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

Physical Review A

Comment: Authors' reply to Comment of Skowronek

Tsu-Jye A. Nee, James R. Roberts

Published Jun 1, 1983• 1 citation
Publisher

Abstract

Skowronek has commented on a Rayleigh-scattering cross-section measurement for various pulse durations made by us. His comments are discussed, and his questions on our experimental methods are answered.
DOI
10.1103/physreva.27.3351

Related papers

Reply to Comment on 'The response of a tunnelling particle to an impulse'

Stanley Clough

Journal of Physics C Solid State Physics•May 20, 1985•4 citations

Reply to “Comment on ‘Stimulated Raman adiabatic passage from an atomic to a molecular Bose-Einstein condensate’ ”

P. D. Drummond, Karen V. Kheruntsyan, Daniel J. Heinzen +1 more

In the preceding Comment, the authors suggest that the molecular conversion efficiency in atom-molecule stimulated Raman adiabatic passage can be improved by lowering the initial atomic density, which in turn requires longer pulse durations to maintain adiabaticity. Apart from the fact that the mean-field approximation becomes questionable at low densities, we point out that a low-density strategy with longer pulses has several problems. It generally requires higher pulse energies and increases radiative losses. We also show that even within the approximations used in the Comment, their example leads to no efficiency improvement compared to our high-density case. In a more careful analysis including radiative losses neglected in the Comment, the proposed strategy gives almost no conversion owing to the longer pulse durations required.

arXiv:physics/0410115•Physical Review A•Jan 20, 2005•18 citations

Reply to ‘‘Comment on ‘Zero angular momentum turns’ ’’

Martin H. Edwards

American Journal of Physics•Jan 1, 1988•0 citations

Reply to “Comment on ‘Nonadiabatic dynamics of atoms in nonuniform magnetic fields’ ”

Vyacheslav I. Yukalov

Nonadiabatic dynamics of neutral atoms in nonuniform magnetic fields, typical of quadrupole magnetic traps, has been considered in my earlier paper [V. I. Yukalov, Phys. Rev. A 56, 5004 (1997)]. The main result of this paper is that an unusual semiconfining regime of motion was found, when atoms are confined from one side of an axis, but are not confined from another side. The author of the Comment [V. E. Shapiro, Phys. Rev. A 60, 719 (1999)] expressed doubts on the validity of this result, advancing several concrete questions. In the present reply I answer all of these questions and show that they do not invalidate the possibility of realizing the semiconfining regime of motion.

Physical Review A•Jul 1, 1999•1 citation

Reply to ‘‘Comments on ‘Resolving time effect on counting statistics’ ’’ [Am. J. Phys. 5 4, 732 (1986)]

Granvil C. Kyker

American Journal of Physics•Aug 1, 1986•0 citations

Reply to "Comment on "Quantum Time Crystals from Hamiltonians with Long-Range Interactions""

Valerii K. Kozin, Oleksandr Kyriienko

In the note by Khemani et al. [arXiv:2001.11037] the authors express conceptual disagreement with our recent paper on quantum time crystals [Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 210602]. They criticise the idealized nature of the considered quantum time crystal, and make several points about properties of Hamiltonians presented in our work. In this reply we answer one-by-one all questions raised in the discussion. As for the ideological dispute, it brightly highlights a bizarre nature of time crystalline order in closed quantum systems, and we offer a different vision for the development of the field.

arXiv:2005.06321•May 13, 2020•2 citations
In the preceding Comment, the authors suggest that the molecular conversion efficiency in atom-molecule stimulated Raman adiabatic passage can be improved by lowering the initial atomic density, which in turn requires longer pulse durations to maintain adiabaticity. Apart from the fact that the mean-field approximation becomes questionable at low densities, we point out that a low-density strategy with longer pulses has several problems. It generally requires higher pulse energies and increases radiative losses. We also show that even within the approximations used in the Comment, their example leads to no efficiency improvement compared to our high-density case. In a more careful analysis including radiative losses neglected in the Comment, the proposed strategy gives almost no conversion owing to the longer pulse durations required.
Nonadiabatic dynamics of neutral atoms in nonuniform magnetic fields, typical of quadrupole magnetic traps, has been considered in my earlier paper [V. I. Yukalov, Phys. Rev. A 56, 5004 (1997)]. The main result of this paper is that an unusual semiconfining regime of motion was found, when atoms are confined from one side of an axis, but are not confined from another side. The author of the Comment [V. E. Shapiro, Phys. Rev. A 60, 719 (1999)] expressed doubts on the validity of this result, advancing several concrete questions. In the present reply I answer all of these questions and show that they do not invalidate the possibility of realizing the semiconfining regime of motion.
In the note by Khemani et al. [arXiv:2001.11037] the authors express conceptual disagreement with our recent paper on quantum time crystals [Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 210602]. They criticise the idealized nature of the considered quantum time crystal, and make several points about properties of Hamiltonians presented in our work. In this reply we answer one-by-one all questions raised in the discussion. As for the ideological dispute, it brightly highlights a bizarre nature of time crystalline order in closed quantum systems, and we offer a different vision for the development of the field.