Preparation, manipulation and detection of single atoms on a chip Guilhem Dubois Supervisor: Jakob Reichel Atomchips group, Laboratoire Kastler Brossel, ENS Paris.

Download Report

Transcript Preparation, manipulation and detection of single atoms on a chip Guilhem Dubois Supervisor: Jakob Reichel Atomchips group, Laboratoire Kastler Brossel, ENS Paris.

Preparation, manipulation and detection
of single atoms on a chip
Guilhem Dubois
Supervisor: Jakob Reichel
Atomchips group, Laboratoire Kastler Brossel, ENS Paris
Single atoms : remarkable features
b
a
• Well-controlled
system!
• Testbed for
Quantum
Mechanics
Cooling & trapping
• Qubit candidate?
Tcoh > 10s
Outline
• Introduction: experiments with single atoms
• Cavity QED and single atom detection
• Experimental setup
• Detection of waveguided atoms
• Preparation and detection of trapped single atoms
• Detection with minimum backaction
• Quantum Zeno effect
Single atoms toolbox
1. Preparation
2. Interaction
3. Detection
Single atoms toolbox
1. Preparation
2. Interaction with …
light fields
(in free space, in a cavity)
3. Detection
another single atom
(atom-atom entanglement)
 atom-photon entanglement
[Volz et al. PRL 96 (2006)]
 controlled collisions
[Mandel et al. Nature 425 (2003)]
 Rydberg blockade
[Gaëtan et al. Nat. Phys. 5 (2009)]
 non-classical states of light
- Fock states
[Deleglise Nature 455 (2008)]
- polarisation-entangled
photons
[Wilk Science 317 (2007)]
Single atoms toolbox
1. Preparation : constraints
 deterministic
 specific internal state e.g. clock states
 specific motional state e.g. trap ground state
2. Interaction
3. Detection
Single atoms toolbox
1. Preparation : feedback
 deterministic
 specific internal state e.g. clock states
 specific motional state e.g. trap ground state
2. Interaction
3. Detection : here atom counting
 minimum backaction (spontaneous emission)
How can we achieve that ?
Outline
• Introduction
• Cavity QED and single atom detection
• Experimental setup
• Detection of waveguided atoms
• Preparation and detection of trapped single atoms
• Detection with minimum backaction
• Quantum Zeno effect
Atom-cavity system
atom
g
e
b
coupling
g
Strong coupling regime : g >> k , g
 small mode volume
 good quality mirrors
optical
cavity
k
Cavity QED experiments
 single atom - single photon interaction
Detection of single atoms
Evidence of field
quantisation & photon
counter
Quantum light sources
Brune et al. PRL 76
(1996)
Hijlkema PhD thesis (2007)
Oettl et al. PRL 95 (2005)
b
e,0
b,0
g,1
b,1
+,1
coupling g
energy
e
energy
Resonant Jaynes-Cummings spectrum
splitting 2g
-,1
b,0
Interaction single atom - single photon visible!
Principle of single atom detection in a cavity
1. Optimum measurement rate
1 measurement = 1 photon
2. With losses L :
¡signal = L £ ¡inc
Detection with minimum backaction?
 Backaction characterized by Gsp
For a free space detector:
factor C !
Outline
• Introduction
• Cavity QED and single atom detection
• Experimental setup
• Detection of waveguided atoms
• Preparation and detection of trapped single atoms
• Detection with minimum backaction
• Quantum Zeno effect
AutoCAD’s view
Integrated atom chip-cavity system
Atom chip basics
1cm
Applications:
- BEC
- precise transport and
positioning
- atomic clocks and
interferometers
- single atom manipulation?
Magnetic traps:
- versatility
- strong confinement
close to the surface
Miniaturized Fabry-Perot cavity
Miniaturized Fabry-Perot cavity
- tunable
- small mode volume
w0=4 mm ; d=39 mm
- integrated
150mm from chip surface
Cavity QED
Strong coupling regime!
finesse
coupling
F = 38000
g /2p = 160 MHz
cavity decay k /2p = 50 MHz
atomic decay g /2 p = 3 MHz
cooperativity C = g2/2kg = 85
Outline
• Introduction
• Cavity QED and single atom detection
• Experimental setup
• Detection of waveguided atoms
• Preparation and detection of trapped single atoms
• Detection with minimum backaction
• Quantum Zeno effect
Detection of waveguided atoms
Principle
APD
BEC
Atomic waveguide
a
Detection zone
LASER
… the easiest way to put SINGLE atoms in the cavity
Detection of waveguided atoms
Reference with no atoms
Detection of waveguided atoms
Single run with atoms
Detection of waveguided atoms
Experiment
Threshold
 these are single atoms !!!
Outline
• Introduction
• Cavity QED and single atom detection
• Experimental setup
• Detection of waveguided atoms
• Preparation and detection of trapped single atoms
• Detection with minimum backaction
• Quantum Zeno effect
Trapping & detecting the atoms in the cavity
mode
Transfer magnetic trap  Optical dipole trap @ 830nm
Experiments with BEC : see Colombe et al. Nature 450 (2007)
Positioning the BEC in the cavity
BEC in magnetic trap
N ~ a few 1000s
input fibre
Dipole trap
@ 830nm
output fibre
• Initial cloud size ~1mm
 single-site loading
possible.
Probe light
@ 780nm
Y
Laser detuning ΔL-A [GHz]
Vacuum Rabi Splitting with collective
enhancement
How to get to the single atom
regime?
Y. Colombe, T. Steinmetz, G. Dubois, F. Linke, D. Hunger and J.Reichel Nature 450 (2007)
From the BEC to just a single atom
• Problem: Evaporation down to N=1 not possible.
• Solution: Extract a single F=2 atom from a ‘reservoir’ of F=1
atoms – and detect it.
F'=0,1,2,3
Cavity tuned to F=2 -> F’=3 transition
F=2
Weak MW pulse (@6.8 GHz)
~2% transfer probability/atom
F=1
Reservoir (N~10)
Usual strategy to obtain trapped single atoms
“Wait and trap” scheme:
dip !
• First trapped cavity QED experiments
(Caltech, Garching)
• Problem: the atom is hot - cooling required
(Raman sideband cooling, cavity cooling)
• Possible improvement: optical conveyor belt
(Bonn, Zurich)
• We do differently!
We aim at direct preparation in the trap ground state
• Analogy with our scheme : position  internal state.
“Preparation and detection” iterative sequence
Detection
mw
Detection
Reservoir
preparation
mw
time
Etc …
F’=3
F=2
F=1
1000
~10
0 or 1 atom in F=2?
nAPD ~ 25
nAPD < 1
Analysis of detection pulses
<n>=25
threshold
<n>=0.35
successful
transfers
(~10%)
• Transfer
efficiency
10%
• Relative
transmission
1.4%
unsuccessful
transfers
(~90%)
after ~10 pulses
 Reliable preparation
Lifetime of the atoms during detection
single run
or
??
Lifetime of the atoms during detection
or
??
Fit
• Average lifetime 1.2 ms
• Limited by depumping to
F=1
stat. limit
depump limit
Fidelity=99.7%
+ QND measurement
Outline
• Introduction
• Cavity QED and single atom detection
• Experimental setup
• Detection of waveguided atoms
• Preparation and detection of trapped single atoms
• Detection with minimum backaction
• Quantum Zeno effect
How can we measure spontaneous emission?
Zeeman “random walk”:
But not visible in lifetime !
Measurement and preparation of a specific
Zeeman state (F=2;mF=0)
Measurement of mF
p
p
B
p
Diffusion in the Zeeman manifold
Fit
Detection figure of merit : backaction
 Better than a perfect
free space detection !
 Possible to prepare a
single atom without
changing the motional
state !
Detection without perturbation ?
with L ~ 0.1 : C ~ 20
expected value C ~ 85 ???
What is the real measurement rate of the system?
• for a lossless observer ¡m = ¡inc = C ¡sp
• can we check that ???
Outline
• Introduction
• Cavity QED and single atom detection
• Experimental setup
• Detection of waveguided atoms
• Preparation and detection of trapped single atoms
• Detection with minimum backaction
• Quantum Zeno effect
Quantum Zeno Effect
Cavity & atomic
excited state
F=2;mF=0
b
mw p
F=1;mF=0
a
Gm = Coherence decay rate
between a and b
Gm = Photon input rate
~ 20 £ Spontaneous emission rate
Summary
• Preparation of trapped single atoms starting from a BEC:

preparation in a specific Zeeman state
 qubit clock states

well localized within the cavity
• First detector of single atoms on a chip
 ability to distinguish F=1 from F=2 states with 99.7%
fidelity
• Demonstrated a Quantum Zeno effect w/o spontaneous
emission.
Outlook
• Characterize the atomic motional state
are we still in the ground state?
• Manipulate of pairs of atoms in the cavity
 Cavity-assisted entanglement generation
• Combine with other atom chip technology
(state dependent mw potentials)
• Quantum memory with BEC and Fiber-cavity
- Large collection efficiency
e
- Long storage time
a
b
Single atom Vacuum Rabi splitting
Atomchip-based single atom detectors
1. Fluorescence (Wilzbach et al. 0801.3255)
2. Photoionization (Stibor et al PRA 76 (2007))
3. Cavity QED (Purdy et al. APB 90 (2008))
1
2
3
Single atoms – light/matter interface
e
• Single photon source
• Atom-photon entanglement
• Photon-photon entanglement
• Long-distance atom-atom entanglement via
entanglement swapping
 Quantum networks for quantum cryptography
- Probabilistic is OK (DLCZ 2002)
 atomic ensembles possible but coherence time ~ms.
- Collection efficiency small with single atoms
 a cavity helps
a
b
Single atom ‘temperature‘
Release and recapture
Mean energy < 100 mK
(trap depth 2.6 mK)
Single atom Rabi oscillations
Transfer probability
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
5
10
15
MW pulse duration [ms]
20
Single atoms : some fascinating achievements
Hong-Ou-Mandel effect
Evidence of field quantisation &
photon counting
Beugnon et al.
Nature 440 (2006)
Massive multi-particle entanglement
Brune et al. PRL 76 (1996)
Mandel et al. Nature 425 (2003)
Single atoms toolbox
• Preparation & trapping
Scheme : controlled collisions
• 1-qubit gates
• 2-qubit gates
• State readout
Entangle atomic internal
and external state
Requirements:
- state dependent potentials
- preparation in the trap ground state
Theory:
Calarco et al. , PRA 61 (2000)
Experiment:
Mandel et al. Nature 425 (2003)
Böhi et al. preprint arXiv 0904.4837
Single atoms toolbox
• Preparation & trapping
Scheme : Rydberg gate
• 1-qubit gates
r
• 2-qubit gates
d1.d2
• State readout
b
a
Theory:
Jaksch et al. PRL 85 (2000)
Experiment:
Requirements:
Wilk et al. preprint arXiv:0908.0454
- preparation of Rydberg states
- small distance (<5mm) between atoms
Single atoms toolbox
• Preparation & trapping
• 1-qubit gates
Scheme : cavity-mediated interaction
• 2-qubit gates
ea
ae
aa+1 photon
• State readout
g
g
ba
aa
You et al. PRA 67 (2003)
Requirements:
- optical cavity, strong coupling regime
- good control over the coupling g
ab
aa
Single atoms toolbox
• Preparation & trapping
• For free space detection
Signal = Spontaneous emission
 heating & depumping
• 1-qubit gates
• 2-qubit gates
• State readout :
• Non-destructive measurement?
- Not necessary in principle
- but very useful for preparation!
e
 need a cavity to enhance
light/matter coupling and
avoid spontaneous emission
b
a
Detection of waveguided atoms
Analysis
• Spontaneous emission:
 depumping to untrapped states.
• Some atoms lost before they reach
maximum coupling
• Still:
Demonstrates >50% efficiency
single atom detection
(absorption imaging, simulations)
• But:
trapped atoms in the strong
coupling region should lead to
better results