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

春の分科会講演予稿集

24p-N-9 QUANTUM BEAT STIMULATED ECHOES II

正幸 谷川, 行男 福田, 正和 国友, 潔 石川

Published Mar 11, 1991• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Related papers

28p-SB-3 STIMULATED QUANTUM BEAT ECHOES

正幸 谷川, 行男 福田, 正和 国友 +2 more

年会講演予稿集•Mar 28, 1989•0 citations

REAL TIME IMAGE PROCESSING BY BACKWARD STIMULATED PHOTON ECHOES

M. K. Kim, Ravinder Kachru

We report the first demonstration of the ability of backward stimulated photon echo to process spatial images in real time. The image processing is accomplished by the correlation and convolution properties of the backward stimulated photon echoes. And by extension, this makes possible to perform pattern recognition, mixed binary multiplication, and other mathematical operations on spatial images.

•Jul 18, 1988•0 citations

Sublevel echoes induced by resonant light pulses: Quantum beat echoes

Yukio Fukuda, Koichi Yamada, T. Hashi

Optics Communications•Jan 1, 1983•24 citations

4p-W-2 Stimulated photon echo modulation

俊介 中西, 収 田村, 孝夫 村本 +1 more

秋の分科会講演予稿集•Sep 15, 1979•0 citations

Description of n -level systems in cooperative behavior. III. Quantum beats

I. R. Senitzky

Quantum beats in the radiation field of "three-level" atoms are analyzed by means of a previously developed boson-second-quantization (BSQ) formalism. Two types of atoms are considered: type I, in which beats are due to transitions from each of two closely spaced upper levels to a single lower level, and type II, in which beats are due to transitions between a single upper level and each of two closely spaced lower levels. This classification is motivated by the claim found in the literature that semiclassical theory and quantum theory give qualitatively different results concerning the existence of beats in the case of type-II atoms. The terminology associated with beats is made precise by distinguishing between amplitude modulation at the beat frequency of the transition frequency field $E$, and the existence of a spectral component at the beat frequency in ${E}^{2}$. With respect to the former, no qualitative difference is found in the predictions from semiclassical theory and quantum theory; with respect to the latter, results that appear paradoxical from an intuitive viewpoint are discussed. It is shown that for the case in which the atoms are all in the same coherent superposition of energy states, with all levels occupied, semiclassical and quantum-mechanical results become equivalent as the number of atoms increases. Reference is made to the disturbance caused by the measurement processes in the case of a single atom. The essential difference in spontaneous emission beats between type-I and type-II atoms [with the ground state(s) unoccupied] is explained by the fact that the phase of the beat amplitude may be determined by preparation of the initial state in type-I atoms but may not be determined in type-II atoms.

Physical Review A•Jan 1, 1977•10 citations

RADIATIVE ECHOES

А. Н. Ораевский

Soviet Physics Uspekhi•Jan 31, 1967•8 citations
Quantum beats in the radiation field of "three-level" atoms are analyzed by means of a previously developed boson-second-quantization (BSQ) formalism. Two types of atoms are considered: type I, in which beats are due to transitions from each of two closely spaced upper levels to a single lower level, and type II, in which beats are due to transitions between a single upper level and each of two closely spaced lower levels. This classification is motivated by the claim found in the literature that semiclassical theory and quantum theory give qualitatively different results concerning the existence of beats in the case of type-II atoms. The terminology associated with beats is made precise by distinguishing between amplitude modulation at the beat frequency of the transition frequency field EEE, and the existence of a spectral component at the beat frequency in E2{E}^{2}E2. With respect to the former, no qualitative difference is found in the predictions from semiclassical theory and quantum theory; with respect to the latter, results that appear paradoxical from an intuitive viewpoint are discussed. It is shown that for the case in which the atoms are all in the same coherent superposition of energy states, with all levels occupied, semiclassical and quantum-mechanical results become equivalent as the number of atoms increases. Reference is made to the disturbance caused by the measurement processes in the case of a single atom. The essential difference in spontaneous emission beats between type-I and type-II atoms [with the ground state(s) unoccupied] is explained by the fact that the phase of the beat amplitude may be determined by preparation of the initial state in type-I atoms but may not be determined in type-II atoms.