Identical atoms in the Dicke model

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter lfqm
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Atoms Model
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the Dicke model and its treatment of N identical atoms interacting with a one-mode electromagnetic (EM) field. The confusion arises from the distinction between atomic operators defined in a basis of distinguishable atoms and the spin basis that treats them as identical. The Dicke Hamiltonian operates on a Hilbert space defined by collective pseudo-spins, specifically with a basis size of N/2, which simplifies the Hamiltonian by eliminating sums over individual spins. Experimental realizations often involve ions in a high-Q cavity, where they are tuned to behave as spin 1/2 systems resonant with the cavity frequency.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Dicke model and its applications in quantum mechanics
  • Familiarity with spin systems and collective excitations
  • Knowledge of Hilbert spaces and quantum operators
  • Experience with experimental setups involving high-Q cavities and ion manipulation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the mathematical formulation of the Dicke Hamiltonian and its implications
  • Explore the concept of pseudo-spin operators in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate the effects of non-uniform coupling in generalized Dicke models
  • Learn about experimental techniques for tuning ions using Zeeman shifts in high-Q cavities
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, researchers in quantum optics, and experimentalists working with atomic ensembles and cavity quantum electrodynamics.

lfqm
Messages
21
Reaction score
1
Hey guys, I've recently read about the Tavis-Cummings and Dicke models and I got a little bit confused about them. They are suppoused to model N identical atoms interacting with a one-mode EM field, however the atomic operators are defined in the basis (for the case of two atoms):

\left\{{|e_{1},e_{2}>, |e_{1},g_{2}>, |g_{1},e_{2}>, |g_{1},g_{2}>}\right\}

which obviously makes a distinction between the atoms.
Then it gets even more confusing, as they start working in a spin basis \left\{{|j,m>}\right\} which makes the atoms identical for the case j=N/2... I don't even undestand why they fix j=N/2

Concretely, my question is: What is the basis of the hilbert space the Dicke hamiltonian is acting on (the atomic part)?

The 2^N elements basis (distinguishable atoms), the \displaystyle\sum_{j=0}^{N/2}(2j+1) elements basis (considering all spin values) or the N+1 elements basis (fixing j=N/2).

And what is the form of the atomic operators in this basis?

Thanks :smile:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Haris
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think I can answer your question (I am not even sure I understand it).

However, the Dicke model deals with pseudo-spins, i.e. collective excitation of an ensemble of spin 1/2 systems. The N/2 factor comes from re-writing the sums over N spins as collective pseudo-spins (the collective angular momentum). You basically re-write it so that you end up with a Hamiltonian with no sums in it, even though you are dealing with an ensemble; i.e. the basis would certainly be of the size N/2 since that is the size of representations of the pseuo-spin operators.

Note that for all systems I can think of the atoms are identical from an "EM" point of view in that they have the same energy splitting and (ideally) the same coupling to the field mode of interest; But this does not imply that they are indistinguishable, they would certainly be separated spatially. There has also been quite a bit work done looking at generalized models, i.e. what happens if the coupling is non-uniform etc. which means you can waves and so on.

A typical experimental realization of the Dicke model would be an ensemble of e.g. ions in a high-Q cavity. The ions are tuned (using for example a Zeeman shift) so that they behave like spin 1/2 systems (i.e. simple two-level systems) and have energies resonant with the cavity frequency.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K