atoms and the cavity field is driven by both applying a pump laser with Hamiltonian

Hpu(t)=Ωp[aexp(iωpt)+aexp(iωpt)],

and an external driving laser with Hamiltonian

Hdr(t)=Ωd̃d3r[Ψ2(r)Ψ1(r)exp(iωdt)]+H.c.,

where Ωp and Ω˜ d are the magnitude of the pump laser and the driving laser with frequencies ωp and ωd, respectively.

In the two-mode approximation defined as Ψ1(r)=c 1 ϕ 1(r) and Ψ2(r)=c 2 ϕ 2(r), where c 1 and c 2 are the annihilation boson operators with [c 1,c 1]=[c 2,c 2]=1 [24], Hamiltonian (3) can be simplified as

H(t)=ωaa+l=1,2(ωlclcl+ω12c2c2+ηl2clclclcl)+χc1c1c2c2+λ2(c1c2+c2c1)(a+a)
+Ωd2[c2+c1exp(iωdt)+c1+cexp(iωdt)]+Ωp[aexp(iωpt)+aexp(iωpt)]

where ωl=d3r{ϕl*(r)[22mR+Vl(r)]ϕl(r),}, ηl=qld 3 r|ϕl(r)|4, χ=q 1,2d 3 r|ϕ 1(r)|2|ϕ 2(r)|2, Ωd=2Ω˜ dd 3 r ϕ * 2(r)ϕ 1(r), and λ=2g̃∫d 3 r ϕ * 2(r)ϕ 1(r). In the SU(2) Schwinger representation Sz=(c2 c 2-c 1 c 1)/2, S +=c 2 c 1and S -=c 1 c 2 and rotating-wave approximation, Hamiltonian (8) becomes

H(t)=ωaa+λ(Sa+S+a)+ω0SzqSz2+Ωd2[S+exp(iωdt)+Sexp(iωdt)]
+Ωp[aexp(iωpt)+aexp(iωpt)],

where q=[χ-(η 1 +η 2)/2] and ω 0=(N-1)(η 2-η 1)/2+ω 12ω 12. Finally, by using a time-dependent unitary transformation U(t)=exp[-i(ωpa a+Sz ωd)t], Hamiltonian (9) can be transformed into a time-independent Hamiltonian

H=Δpaa+λ(Sa+S+a)+ΔaSzqSz2+ΩdSx+Ωp(a+a),

where Δp=ω-ωp and Δa=ω 12-ωp-ωd.

In the dispersive regime Δpλ, the maximum of the scaled mean intracavity photon number is far away from the critical intracavity photon number. As a result, the photon is virtually excited. Therefore, a time-dependent unitary transformation U=exp[λΔpSx(aa)] can be used to rewrite Hamiltonian (10) as HL=UHU . By means of Baker-Campbell-Haussdorf formula, a biaxial collective spin model can be obtained by

HL=pSx2qSz2+ΔaSz+ΩSx

where p=λ 2/(ω-ωp), Δa=ω 12-ωp-ωd, and Ω=Ωd-λΩp/(ω-ωp). Hamiltonian (11) is our expected LMG model with a generalized version. As was shown previously, Hamiltonian (11) with Δa=0 has been achieved theoretically in the trapped ions [25] and the four-level alkali-metal atoms [26]. Although promising, these approaches are difficult since all trapped ions (atoms) can not couple identically to the laser fields (cavity modes), which is, however, the main advantage of the ultracold atoms in BEC.

Hamiltonian (11) has a unique advantage in that the parameters p, q, Δa and Ω can be controlled independently. For example, since the parameter q is proportional to Δρ=[ρ 1,2-(ρ 1+ρ 2)/2], it can range continuously from the positive to the negative values due to the competition among the s-wave scattering lengths. Far from the resonance, ρ 1, ρ 2, and 2ρ 12 are approximately equal, and the collision-induced interactions among the ultracold atoms are therefore suppressed. However, near the resonance nonzero s-wave scattering length Δρ leads to a significant nonlinear interaction energy with a small value because Δρ can be changed by a few 10% from its background value [27]. For typical experimental parameters with B=9.131 G and N=60 the parameter q can be evaluated as 2π×4.6 Hz [28]. The cavity-assisted interactions can be driven by frequency of the pump laser, and especially, vary continuously from the antiferromagnetic (p<0) to the ferromagnetic (p>0) cases. Also, the effective Rabi frequency Ω and the detuning Δa of the ultracold atoms depend on both the pump laser and the driving laser.

4. Macroscopic quantum coherent effect with a large amplitude

By properly choosing some parameters we can realize some interesting collective spin models with rich phase diagrams, which are strongly determined by the cavity-assisted or the collision-induced interactions among the ultracold atoms. Two examples are illustrated as follows. For Δa=0, Hamiltonian (11) can be reduced to a standard LMG model

HL1=pSx2qSz2+ΩSx.

This Hamiltonian can exhibit a typical second-order phase transition from the normal phase to the deformed phase via the effective Rabi frequency Ω in the ferromagnetic regime (p > 0). By using the mean-field approximation [9], the critical point can be evaluated as Ωc=2N|p-q|. It has been shown that the quantum system is only microscopically excited in the normal phase (Ω>Ωc), whereas it undergoes a macroscopic collective coherent excitation in the so-called deformed phase (Ω<Ωc) [6, 7]. Experimentally, this quantum phase transition can be detected by using the transmission spectroscopy with a weak probe laser since in our proposal the photon of the cavity mode is virtually excited.

However, in the antiferromagnetic regime (p<0) Hamiltonian (12) has a first-order phase transition at the critical point Ωc=0. Moreover, for finite-number ultracold atoms, it possesses a macroscopic quantum coherent effect that the energy gap is periodically driven by the effective Rabi frequency Ω shown in Fig. 2. This phenomenon arises from the quantum phase interference induced by the gauge potential, which is generated by the effective Rabi frequency Ω along the hard (the highest energy) anisotropy direction [29]. The macroscopic quantum coherent effect was partly observed experimentally in molecular magnetic of Fe8 due to higher-order anisotropies [30], and very recently, predicted in a BEC inside a double-well potential [31]. It should be noticed that in their models the value for |p|/|q|, which determines the magnitude of the energy gap, is very small (for example, |p|/|q|~10-3 in Fe8). So, it is very difficult to observe the fully macroscopic quantum coherent effect when the high-order effects exist [30]. However, here |p|/|q| can arrive at a larger value of ~103. Therefore, we argue that our proposal has a cleaner, perhaps significantly improved to observe this coherent effect. Experimentally, we suggest a dynamic approach used in Fe8 to detect the energy gap. When the effective Rabi frequency Ω is varied through the tunneling resonance, a coherent superposition state is generated. By measuring the probability in each state this energy gap can be identified by using the famous Landau-Zener formula [30].

 figure: Fig. 2.

Fig. 2. (Color online) The energy gap of Hamiltonian (12) versus the effective Rabi frequency Ω. The parameters are given by q=0.1 Hz and N=20 with p=-10q (Red-solid line) and p=-12q (Blue-dashed line).

Download Full Size | PDF

5. Topological transition

For Δa=Ω=0, Hamiltonian (11) can be reduced to a special collective spin model

HL2=pSx2qSz2

In the SU(2) spin-coherent-state representation |Ω(θ,φ)〉 with the north pole gauge, the expectation values for spin angular momenta are given by 〈Ω(θ,φ)|Sz|Ω(θ,φ)〉=Scosθ and Ω(θ,φ)|Sx|Ω(θ,φ)〉=Ssinθ cosφ. Thus, the semiclassical energy E(θ,φ)=〈Ω(θ,φ)|H L2 |Ω(θ,φ)〉 can be obtained by

E(θ,φ)=pS2sin2θcos2φqS2cos2θ,

which has double-degenerate ground-states at cosφ=±1 and

cosθ={0,q<p1,q>p.

We also denote these two degenerate orientations of the giant-spin as |0〉(φ=0) and |1〉(φ=π), respectively.

In general, quantum tunneling between these two degenerate ground states prevails. As a consequence, the degeneracy is removed and two low-lying eigenstates with a small tunnel splitting d are formed by symmetric and antisymmetric superpositions of the macroscopic quantum states (the so-called Schrödinger cat states), such that |ψ ±〉=(|0〉±|π〉)/√2. In order to evaluate this tunnel splitting d, it is necessary to consider the imaginary-time transition-amplitude P since the tunnel splitting is inversely proportional to the transition-amplitude. In the degenerate ground states |0〉 and |π〉, this transition-amplitude P can be formally written in the SU(2) spin-coherent-state representation as P=〈π|exp(-βH L2)|0〉=∫𝓓{Ω}exp[-(SE+SWZ)] [32], where β is the imaginary time-period, SE=limβ→∞β 0 E(θ,φ) with τ=it, and

SWZ=θ(0),φ(0)θ(τ),φ(τ)iS(1cosθ)φ˙dτ.
 figure: Fig. 3.

Fig. 3. (Color online) The scaled ground-state Berry phase Γ/S and the ultracold atom population 〈Sz〉/S versus the controllable interaction constant q.

Download Full Size | PDF

SE is the Euclidean action evaluated along the instanton trajectory, which is, as a matter of fact, the tunneling path between the degenerate ground-states. Indeed, instanton may be visualized as a pseudo-particle moving between degenerate vacua under the barrier region and has nonzero topological charge but zero energy. SWZ, which is only taken place in the spin-coherent-state path integral, is usually called the topologicalWess-Zumino action since the contribution of any path on the Bloch sphere S 2, described by the parameters θ(τ) and φ(τ), to the Wess-Zumino action SWZ is equal to iS times the area swept out between the path and the north pole [33]. For closed paths, this is identical to the Berry phase [34].

For Hamiltonian (13) with the degenerate condition in Eq. (15), the scaled Berry phase (mod n, where n is the winding number, counting the number of times that the path wraps around the north pole) can be immediately evaluated by

ΓS=π(1cosθ)={π,q<p0,q>p.

Equation (17) reveals a novel interaction-induced topological transition for both integer and half-integer spins, which is an abrupt variation from π to zero of the Berry phase. In terms of 〈Sz〉=Scosθ and Eq.(17), we can suggest in experiment to measure the ultracold atom population by using the transmission spectroscopy with a weak probe laser to detect this topological transition [14]. By means of Eq. (15), the scaled ground-state ultracold atom population can be obtained easily by

SzS=cosθ={0,q<p1,q>p.

Figure 3 shows the scaled Berry phase and ground-state ultracold atom population as a function of q.

6. Conclusions and remarks

In this paper, we have simulated a controllable LMG model based on recent experimental development about the BEC and the cavity. We have also obtained some interesting collective spin Hamiltonians with rich phase diagrams, which are strongly determined by the nonlinear quadratic terms arising from the cavity-assisted and the collision-induced interactions among the ultracold atoms. Especially, we have predicted a novel interaction-induced topological transition, which is an abrupt variation from π to zero of the Berry phase, and a macroscopic quantum coherent effect with a large amplitude. Compared with the existed schemes, our proposal has a cleaner, perhaps significantly improved to observe this coherent effect.

Acknowledgements

We thank H. B. Xue for helpful discussions and suggestions. Gang Chen and J. -Q. Liang thank the supports of the Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos.10704049 and 10775091, respectively. Suotang Jia thanks the supports of the 973 Program under Grant No.2006CB921603 and the Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos.10574084 and 60678003.

References and links

1. A. Kitaev, “Anyons in an exactly solved model and beyond” Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 321, 2–111 (2006). [CrossRef]  

2. L. M. Duan, E. Demler, and M. D. Lukin, “Controlling spin exchange interactions of ultracold atoms in optical lattices,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 090402 (2003). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

3. J. J. Garcia-Ripoll, M. A. Martin-Delgando, and J. I. Cirac, “Implementation of spin Hamiltonians in optical lattices,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 250405 (2004). [CrossRef]  

4. M. Lewenstein, A. Sanpera, V, Ahufinger, B. Damski, A. Sen, and U. Sen, “Ultracold atomic gases in optical lattices: mimicking condensed matter physics and beyond,” Adv. Phys. 56, 243–379 (2007). [CrossRef]  

5. H. J. Lipkin, N. Meshkov, and A. J. Glick, “Validity of many-body approximation methods for a solvable model : (I). Exact solutions and perturbation theory,” Nucl. Phys. A 62, 188–198 (1965). [CrossRef]  

6. R. Botet, R. Jullien, and P. Pfeuty, “Size scaling for infinitely coordinated systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 478–481 (1982). [CrossRef]  

7. R. Botet and R. Jullien, “Large-size critical behavior of infinitely coordinated systems,” Phys. Rev. B 28, 3955–3967 (1983). [CrossRef]  

8. S. Dusuel and J. Vidal, “Finite-size scaling exponents of the Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick model,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 237204 (2004). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

9. S. Dusuel and J. Vidal, “Continuous unitary transformations and finite-size scaling exponents in the Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick model,” Phys. Rev. B 71, 224420 (2005). [CrossRef]  

10. P. Ribeiro, J. Vidal, and R. Mosseri, “Thermodynamical Limit of the Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick Model,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 050402 (2007). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

11. P. Ribeiro, J. Vidal, and R. Mosseri, “Exact spectrum of the Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick model in the thermodynamic limit and finite-size corrections,” Phys. Rev. E 78, 021106 (2008). [CrossRef]  

12. L. Amico, R. Fazio, A. Osterloh, and V. Vedral, “Entanglement in many-body systems,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 517–576 (2008). [CrossRef]  

13. R. Orus, S. Dusuel, and J. Vidal, “Equivalence of critical scaling laws for many-body entanglement in the Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick model,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 025701 (2008). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

14. F. Brennecke, T. Donner, S. Ritter, T. Bourdel, M. Köhl, and T Esslinger, “Cavity QED with a Bose-Einstein condensate,” Nature 450, 268–271 (2007). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

15. F. Brennecke, S. Ritter, T. Donner, and T. Esslinger, “Cavity optomechanics with a Bose-Einstein condensate,” Science 322, 235–238 (2008). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

16. C. Maschler and H. Ritsch, “Cold atom dynamics in a quantum optical lattice potential,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 260401 (2005). [CrossRef]  

17. J. Larson, B. Damski, G. Morigi, and M. Lewenstein, “Mott-Insulator states of ultracold atoms in optical resonators,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 050401 (2008). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

18. J. Larson and M. Lewenstein, “Dilute gas of ultracold two-level atoms inside a cavity: generalized Dicke model,” New J. Phys. 11, 063027 (2009). [CrossRef]  

19. J. M. Zhang, W. M. Liu, and D. L. Zhou, “Mean-field dynamics of a Bose Josephson junction in an optical cavity,” Phys. Rev. A 78, 043618 (2008). [CrossRef]  

20. J. M. Zhang, F. C. Cui, D. L. Zhou, and W. M. Liu, “Nonlinear dynamics of a cigar-shaped Bose-Einstein condensate in an optical cavity,” Phys. Rev. A 79, 033401 (2009). [CrossRef]  

21. G. Chen, X. G. Wang, J. -Q. Liang, and Z. D. Wang, “Exotic quantum phase transitions in a Bose-Einstein condensate coupled to an optical cavity,” Phys. Rev. A 78, 023634 (2008). [CrossRef]  

22. D. J. Thouless, M. Kohmoto, M. P. Nightingale, and M. Nijs, “Quantized Hall conductance in a two-dimensional periodic potential,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 405–408 (1982). [CrossRef]  

23. M. G. Moore, O. Zobay, and P. Meystre, “Quantum optics of a Bose-Einstein condensate coupled to a quantized light field,” Phys. Rev. A 60, 1491–1506 (1999). [CrossRef]  

24. G. J. Miburn, J. Corney, E. M. Wright, and D. F. Walls, “Quantum dynamics of an atomic Bose-Einstein condensate in a double-well potential,” Phys. Rev. A 55, 4318–4324 (1997). [CrossRef]  

25. R. G. Unanyan and M. Fleischhauer, “Decoherence-free generation of many-particle entanglement by adiabatic ground-state transitions” Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 133601 (2003). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

26. S. Morrison and A. S. Parkins, “Dynamical quantum phase transitions in the dissipative Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick model with proposed realization in optical cavity QED,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 040403 (2008). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

27. A. Widera, O. Mandel, M. Greiner, S. Kreim, T W. Hänsch, and I. Bloch, “Entanglement interferometry for precision measurement of atomic scattering properties,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 160406 (2004). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

28. A. Widera, S. Trotzky, P. Cheinet, S. Föling, F. Gerbier, Immanuel Bloch, V. Gritsev, M. D. Lukin, and E. Demler, “Quantum spin dynamics of mode-squeezed Luttinger liquids in two-component atomic gases,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 140401 (2008). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

29. G. Chen and J. -Q. Liang, “Unconventional quantum phase transition in the finite-size Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick model,” New J. Phys. 8, 297 (2006). [CrossRef]  

30. W. Wernsdorfer and R. Sessoli, “Quantum phase interference and parity effects in magnetic molecular clusters” Science 284, 133–135 (1999). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

31. R. Lü, M. Zhang, J. L. Zhu, and L. You, “Effect of even and odd numbers of atoms in a condensate inside a double-well potential,” Phys. Rev. A 78, 011605(R) (2008). [CrossRef]  

32. W. M. Zhang, D. H. Feng, and R. Gilmore, “Coherent states: theory and some applications,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 62, 867–927 (1990). [CrossRef]  

33. E. Fradkin, “Field Theories of Condensed Matter Systems,” (MA: Addison-Wesley, Reading, 1992) Chap. 5.

34. M. V. Berry, “Quantum phase factors accompanying adiabatic changes,” Proc. R. Soc. London A 392, 45–57 (1984). [CrossRef]  

Cited By

Optica participates in Crossref's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from Optica Publishing Group journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Figures (3)

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1. (Color online) Schematic diagram for our considerations. The coherent dynamics of the ultracold atoms and the cavity field can be driven by both applying a pump laser along cavity axis and a classical driving laser.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. (Color online) The energy gap of Hamiltonian (12) versus the effective Rabi frequency Ω. The parameters are given by q=0.1 Hz and N=20 with p=-10q (Red-solid line) and p=-12q (Blue-dashed line).
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3. (Color online) The scaled ground-state Berry phase Γ/S and the ultracold atom population 〈Sz 〉/S versus the controllable interaction constant q.

Equations (21)

Equations on this page are rendered with MathJax. Learn more.

HLMG=νi<j(σxiσxj+γσyiσyi)hiσzi,
HLMG=2ν(Sx2+γSy2)2hSz,
H(t)=Hph+Hat+Hatph+Hpu+Hdr.
Hat=d3r[ω12Ψ2(r)Ψ2(r)+q1,2Ψ1(r)Ψ2(r)Ψ1(r)Ψ2(r)]
+ l=1,2 d3 r{Ψl(r)[22mR+Vl(r)]Ψl(r)+ql2Ψl(r)Ψl(r)Ψl(r)Ψl(r)} ,
Hatph=g˜d3rΨ1(r)Ψ2(r)(a+a)+H.c.
Hpu(t)=Ωp[aexp(iωpt)+aexp(iωpt)],
Hdr(t)=Ωd̃d3r[Ψ2(r)Ψ1(r)exp(iωdt)]+H . c . ,
H(t)=ωaa+l=1,2(ωlclcl+ω12c2c2+ηl2clclclcl)+χc1c1c2c2+λ2(c1c2+c2c1)(a+a)
+Ωd2[c2+c1exp(iωdt)+c1+cexp(iωdt)]+Ωp[aexp(iωpt)+aexp(iωpt)]
H(t)=ωaa+λ(Sa+S+a)+ω0SzqSz2+Ωd2[S+exp(iωdt)+Sexp(iωdt)]
+Ωp[aexp(iωpt)+aexp(iωpt)],
H=Δpaa+λ(Sa+S+a)+ΔaSzqSz2+ΩdSx+Ωp(a+a),
HL=pSx2qSz2+ΔaSz+ΩSx
HL1=pSx2qSz2+ΩSx.
HL2=p Sx2 q Sz2
E(θ,φ)=pS2sin2θcos2φqS2cos2θ ,
cosθ={0,q<p1,q>p.
SWZ=θ(0),φ(0)θ(τ),φ(τ)iS(1cosθ)φ˙dτ.
ΓS=π (1cosθ)={π,q<p0,q>p .
SzS=cosθ={0,q<p1,q>p.
Select as filters


Select Topics Cancel
© Copyright 2024 | Optica Publishing Group. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies.