Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:1112.0986 · Physical Review Letters

Comment on “Superradiant Phase Transitions and the Standard Description of Circuit QED”

Cristiano Ciuti, Pierre Nataf

Published Oct 23, 2012• 43 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

A Comment on the Letter by O. Viehmann, J. von Delft, and F. Marquardt [Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 107}, 113602 (2011)].
DOI
10.1103/physrevlett.109.179301

Related papers

Reply to Comment on "Superradiant Phase Transitions and the Standard Description of Circuit QED"

Oliver Viehmann, Jan von Delft, Florian Marquardt

A Reply to the Comment by C. Ciuti and P. Nataf [arXiv:1112.0986v1] on our Letter "Superradiant Phase Transitions and the Standard Description of Circuit QED" [Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 113602 (2011)].

arXiv:1202.2916•Feb 14, 2012•3 citations

Superradiant Phase Transitions and the Standard Description of Circuit QED

Oliver Viehmann, Jan von Delft, Florian Marquardt

We investigate the equilibrium behavior of a superconducting circuit QED system containing a large number of artificial atoms. It is shown that the currently accepted standard description of circuit QED via an effective model fails in an important aspect: it predicts the possibility of a superradiant phase transition, even though a full microscopic treatment reveals that a no-go theorem for such phase transitions known from cavity QED applies to circuit QED systems as well. We generalize the no-go theorem to the case of (artificial) atoms with many energy levels and thus make it more applicable for realistic cavity or circuit QED systems.

arXiv:1103.4639•Physical Review Letters•Sep 8, 2011•200 citations

Reply to “Comment on “Role of matter interactions in superradiant phenomena””

J. P. Mendonça, K. Jachymski, Y. Wang

Physical Review Letters•Oct 26, 2026•0 citations

Comment on “Electromagnetic Wave Dynamics in Matter-Wave Superradiant Scattering”

Wolfgang Ketterle

A Comment on the Letter by L. Deng, M. G. Payne, and E. W. Hagley, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 050402 (2010). The authors of the Letter offer a Reply.

Physical Review Letters•Mar 15, 2011•6 citations

Remark on the superradiant phase transition

Kazimierz Rza̧żewski, K. Wódkiewicz, W. Żakowicz

Physics Letters A•Sep 1, 1976•17 citations

Comment on the paper "Electromagnetic Wave Dynamics in Matter-Wave Superradiant Scattering" by L. Deng, M.G. Payne, and E.W. Hagley

Wolfgang Ketterle

The paper by Deng et al. (Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 050402 (2010)) presents an analytic theoretical description of matter-wave superradiance (Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 4225-4228 (2000)) which claims to go beyond previous theoretical frameworks. I show here that the theory presented in this paper is not a description of superradiance per se, but rather an elegant perturbative description of a Raman amplifier far away from the superradiant threshold. As such, it merely is a limiting case of previously known treatments of superradiance. Two additional new findings of the paper are incorrect: (1) The claim that adiabatic elimination of the excited state of the atoms is only possible when the probe pulse propagates slowly. (2) The prediction that superradiance has a dependence on the sign of the detuning of the pump laser due to a phase-matching condition.

arXiv:1010.3915•Oct 19, 2010•0 citations
We investigate the equilibrium behavior of a superconducting circuit QED system containing a large number of artificial atoms. It is shown that the currently accepted standard description of circuit QED via an effective model fails in an important aspect: it predicts the possibility of a superradiant phase transition, even though a full microscopic treatment reveals that a no-go theorem for such phase transitions known from cavity QED applies to circuit QED systems as well. We generalize the no-go theorem to the case of (artificial) atoms with many energy levels and thus make it more applicable for realistic cavity or circuit QED systems.
The paper by Deng et al. (Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 050402 (2010)) presents an analytic theoretical description of matter-wave superradiance (Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 4225-4228 (2000)) which claims to go beyond previous theoretical frameworks. I show here that the theory presented in this paper is not a description of superradiance per se, but rather an elegant perturbative description of a Raman amplifier far away from the superradiant threshold. As such, it merely is a limiting case of previously known treatments of superradiance. Two additional new findings of the paper are incorrect: (1) The claim that adiabatic elimination of the excited state of the atoms is only possible when the probe pulse propagates slowly. (2) The prediction that superradiance has a dependence on the sign of the detuning of the pump laser due to a phase-matching condition.