Superradiance and the assumption of indiscernable atom field coupling

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter McLaren Rulez
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Atom Coupling Field
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the phenomenon of superradiance in a system of N atoms, emphasizing the necessity of treating atomic ensembles as indiscernible in their coupling to the electromagnetic field. The initial state of the system is represented by the quantum state \mid\psi\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}\sum_{j}\mid g_{1}g_{2}..e_{j}..g_{N}\rangle. The key conclusion is that assuming indistinguishability among atoms leads to coherent radiation in phase, resulting in an intensity scaling as N², rather than N, which is critical for accurately describing superradiance.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics, particularly the concepts of superradiance and atomic ensembles.
  • Familiarity with quantum state notation and the significance of coherent states.
  • Knowledge of electromagnetic field coupling and its implications in quantum optics.
  • Basic grasp of intensity calculations in quantum systems, including the relationship between number of atoms and emitted intensity.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of superradiance in quantum optics.
  • Explore the concept of indistinguishability in quantum mechanics, particularly in relation to the double slit experiment.
  • Investigate the mathematical treatment of coherent states and their implications for atomic interactions.
  • Learn about the intensity scaling laws in systems of indistinguishable particles and their applications in quantum field theory.
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, quantum optics researchers, and students studying atomic interactions and superradiance phenomena will benefit from this discussion.

McLaren Rulez
Messages
289
Reaction score
3
Hi,

If we have a system on N atoms confined to dimensions much smaller than the wavelength corresponding to the transition, we see superradiant decay. Now, in these cases, we always assume that the excitation is symmetrically or antisymmetrically distributed. For instance, if we have one excitation among N atoms, an example of an initial state is
<br /> \mid\psi\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}\sum_{j}\mid g_{1}g_{2}..e_{j}..g_{N}\rangle<br />The claim is that the correct treatment of superradiance needs to assume that the atomic ensemble couples to the field in an indiscernible way. In other words, there is no way to know which atom emitted the photon. Why is this assumption necessary and why does it correctly describe superradiance?

Why can I not say, for instance, that the kth atom is excited and all others are in the ground state? Remember, we are not doing an actual experiment so for our purposes, all the atoms are just dipoles and no dimensions have been specified for the atoms.

Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
McLaren Rulez said:
The claim is that the correct treatment of superradiance needs to assume that the atomic ensemble couples to the field in an indiscernible way. In other words, there is no way to know which atom emitted the photon. Why is this assumption necessary and why does it correctly describe superradiance?

Why can I not say, for instance, that the kth atom is excited and all others are in the ground state? Remember, we are not doing an actual experiment so for our purposes, all the atoms are just dipoles and no dimensions have been specified for the atoms.

This is a bit like asking, why we need to assume indistinguishability in the double slit experiment and cannot just have a look at two individual slits.

If you have an indistinguishable situation, that also means your atoms will coherently radiate in phase with each other. That makes a huge difference. For independently radiating atoms, you will get an intensity proportional to N (the number of atoms). Basically you just take the field of each individual atom, square it and sum up the intensities.

For indistinguishable atoms you cannot neglect phase and you cannot sort one field to one atom. So you have to sum up all the fields (or probability amplitudes if you want a quantum optics treatment). This sum will be proportional to N. Now you need to square afterwards to get the intensity, which will obviously go as N^2.
 
Thank you for replying. I see your point.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
389
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K