4.6 Article

Simulating cosmological supercooling with a cold atom system. II. Thermal damping and parametric instability

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW A
卷 104, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.104.053309

关键词

-

资金

  1. U.K. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/R021074/1]
  2. Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC) [ST/T000708/1]
  3. U.K. Quantum Technologies for Fundamental Physics program [ST/T00584X/1]
  4. STFC
  5. Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence in Future Low-Energy Electronics Technologies [CE170100039]
  6. Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Engineered Quantum Systems [CE170100009]
  7. EPSRC [EP/R021074/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  8. STFC [ST/T006900/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study analyzes the supercooled state in an analog of an early universe phase transition using a one-dimensional, two-component Bose gas with time-dependent interactions. It shows that the system behaves similarly to a thermal, relativistic Bose gas undergoing a first-order phase transition. The study proposes a method to prepare the system in a metastable phase and reveals that parametric resonances can be suppressed by thermal damping.
We perform an analysis of the supercooled state in an analog of an early universe phase transition based on a one-dimensional, two-component Bose gas with time-dependent interactions. We demonstrate that the system behaves in the same way as a thermal, relativistic Bose gas undergoing a first-order phase transition. We propose a way to prepare the state of the system in the metastable phase as an analog to supercooling in the early universe. We show that parametric resonances in the system can be suppressed by thermal damping if the damping rate is similar to some of the higher rates previously used for modeling nonequilibrium experiments. However, the theoretically predicted damping rate for equilibrium systems within our model is too weak to suppress the resonances.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据