4.6 Article

Exchange of optical vortices in symmetry-broken quantum systems

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW A
卷 103, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.103.063705

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the interaction of laser pulses carrying orbital angular momentum with a symmetry-broken ladder-type quantum coupling scheme involving three internal states. The results demonstrate efficient transfer of optical vortices to the generated signal beam and the transition between EIT and ATS conversion schemes by tuning the control field. The ATS regime is shown to be considerably more favorable than the EIT for achieving maximum energy conversion efficiency between light beams carrying the OAM.
We investigate the interaction of laser pulses carrying orbital angular momentum (OAM) with a symmetry-broken ladder-type quantum coupling scheme involving three internal states. A weak probe beam acts on the lower leg of the ladder scheme, while a control beam of higher intensity drives the upper leg. In contrast to natural atoms, such a model with broken symmetry allows generating a sum-frequency signal beam between the most upper and lower quantum states, forming a cyclic closed-loop configuration of light-matter interaction. We propose situations for the efficient transfer of optical vortices to the generated signal beam via a nonlinear three-wave mixing process. It is demonstrated that the exchange process can occur both in the electromagnetically induced transparency (EIT) and the Autler-Townes splitting (ATS) regimes. The transition between the EIT and ATS conversion schemes can smoothly happen by simply tuning the knob of the control field. It is shown that the ATS regime is considerably more favorable than the EIT to achieve maximum energy conversion efficiency between light beams carrying the OAM. The results may provide an applications-based perspective to the ongoing research centered on vortex conversion-based comparisons between the ATS and EIT.

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