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:1304.5585

Comment on "Spatial Coherence and Optical Beam Shifts"

Li‐Gang Wang, Shiyao Zhu, Muhammad Suhail Zubairy

Published Apr 20, 2013• 1 citation
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

This comment is to show that our simulation data, based on our theory and method in Ref. [J. Phys. B 41, 055401 (2008)], are also in agreement with the experimental data presented for $D_{p}-D_{s}$ in Ref. [Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{109}, 213901 (2012)]. We also demonstrate how to show the effect of spatial coherence on the GH shifts in this comment, therefore we disagree with the claims in Ref. [Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{109}, 213901 (2012)].

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1304.5585

Related papers

Comment on "Relaxation theory for perturbed many-body quantum systems versus numerics and experiment"

Paul Secular

In a recent Letter [Dabelow and Reimann, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 120602 (2020)], a perturbative relaxation theory is applied to the Bose-Hubbard model and compared to data from a quantum simulator experiment [Trotzky et al. Nature Phys 8, 325 (2012)]. In this Comment, I argue that the discrepancy found is due to the quasi-local observable measured in the experiment being affected by a harmonic trapping potential that is unaccounted for in the analytic calculation. I support my claim with quasi-exact numerics computed using a parallel time-evolving block decimation algorithm (TEBD), and show that the relaxation theory gives accurate results in the correct limit when compared to an appropriate local observable. Finally, I note that my numerics disagree with the t-DMRG calculations of Trotzky et al. but give better qualitative agreement with their experimental results.

arXiv:2005.02681•May 6, 2020•0 citations

Some Recent Work on Coherence Properties of Photon Beams

L. Mandeļ

•Jan 1, 1967•0 citations

Reply to 'Comment on Universal out-of-equilibrium transport in Kondo-correlated quantum dots'

Enrique Muñoz, C. J. Bolech, Stefan Kirchner

A recent comment on our work (Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 110, 016601 (2013)) by A.A.Aligia claims that we "made mistakes in the evaluation of the lesser quantities". It is further claimed that the distribution function of the single-particle selfenergy of the interacting region in the Fermi liquid regime, e.g. at small bias voltage, low temperature, and small frequency, is continuous. These claims are based on a comparison of the particle-hole symmetric case with results obtained from the approach of A.A.Aligia. We disagree with these claims and show that the discrepancies that the comment alludes to originate from a violation of Ward identities by the method employed in the comment. A comparison of our approach with the numerical renormalization group shows perfect agreement for the symmetric case.

arXiv:1308.0638•Aug 2, 2013•0 citations

Coherence effects in the anisotropy of optical experiments

Chemical Physics•Jul 1, 1993•11 citations

Comment on "Nonlocal Coherent Perfect Absorption"

Pablo L. Saldanha

We show that, contrary to what is claimed in Ref. [J. Jeffers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 143602 (2019)], there is no nonlocal coherent absorption by the two lossy beam splitters considered in detail in the treatment of the setup presented in this reference. What happens is a local coherent absorption by the other two lossy beam splitters of the setup.

arXiv:1912.08194•Dec 17, 2019•0 citations

Comment on "Feshbach resonances in an optical lattice" (2 pages)

Roberto B. Diener

Physical Review A•Jan 1, 2006•0 citations
This comment is to show that our simulation data, based on our theory and method in Ref. [J. Phys. B 41, 055401 (2008)], are also in agreement with the experimental data presented for Dp−DsD_{p}-D_{s}Dp​−Ds​ in Ref. [Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{109}, 213901 (2012)]. We also demonstrate how to show the effect of spatial coherence on the GH shifts in this comment, therefore we disagree with the claims in Ref. [Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{109}, 213901 (2012)].
In a recent Letter [Dabelow and Reimann, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 120602 (2020)], a perturbative relaxation theory is applied to the Bose-Hubbard model and compared to data from a quantum simulator experiment [Trotzky et al. Nature Phys 8, 325 (2012)]. In this Comment, I argue that the discrepancy found is due to the quasi-local observable measured in the experiment being affected by a harmonic trapping potential that is unaccounted for in the analytic calculation. I support my claim with quasi-exact numerics computed using a parallel time-evolving block decimation algorithm (TEBD), and show that the relaxation theory gives accurate results in the correct limit when compared to an appropriate local observable. Finally, I note that my numerics disagree with the t-DMRG calculations of Trotzky et al. but give better qualitative agreement with their experimental results.
A recent comment on our work (Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 110, 016601 (2013)) by A.A.Aligia claims that we "made mistakes in the evaluation of the lesser quantities". It is further claimed that the distribution function of the single-particle selfenergy of the interacting region in the Fermi liquid regime, e.g. at small bias voltage, low temperature, and small frequency, is continuous. These claims are based on a comparison of the particle-hole symmetric case with results obtained from the approach of A.A.Aligia. We disagree with these claims and show that the discrepancies that the comment alludes to originate from a violation of Ward identities by the method employed in the comment. A comparison of our approach with the numerical renormalization group shows perfect agreement for the symmetric case.