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

Reply to "Comment on `Theory of collective resonance fluorescence in strong driving fields' "

G. Compagno, Franco Persico

Published Sep 1, 1984• 2 citations
Publisher

Abstract

In relation to Seke's Comment, some remarks are presented concerning the qualitative agreement between the results obtained by the simple decoupling technique used by the authors and previous numerical calculation.
DOI
10.1103/physreva.30.1545

Related papers

Comment on "Theory of collective resonance fluorescence in strong driving fields"

JOSIP SEKE

In a recent paper by Compagno and Persico a factorization for three-operator expectation values was used. In connection with this factorization the result obtained in that paper is discussed for the relative variance of the population-inversion operator in the pure superfluorescence, and we propose a new approximation procedure.

Physical Review A•Sep 1, 1984•2 citations

Reply to ‘Comment on “Discrepancies in the resonance-fluorescence spectrum calculated with two methods” ’

Qing Yang Xu, Xiangming Hu, Jian-wu Yin

Physical Review A•May 11, 2009•0 citations

Reply to the Comment on ‘Quantum theory of collective strong coupling of molecular vibrations with a microcavity mode’ (2015New J. Phys.17 053040)

Javier del Pino, Johannes Feist, Francisco José García-Vidal

New Journal of Physics•Feb 1, 2018•2 citations

Comment on ‘‘Generalized saddle-point method for Feshbach resonances’’

Kwong T. Chung

In the recent article by M. Bylicki [Phys. Rev. A 39, 3316 (1989)], many remarks were made concerning the saddle-point technique developed by this author. These remarks appear to have been based on a misunderstanding of both the spirit as well as the actual application of this method. In this Comment, I shall try to clarify some of these misunderstandings, and one hopes, put the problem in its proper perspective.

Physical Review A•Apr 1, 1990•19 citations

Comment on "Theory of resonance fluorescence"

Jay R. Ackerhalt

We comment on the work of Kimble and Mandel with respect to Markovian approximations and the Lamb shift. The importance of the quantum properties of the free electromagnetic field in spontaneous-emission calculations is discussed.

Physical Review A•Jan 1, 1978•9 citations

Collective atomic effects in resonance fluorescence: The "scaling factor"

Helen S. Freedhoff

In this Comment we study the resonance fluorescence of a system of two atoms separated by an arbitrary distance $R$ in an on-resonance laser field. The steady-state spectrum is calculated in the strong-field limit both for negligible and for non-negligible dipole-dipole interaction. The singlet state of the system is included throughout, even for small interatomic separations. We show that the so-called "scaling factor," or the enhancement of the integrated fluorescence by $N$ atoms (above the expected factor of $N$), predicted in the literature by many authors, does not, in fact, exist.

Physical Review A•Jul 1, 1982•20 citations
In this Comment we study the resonance fluorescence of a system of two atoms separated by an arbitrary distance RRR in an on-resonance laser field. The steady-state spectrum is calculated in the strong-field limit both for negligible and for non-negligible dipole-dipole interaction. The singlet state of the system is included throughout, even for small interatomic separations. We show that the so-called "scaling factor," or the enhancement of the integrated fluorescence by NNN atoms (above the expected factor of NNN), predicted in the literature by many authors, does not, in fact, exist.