What Is the Second-Order Correlation Function in Quantum Optics?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the second-order correlation function in quantum optics, specifically focusing on the mathematical expression for g^{(2)}(\tau) and its evaluation at different time intervals.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to understand the implications of the second-order correlation function, particularly how it varies with time. Some participants question the role of time averages in simplifying the expression and explore the relationship between functions at different time intervals.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the concepts, with some offering clarifications about time averages and their effects on the correlation function. There seems to be a productive exchange of ideas, although no consensus has been reached on all aspects of the problem.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of specific time intervals and the potential confusion arising from averaging over different time scales, which may affect the understanding of the correlation function.

svenvbins
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I'm studying for my Quantum Optics exam and still have problems with the second-order correlation function.

The question concerned is question 3b, 3c etc which can be found here: http://www.arago.utwente.nl/comms/sotn/tentamendatabase/optics/qo/351500_Quantum_Optics_2010-11-03.pdf

They want to know [itex]g^{(2)}(\tau)=\frac{<I(t) I(t+\tau)>}{<I(t)><I(t+\tau)>}[/itex]

For [itex]\tau=0[/itex], this simplifies to [itex]\frac{<I(t)^2>}{<I(t)>^2}[/itex]
For [itex]\tau=1[/itex], it is [itex]\frac{I(t)I(t+1)>}{<I(t)><I(t+1)>}[/itex]

Now, I'd say that in the second case, the answer depends on time, since (take t=1) I(1) is not equal to I(2).

If anyone can help me out (especially understanding what exactly is going on) I'd be grateful!

Sven
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Taking time averages gets rid of the [itex]t[/itex] dependence.

Suppose [itex]f\left(t\right) = I\left(t\right)[/itex] and [itex]g\left(t\right) = I\left(t + 1\right)[/itex]. What do you have to do to the graph of [itex]f\left(t\right)[/itex] to get the graph of [itex]g\left(t\right)[/itex]?
 
Ah, yeah. I was a bit confused about the time average, since in some (other) cases you average over very short times (much smaller than the 1 second in this assignment, thus not deleting the time dependence :P)

To get g(t) from f(t) you'd have to move the whole graph one unit to the right.

Thanks, I think with that tip I know what should be done :)
 
svenvbins said:
move the whole graph one unit to the right.

How about left? :)
 
Ugh, yeah. That was really stupid of me :P
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K