4.8 Article

Direct measurement of polariton-polariton interaction strength

期刊

NATURE PHYSICS
卷 13, 期 9, 页码 870-875

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/NPHYS4148

关键词

-

资金

  1. Center for Excitonics, an Energy Frontier Research Center - US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences [DE-SC0001088]
  2. National Science Foundation [PHY-1205762, DMR-1104383]
  3. Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation through the EPiQS initiative Grant [GBMF4420]
  4. National Science Foundation MRSEC Grant [DMR-1420541]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Exciton-polaritons in a microcavity are composite two-dimensional bosonic quasiparticles, arising from the strong coupling between confined light modes in a resonant planar optical cavity and excitonic transitions. Quantum phenomena such as Bose-Einstein condensation, superfluidity, quantized vortices, and macroscopic quantum states have been realized at temperatures from tens of kelvin up to room temperatures. Crucially, many of these effects of exciton-polaritons depend on the polariton-polariton interaction strength. Despite the importance of this parameter, it has been difficult to make an accurate experimental measurement, mostly because of the difficulty in determining the absolute densities of polaritons and bare excitons. Here we report a direct measurement of the polariton-polariton interaction strength in a very high-Q microcavity structure. By allowing polaritons to propagate over 20 mu m to the centre of a laser-generated annular trap, we are able to separate the polariton-polariton interactions from polariton-exciton interactions. The interaction strength is deduced from the energy renormalization of the polariton dispersion as the polariton density is increased, using the polariton condensation as a benchmark for the density. We find that the interaction strength is about two orders of magnitude larger than previous theoretical estimates, putting polaritons in the strongly interacting regime.

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

4.8
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