Skip to Main Content

Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review Letters

Access by Xinjiang University

Measurements of Relative Phase in Two-Component Bose-Einstein Condensates

D. S. Hall, M. R. Matthews, C. E. Wieman, and E. A. Cornell^*

JILA, National Institute of Standards and Technology and Department of Physics, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0440

^*Quantum Physics Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology.

Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1543 – Published 24 August, 1998Erratum Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 4532 (1998)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.81.1543

Abstract

We have measured the relative phase of two Bose-Einstein condensates using a time-domain, separated-oscillatory-field condensate interferometer. A single two-photon coupling pulse prepares the double-condensate system with a well-defined relative phase; at a later time, a second pulse reads out the phase difference accumulated between the two condensates. We find that the accumulated phase difference reproduces from realization to realization of the experiment, even after the individual components have separated spatially and their relative center-of-mass motion has damped.

Erratum

Measurements of Relative Phase in Two-Component Bose-Einstein Condensates [Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1543 (1998)]

D. S. Hall, M. R. Matthews, C. E. Wieman, and E. A. Cornell

Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 4532 (1998)

References (35)

S. Backhaus et al., Science 278, 1435 (1997).
M. H. Anderson et al., Science 269, 198 (1995).
K. B. Davis et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 3969 (1995).
C. C. Bradley, C. A. Sackett, and R. G. Hulet, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 1687 (1995); 79, 1170 (1997).
J. Javanainen, Phys. Rev. A 54, R4629 (1996).
A. Imamog¯lu and T. A. B. Kennedy, Phys. Rev. A 55, R849 (1997).
J. Ruostekoski and D. F. Walls, Phys. Rev. A 56, 2996 (1997).
S. M. Barnett, K. Burnett, and J. A. Vaccaro, J. Res. Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. 101, 593 (1996).
J. Javanainen and S. M. Yoo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 161 (1996).
Y. Castin and J. Dalibard, Phys. Rev. A 55, 4330 (1997).
M. R. Andrews et al., Science 275, 637 (1997). Because of technical noise, the intrinsically random nature of the relative phase was not conclusively established.
One can equally well describe our experimental system as a single condensate in a coherent superposition of internal states, or as two separate condensates with a particular relative phase. It would be customary in condensed-matter physics, with a typical coherent sample size of $\sim 10^{20}$ particles, to use the latter description. On the other hand, an expert in atom interferometry, with a typical coherent sample size of one particle, would be more likely to use the former.
We define “coherence” as the predictability of the relative quantum phase. For interesting discussions of quantum coherence, see Refs. [[14]] and [[15]].
A. J. Leggett, in Bose-Einstein Condensation, A. Griffin, D. W. Snoke, and S. Stringari (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1995).
W. H. Zurek, Phys. Today 44, No. 10, 36 (1991).
M. R. Matthews et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 243 (1998).
D. S. Hall, M. R. Matthews, J. R. Ensher, C. E. Wieman, and E. A. Cornell, preceding Letter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1539 (1998).
D. S. Hall et al., Proc. SPIE 3270 (to be published).
The microwave and rf frequencies are produced by synthesizers locked to global-positioning system signals. The manufacturer of the receiver claims a root Allan variance better than $10^{- 10}$ .
C. H. Greene (private communication).
We separate the “environment” into two categories: an “intimate” environment, which includes interactions with thermal atoms as well as with internal modes within the condensate itself, and an “external” environment which includes such experimental factors as uncontrolled fluctuations in the magnetic fields. The former are intrinsic to the physics of the problem, whereas the latter can (in principle) be suppressed. In practice, we experience difficulty in keeping the external environment from intruding on our measurements; only in the modes of quietest operation are the oscillations of Fig. 3 observable. When coherence is observed, perturbations due to both the intimate and the external environments must be small; when coherence is washed out, either may be responsible. For these reasons, we have not attempted in this paper to quantify the loss of coherence at longer times.
A. J. Leggett and F. Sols, Found. Phys. 21, 353 (1991).
Quantum fluctuations introduce an additional uncertainty that grows linearly in time in a process akin to the spreading of a Gaussian wave packet in space (see Refs. [[10,31]–[32,33]]). We estimate the time scale for this process to be much longer than the duration of an individual measurement.
Atom interferometry between thermal beams is a well-established technique. See, for example, D. W. Keith, C. R. Ekstrom, Q. A. Turchette, and D. E. Pritchard, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 2693 (1991). An early condensate interferometer is described in H.-J. Miesner and W. Ketterle, Solid State Commun. (to be published).
N. F. Ramsey, Molecular Beams (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1956).
E. A. Cornell, D. S. Hall, M. R. Matthews, and C. E. Wieman, J. Low Temp. Phys. (to be published).
We take the average of a $\sim 14 μ m$ wide (postexpansion) vertical swath down the middle of the condensate density profile and extract the amplitude of the pixel at the center of the condensate image (i.e., at the center of the overlap region).
A. O. Caldeira and A. J. Leggett, Phys. Rev. A 31, 1059 (1985).
D. F. Walls and G. J. Milburn, Phys. Rev. A 31, 2403 (1985).
M. Brune et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 4887 (1996).
E. M. Wright, D. F. Walls, and J. C. Garrison, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2158 (1996).
J. Javanainen and M. Wilkens, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 4675 (1997).
M. Lewenstein and L. You, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3489 (1996); A. Imamog¯lu, M. Lewenstein, and L. You, 78, 2511 (1997).
T. Wong, M. J. Collett, and D. F. Walls, Phys. Rev. A 54, R3718 (1996).
J. Javanainen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 3164 (1986); I. Zapata, F. Sols, and A. J. Leggett, Phys. Rev. A 57, R28 (1998); A. Smerzi, S. Fantoni, S. Giovanazzi, and S. R. Shenoy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 4950 (1997); J. Williams and M. Holland (private communication).