Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Nobelprize for quantum optics

  1. Oct 4, 2005 #1

    vanesch

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 4, 2005 #2

    ZapperZ

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    We must not forget that Glauber's body of work includes a substantial portion on the quantum theory of coherence for photons and photon correlations. One only needs to check the citation of his work to see the huge amount of applications that have resulted in his theoretical work.

    I must admit ignorance about the contribution of the other two. This is as good as a time as any to find out....

    Zz.
     
  4. Oct 4, 2005 #3

    vanesch

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Yeah, me too. I knew about Glauber's work (in fact, somehow it is not clear to me what is Glauber's work, and what is Mandel's work: as I understand well, they were both the "founding fathers" of quantum optics, and even somehow rivals I thought I could make up about the tone of certain publications).
    I never heard about the others. But then, I don't know much about spectroscopy in general...
     
  5. Oct 4, 2005 #4

    marcus

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2015 Award
    Dearly Missed

    Nobel Prize in physics goes to optics

    http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/2005/press.html

    http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/2005/index.html

    half to Roy Glauber (Harvard)
    "for his contribution to the quantum theory of optical coherence"

    a quarter each to John L. Hall
    (University of Colorado, JILA; National Institute of Standards and Technology)

    and Theodor W. Hänsch
    (Max-Planck-Institut für Quantenoptik
    Garching, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
    Munich)

    "for their contributions to the development of laser-based precision spectroscopy, including the optical frequency comb technique"

    EDIT: HERE ARE A COUPLE OF GOOD ARTICLES from Nobel site---if anyone wants to read about the 2005 physics laureates' work.

    This one is more basic and easy to understand
    http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/2005/info.pdf

    This gives more history, more technical detail
    http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/2005/phyadv05.pdf
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2005
  6. Oct 4, 2005 #5

    ZapperZ

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    Hope you don't mind, marcus. I merged your thread with this one that was there already.

    Zz.
     
  7. Oct 4, 2005 #6

    marcus

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2015 Award
    Dearly Missed

    Indeed I don't mind! I appreciate having it consolidated.
     
  8. Oct 6, 2005 #7
    Thanks for the references marcus, i was somewhat disconcerted by the AP feed (a snippet here):


    "Until Glauber published his theories in 1963, scientists dismissed the idea that quantum theory, which was developed to describe the behavior of particles, had any application to light. But Glauber showed that certain types of light — including lasers — could only be fully understood using quantum methods, which treat light as individual packets of energy rather than continuous waves."


    I wonder who released that summary to the press?

    I find it somewhat odd that Julian Swinger didn't mention Glauber during his lectures at my school (1973), of course it was a series of lectures on theory, not a history lesson.

    Thanks Roy Glauber
     
  9. Oct 6, 2005 #8

    marcus

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2015 Award
    Dearly Missed

    I thought one of the first quantum theory papers of all time was the 1905 einstein paper about the photoelectric effect----that light energy comes in packets which he or somebody called named "photons"

    so at the very beginning, quantum mechanics was about light

    so I am confused by what you quote from the Associated Press wireservice.

    maybe I just dont understand what the reporter is trying to say, but out of context it sounds misinformed
     
  10. Oct 6, 2005 #9

    ZapperZ

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    Never trust science or the historical accuracy of science done in popular media.

    Zz.
     
  11. Oct 6, 2005 #10

    reilly

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Glauber: elegant, empirical, far reaching. Richly deserved.
    Regards,
    Reilly Atkinson
     
  12. Oct 10, 2005 #11

    ZapperZ

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Nobelprize for quantum optics
  1. Quantum optics (Replies: 2)

  2. Quantum optics (Replies: 2)

  3. Quantum optics texts (Replies: 3)

Loading...