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

European Quantum Electronics Conference (EQEC)

Micromaser Trapping States By Quantum-trajectory Simulations

Federico Casagrande, Maria Lisa Garavaglia, ALFREDO LULLI

Published Aug 24, 2005• 0 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1109/eqec.1998.714767

Related papers

Trapping states and micromaser dynamics by a quantum-trajectory approach

Federico Casagrande, Maria Lisa Garavaglia, ALFREDO LULLI

Optics Communications•Jun 1, 1998•13 citations

Detection of Trapping States in the Micromaser Field

M. Weidinger, R. Heelein, Benjamin T. H. Varcoe +1 more

European Quantum Electronics Conference (EQEC)•Aug 24, 2005•0 citations

Trapping and photon number states in a two-photon micromaser

Moorad Alexanian, S. Bose, Lee Chow

Journal of Luminescence•Feb 1, 1998•4 citations

Two-Photon Micromaser: from Trapping to Ideal Squeezed States

Miguel Orszag, Luis Roa, Ricardo Ramı́rez

Nonlinear phenomena and complex systems•Jan 1, 1996•0 citations

Collective effects and trapping states by a quantum-trajectory treatment of micromaser dynamics

Federico Casagrande, ALFREDO LULLI, Simone Ulzega

By applying a quantum-trajectory approach to a master equation for the cavity mode density operator, we investigate the dynamics and the trapping states of a micromaser or microlaser including the effects of cavity temperature, two-atom events, atomic velocity spread, and partial excitation of the atomic beam. In the description of two-atom collective effects we allow for the nonsimultaneous arrival of atoms in the cavity, generalizing to a mean number of atoms ${N}_{\mathrm{at}}\ensuremath{\approx}1,$ a recent treatment [M. I. Kolobov and F. Haake, Phys. Rev. A 55, 3033 (1997)]. We show that, in trapping regions, our treatment of two-atom events can give strikingly different effects with respect to the approximation of simultaneous arrival of atom pairs; e.g., detrapping instead of trapping, different times of approach to the steady state, and different photonstatistics. Also, we simulate micromaser dynamics with parameter values corresponding to the recent experimental observation of the trapping effect by Walther and collaborators [H. Weidinger et al., Technical Digest of the European Quantum Electronics Conference '98 (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 1998)].

Physical Review A•Aug 1, 1999•14 citations

Comment on “Collective effects and trapping states by a quantum-trajectory treatment of micromaser dynamics”

David B. Johnson, William C. Schieve

A quantum trajectory analysis of the steady-state photon statistics of a micromaser by Casagrande and collaborators [F. Casagrande et al., Phys. Rev. A 60, 1582 (1999)] shows a significant suppression of the trapping behavior due to the inclusion of two-atom events. We use numerical integration in our investigation and obtain results that disagree with their analysis and show less suppression of the trapping behavior. A comparison with two extreme cases places our results between the two extremes and gives us confidence that our calculations are correct. The results of Casagrande and collaborators do not satisfy this condition.

Physical Review A•Feb 25, 2003•2 citations
By applying a quantum-trajectory approach to a master equation for the cavity mode density operator, we investigate the dynamics and the trapping states of a micromaser or microlaser including the effects of cavity temperature, two-atom events, atomic velocity spread, and partial excitation of the atomic beam. In the description of two-atom collective effects we allow for the nonsimultaneous arrival of atoms in the cavity, generalizing to a mean number of atoms ${N}_{\mathrm{at}}\ensuremath{\approx}1,$ a recent treatment [M. I. Kolobov and F. Haake, Phys. Rev. A 55, 3033 (1997)]. We show that, in trapping regions, our treatment of two-atom events can give strikingly different effects with respect to the approximation of simultaneous arrival of atom pairs; e.g., detrapping instead of trapping, different times of approach to the steady state, and different photonstatistics. Also, we simulate micromaser dynamics with parameter values corresponding to the recent experimental observation of the trapping effect by Walther and collaborators [H. Weidinger et al., Technical Digest of the European Quantum Electronics Conference '98 (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 1998)].
A quantum trajectory analysis of the steady-state photon statistics of a micromaser by Casagrande and collaborators [F. Casagrande et al., Phys. Rev. A 60, 1582 (1999)] shows a significant suppression of the trapping behavior due to the inclusion of two-atom events. We use numerical integration in our investigation and obtain results that disagree with their analysis and show less suppression of the trapping behavior. A comparison with two extreme cases places our results between the two extremes and gives us confidence that our calculations are correct. The results of Casagrande and collaborators do not satisfy this condition.