- #1

mhsjx

- 1

- 1

- TL;DR Summary
- Can I just replace the replace the photon state in a photon interferometer into atom state to attain the derivation of an atom interferometer?

First, we can think a MZ interferometer as a combination of two beamspliter and a phase shifter(from MIT course "Atomic and Optical Physics II", the paper is "Quantum-mechanical noise in an interferometer"), which evolution matrix is B = {{1,-i},{-i,1}},B dagger and P ={{1,0},{{0,exp{i\phi}}}.

Assuming a single photon state |1> couple with a vacuum state |0> as an input, then, just multiply the initial state and evolution matrix, we can get the final state, which is the result.

So, can we just copy to the atom interferomter and just say we use the Hyperfine level of groud state denoted by |F=2,mF=0> and |F=3,mF=0> to replace single photon state |1> and vacuum state |0> to get the same result?

My answer is yes, but my teacher deny it and say "you can not use this model to express the noise suddenly appear in an atom interferometer such as EMP and the replacement is not intuitively correct". Then I say "we can not use a model to express a sudden noise, even the Feyman Path Approach method(the paper is "The Feynman Path Integral Approach to Atomic Interferometry. A Tutorial")". But he still disagree with me.

So, my question is:

Assuming a single photon state |1> couple with a vacuum state |0> as an input, then, just multiply the initial state and evolution matrix, we can get the final state, which is the result.

So, can we just copy to the atom interferomter and just say we use the Hyperfine level of groud state denoted by |F=2,mF=0> and |F=3,mF=0> to replace single photon state |1> and vacuum state |0> to get the same result?

My answer is yes, but my teacher deny it and say "you can not use this model to express the noise suddenly appear in an atom interferometer such as EMP and the replacement is not intuitively correct". Then I say "we can not use a model to express a sudden noise, even the Feyman Path Approach method(the paper is "The Feynman Path Integral Approach to Atomic Interferometry. A Tutorial")". But he still disagree with me.

So, my question is:

- Is the replacement valid? If it's not correct, how can I use it in an atom interferometer, or the whole method just not valid for it?(The derivation is so beauty that I want to use it, but I have no idea)
- The rightness of our argument