Atomic electron transition appears leaping from one energy level to another. The issue is, atomic particles are too small and too fast for our detectors to recognize their action and identity. I believe it is due to the sensors can only detect and register the repeated trajectory. Particle would have to revolving on the same orbit long enough. Otherwise, it would not trigger the reaction of the detectors. Transitional trajectory is short, and it does not repeat. It can not be detected, hence, jump.
Atomic electron transition appears leaping from one energy level to another. The issue is, atomic particles are too small and too fast for our detectors to recognize their action and identity. I believe it is due to the sensors can only detect and register the repeated trajectory. Particle would have to revolving on the same orbit long enough. Otherwise, it would not trigger the reaction of the detectors. Transitional trajectory is short, and it does not repeat. It can not be detected, hence, jump.
A single-atom optical clock proposed over ten years ago utilizes an amplification scheme which only recently was recognized as a novel problem in quantum statistics. The atom, a three-state system, has two coupled transitions that are driven continuously by two external fields, one being an allowed transition (1\ensuremath{\leftrightarrows}3) and the other a forbidden transition (2\ensuremath{\leftrightarrows}3) where \ensuremath{\Vert}3〉 is the lowest state. It has been argued that the weak transition, which is difficult to detect, could be monitored by the presence or absence of spontaneous emission of the strong transition. Thus, when the atom is shelved in the metastable state \ensuremath{\Vert}2〉, the strong transition is extinguished, but when the atom executes a single quantum jump (2\ensuremath{\rightarrow}3), it triggers a succession of perhaps a million quantum jumps (macroscopic quantum jumps) in the strong transition, an amplification that can be detected easily. This intuitive argument for alternating bright and dark intervals assumes, however, that the atom is always in an eigenstate. Should the atom be in a superposition state, because of coherent excitation, one could imagine that the weak transition would merely reduce the intensity of the strong transition slightly. This issue is resolved, in favor of the first intuitive argument, by calculating the photon-counting statistics, the probability W(n,T) of observing precisely n photon-counting events in a collection T in a quantum-mechanically consistent way. The results cannot be described by classical statistics. A compact analytic form is obtained for W(n,T) by considering the entire hierarchy of correlation functions where the emission interval peaks sharply about a particular n with a Poisson distribution and can be comparable in length to the darkness interval (n=0) while the other values of n display vanishingly small probabilities.
The observation of quantum jumps in a Dehmelt electron-shelving scheme was made two years ago.1 Prior to these experiments considerable theoretical discussion was addressed to the question of whether the turn-on and turn-off of fluorescence, as described by Cook and Kimble,2 would actually occur. This discussion focused on photon statistics. It was taken to be self-evident that a prolonged cessation of fluorescence from the strong transition implied that the atom had jumped and now resided in the shelved state. This is surely correct but with some qualification. What observational information leads to the conclusion that the electron is shelved? It is the appearance of an abnormally long time interval without recording a single photoelectron at the detector monitoring the strong fluorescence. But how long is abnormally long? What is the time resolution of our quantum jump? I calculate the reduced atomic state following a photoelectric detection event, conditioned on the requirement that no subsequent photoelectron has been observed. For sufficiently long times without recording a subsequent photoelectron the atomic state collapses to the shelved state with high (but not unit) probability. The waiting time required for a confident judgment that the atom is in the shelved state is calculated as a function of transition rates and detector efficiency.
Quantum physics was invented to account for two fundamental features of measurement results their discreetness and randomness. Emblematic of these features is the Bohr idea of quantum jumps between two discrete energy levels of an atom. Experimentally, quantum jumps were first observed in an atomic ion driven by a weak deterministic force while under strong continuous energy measurement. The times at which the discontinuous jump transitions occur are reputed to be fundamentally unpredictable. Can there be, despite the indeterminism of quantum physics, a possibility to know if a quantum jump is about to occur or not? Here, we answer this question affirmatively by experimentally demonstrating that the jump from the ground to an excited state of a superconducting artificial three-level atom can be tracked as it follows a predictable flight, by monitoring the population of an auxiliary energy level coupled to the ground state. The experimental results demonstrate that the jump evolution when completed is continuous, coherent, and deterministic. Furthermore, exploiting these features and using real-time monitoring and feedback, we catch and reverse a quantum jump mid-flight, thus deterministically preventing its completion. Our results, which agree with theoretical predictions essentially without adjustable parameters, support the modern quantum trajectory theory and provide new ground for the exploration of real-time intervention techniques in the control of quantum systems, such as early detection of error syndromes.
Introduction The quantum theory of atoms and molecules had its origin in the famous 1913 paper of Bohr [186] in which he suggested that the interaction of radiation and atoms occurred with the transition of an atom from one stationary internal state to another, accompanied by the emission or absorption of radiation of a frequency determined by the energy difference between these states. These transitions came to be known as ‘quantum jumps’. Since all experiments until the late 1970s used to be carried out with large ensembles of atoms and molecules, these jumps were masked and could not be directly observed; they were only inferred from spectroscopic data. In fact, with the advent of quantum mechanics they eventually came to be regarded as artefacts of Bohr's simple-minded semi-classical model. But with the availability of coherent light sources and single ions prepared in ion traps [187], [188], and optically cooled [189], [190], the issue has been reopened with the experimental demonstration of quantum jumps in single ions [191], [192], [193]. These experiments have also opened up the contentious issue of wave function collapse or reduction on measurement, as they can be regarded as making collapse visible on the oscilloscope screen [191]. Evidence of the discrete nature of quantum transitions in a single quantum system had been accumulating from the observation of photon anti-bunching in single-atom resonance fluorescence [194], the tunneling of single electrons in metal–oxide-–semiconductor junctions [195] and spin-flips of individual electrons in a Penning trap [196].
Generally, one thinks of a “quantum jump” as the process in which an electron “jumps” between a pair of quantum states, even as the process is treated within perturbation theory. This jump of an electron has remained a key point of conservative (i.e., traditional) quantum mechanics. But, the question of the time dependence of such a transition, e.g. the time for an atom to be ionized by radiation, is somewhat different than this view. A detailed approach in which an incoming wave first polarizes the quantum states and then completes the transition has allowed for a detailed discussion of the smooth transition of the electron from one state to the next. Here, we will discuss the history of the process, and illustrate the approach with the question of “how long does it take for an electron to emit a phonon?” The entire process arises from the proper application of wave mechanics and obviates the need to even consider a discussion of quantum jumps.
This paper re-examines the mechanism of electron motion inside atoms and the causes of photon radiation and photon absorption, abandoning the inherent cognition of fixed electron orbits and quantum transitions in traditional atomic physics. It clarifies that electrons have no physical fixed orbits; orbits are only imaginary concepts constructed for convenience of description, not objective physical realities. With mass, electrons possess inertia and kinetic energy. Under the three-force equilibrium of Coulomb force, electromagnetic force and inertial effect, electrons naturally move in elliptical trajectories rather than regular circles. When an electron moves along an elliptical trajectory, it naturally passes through low-energy regions near the atomic nucleus and high-energy regions far from the nucleus. This change in position arises entirely from its own inertia, involving only the conversion between kinetic energy and potential energy. The electron neither gains nor loses total energy, so it emits no photons and undergoes no energy-level change. An electron loses total energy when emitting a photon outward, and transitions smoothly and continuously to a lower overall motion range under mechanical equilibrium and inertia. Meanwhile, an electron can also absorb external photons and gain energy; its total energy increases, and it similarly expands smoothly to a higher motion range. Photon energy is indivisible and can only be emitted or absorbed as a complete unit. This is the fundamental reason why atoms show discrete emission and absorption spectra. Electron motion is entirely smooth and continuous; instantaneous quantum transitions assumed in traditional physics do not exist. Based on classical mechanics and energy conservation, this paper unifies the laws of macroscopic celestial bodies and microscopic particles, and reconstructs an atomic motion model closer to the essential nature of physics.