19.01.2015 Views

EGAS41 - Swansea University

EGAS41 - Swansea University

EGAS41 - Swansea University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

41 st EGAS CP 37 Gdańsk 2009<br />

Optical lattice clock without atom-motion-dependent<br />

uncertainties<br />

E.Yu. Ilinova 1 , V.D. Ovsiannikov 1 , H. Katori 2 , K. Hashiguchi 3<br />

1 Faculty of Theoretical Physics,Voronezh State <strong>University</strong>, Universitetskaya pl. 1, Voronezh,<br />

Russia<br />

2 Department of Applied Physics, Graduate School of Engineering, The <strong>University</strong> of Tokyo,<br />

Bunkyo-ku, 113-8656 Tokyo, Japan<br />

3 CREST, Japan Science and Technology Agency, 4-1-8 Honcho Kawaguchi, 332-0012 Saitama,<br />

Japan<br />

∗ Corresponding author: sweraji@yandex.ru,<br />

Excellent controllability of system parameters for atoms in optical lattices has found broad<br />

applications in condensed matter physics, quantum information science and metrology.<br />

Polarization gradient lattice led to efficient laser cooling mechanisms and controlled atomic<br />

transport. The long coherence times of atoms in far-detuned intensity lattices make them<br />

attractive for precision measurement. In these applications, so far, the lattice potentials<br />

are well characterized by the electric dipole (E 1 ) interaction, hence, the higher order<br />

multipole interactions, such as the magnetic-dipole (M 1 ) and electric-quadrupole (E 2 )<br />

interactions, are rarely discussed as an experimental concern. Besides controlling atomic<br />

motion, engineering light shift potential of a far-detuned intensity lattice opens up possibilities<br />

for novel atomic clocks. Optical lattice clocks are attracting growing interest as<br />

candidates for future redefinition of the second. It was pointed out, that different spatial<br />

distributions of multipolar (E 1 ,M 1 ,E 2 ) atom-field interactions may critically affect the<br />

uncertainties of highly accurate clocks based on atoms in an optical lattice of a ”magic”<br />

wavelength [1], introducing difficulties in canceling out the light shift in clock transitions.<br />

There are two possibilities to overcome this problem: (i) to use an optical lattice, where<br />

the spatial distribution of the E 1 Stark effect coincided with the distributions of the M 1<br />

and E 2 Stark energies; (ii) to shift the magic wavelength so, as to equalize the spatial<br />

distributions of the Stark-effect corrections to the energies of atoms in their excited and<br />

ground states, which for equal amplitudes E 0 of the waves is:<br />

△E g(e)<br />

St (r) = − E2 0<br />

2<br />

[<br />

α<br />

g(e)<br />

E 1<br />

(ω)g E1 (r) + α g(e)<br />

M 1<br />

(ω)g M1 (r) + α g(e)<br />

E 2<br />

(ω)g E2 (r) ] (1)<br />

where α g(e)<br />

E 1<br />

(ω), α g(e)<br />

M 1<br />

(ω), α g(e)<br />

E 2<br />

(ω) are the polarizabilities of the ground-state (excited) atom<br />

at the frequency ω , and the factors g E1 (r), g M1 (r), g E2 (r)are the spatial distribution<br />

factors of the corresponding light shifts. A thorough analysis demonstrates, that 2D<br />

and 3D lattices exist with standing waves produced by running waves with mutually<br />

orthogonal polarization, where the E 1 distribution g E1 (r) could coincide with either g M1 (r)<br />

or g E2 (r). E.g., in a 3D lattice with running waves polarized along the standing-wave<br />

axes Ox, Oy and Oz the M1 and E1 distributions coincide: g E1 (r) = g M1 (r) = 3 +<br />

cosk(x + y) + cos k(x + z) + cosk(y + z), while g E2 (r) = 6 − g E1 (r). In the case of<br />

polarization at the angle π/4 to the axes the E2 distribution coincides with that of the<br />

E1: g E1 (r) = g E2 (r) = 3 + 2 sin kx sin kz + 2 cosky coskz, while g M1 (r) = 6 − g E1 (r). In<br />

every case, the position-dependent Stark shift of the clock frequency may be eliminated<br />

by corresponding choice of the magic wavelength, while the residual position-independent<br />

multipole offset may be correctly taken into account.<br />

References<br />

[1] A.V. Taichenachev et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 193601 (2008)<br />

97

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!