Recent content by YuryM

Yes, this is good example with a single atom, thank you. Makes it quite obvious that g2 is not conserved by an atom beam splitter.

Sorry for the delay. I did not know quite what to reply. Now I do (I think). Not quite, the problem was that the calibration signal was polluted by post-detector noise. And the calibration assumed thermal noise. Knowing this I will change receiver/detector channel and/or fit to thermal+gaussian...

You are right. It would not. In reality the denominator is just for gain calibration, and is later replaced by measured total power. I've forgot about this in simulations. With <n_1><n_2> in the denominator, as it should be g_2 for thermal light does not depend on <n>. Now I am lost. If this...

I use simple formula - each detector measures number of photons, which arrives during its reaction time, n_i. Then I calculate ##g_2=\frac{<(n_1-<n_1>) (n_2-<n_2>)>}{\sqrt{<(n_1-<n_1>)^2> <(n_2-<n_2>)^2>}## OK. But one has to take into account interference of the wavefunction from two photons...

Thank you for quick response. Oops, of course, 0. Or perfect anti-correlation. Is this what it should be? Sure, one never detects photon pairs, and when one detector is 1 the other is 0, but if one is 0, the other is not necessarily 1. Sound like partial anti-correlation. Actually, I am...

>Now you can evaluate all these terms. The mean value of the deviation should vanish. The expectation >value of the square of the deviation survives. This is the variance of the photon number distribution. That >leaves us with three surviving terms: > >g^{(2)}=\frac{\langle n \rangle^2 +\langle...