1:
2: \documentclass[12pt,a4paper]{iopart}
3: \usepackage{amssymb,graphicx,cite}
4: \eqnobysec
5: \begin{document}
6:
7:
8: %LATEX FILE OF MANUSCRIPT
9: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
10:
11:
12:
13: %LATEX file of the manuscript
14:
15: %\documentclass[preprint,eqsecnum,aps,epsf]{revtex4} % PH. REV.
16: %\documentclass[eqsecnum,aps,twocolumn,epsf,showpacs]{revtex4} % PH. REV.
17: %\usepackage{graphicx}
18: %\documentclass[eqsecnum,aps,twocolumn]{revtex4} % PH. REV.
19:
20: %\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{.89}
21:
22:
23: %\documentstyle[aps,epsf]{revtex}
24: %\documentstyle[eqsecnum,aps,epsf]{revtex}
25: %%% <<< epsf commands in the next two lines >>>
26: %\newcommand{\postscript}[2] {\setlength{\epsfxsize}{#2\hsize}
27: %\centerline{\epsfbox{#1}}}
28:
29:
30:
31: %\documentstyle[eqsecnum,aps,epsf]{revtex} % PH. REV. FINAL FORMAT STYLE
32: %\documentstyle[aps,epsf]{revtex} % PH. REV. FINAL FORMAT STYLE
33: %%% <<< epsf commands in the next two lines >>>
34: %\newcommand{\postscript}[2] {\setlength{\epsfxsize}{#2\hsize}
35: %\centerline{\epsfbox{#1}}}
36:
37: %\documentstyle[preprint,aps]{revtex}
38: %\documentstyle[eqsecnum,aps]{revtex}
39: %\documentstyle[aps]{revtex}
40: %\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{.945}
41:
42: %\begin{document}
43:
44: %\twocolumn[\hsize\textwidth\columnwidth\hsize\csname@twocolumnfalse\endcsname
45:
46: %\title[Jet formation in a collapsing Bose-Einstein condensate]{Mean-field
47: %model of jet formation in a collapsing Bose-Einstein condensate}
48:
49: \title[Fermionic dark solitons in a boson-fermion
50: mixture]{Free expansion of
51: fermionic dark solitons in a boson-fermion
52: mixture}
53:
54: \author{Sadhan K Adhikari}
55: %\affiliation
56: \address
57: {Instituto de F\'{\i}sica Te\'orica, Universidade Estadual
58: Paulista, 01.405-900 S\~ao Paulo, S\~ao Paulo, Brazil\\}
59:
60:
61: \date{\today}
62:
63: %\maketitle
64:
65: \begin{abstract}
66:
67: We use a time-dependent dynamical mean-field-hydrodynamic model to study
68: the formation of fermionic dark
69: solitons in a trapped degenerate fermi gas mixed with a Bose-Einstein
70: condensate in a harmonic as well as a periodic
71: optical-lattice potential. The dark soliton with a ``notch" in the
72: probability density with a zero at the minimum is simulated numerically as
73: a nonlinear continuation of the first vibrational excitation of the linear
74: mean-field-hydrodynamic equations, as suggested recently for pure bosons.
75: We study the free expansion of these
76: dark solitons as well as the consequent increase in the size of
77: their central notch
78: and discuss the possibility of experimental observation
79: of the notch after free expansion.
80:
81:
82:
83:
84:
85:
86: \pacs{03.75.Lm, 03.75.Ss}
87: %PACS numbers: 03.75.Lm, 03.75.Ss
88: \end{abstract}
89:
90: \maketitle
91:
92:
93:
94: \section{Introduction}
95:
96: Due to a strong repulsive Pauli-blocking interaction at low
97: energies among spin-polarized fermions,
98: there cannot be an evaporative
99: cooling leading to a quantum degenerate fermi gas (DFG)\cite{exp1}.
100: Trapped DFG has
101: been achieved only by sympathetic cooling in the presence of a
102: second
103: boson or fermion
104: component.
105: Recently, there have been successful observation
106: \cite{exp1,exp2,exp3,exp4} and associated experimental
107: \cite{exp5,exp5x,exp6} and theoretical \cite{yyy,yyy1,zzz,capu,capu1,ska}
108: studies of
109: degenerate
110: boson-fermion
111: mixtures by different experimental groups
112: \cite{exp1,exp2,exp3,exp4} in
113: the following systems: $^{6,7}$Li \cite{exp3}, $^{23}$Na-$^6$Li
114: \cite{exp4} and
115: $^{87}$Rb-$^{40}$K \cite{exp5,exp5x}.
116: Also, there have been
117: studies of a degenerate mixture of two components of fermionic
118: $^{40}$K \cite{exp1} and
119: $^6$Li \cite{exp2} atoms. The
120: collapse of the DFG in a boson-fermion mixture
121: $^{87}$Rb-$^{40}$K
122: has been
123: observed and studied by Modugno {\it et al.} \cite{exp5,zzz,ska}.
124: In these
125: studies of a mixed Bose-Einstein
126: condensate (BEC)
127: and a DFG the initial
128: states
129: were the stationary ground states of the systems.
130:
131:
132:
133:
134: In this paper
135: we study the possibility of the formation of fermionic
136: dark solitons in a mixture of a DFG with a BEC
137: using a coupled time-dependent mean-field-hydrodynamic
138: model where the bosonic component is treated by the mean-field
139: Gross-Pitaevskii (GP)
140: equation \cite{11} and the fermionic component is treated by a
141: hydrodynamic
142: model \cite{capu,capu1}. This time-dependent mean-field-hydrodynamic model
143: was
144: suggested
145: recently by the present author \cite{ska} to study the collapse dynamics
146: of a DFG and
147: is a
148: time-dependent extension of a time-independent model suggested for the
149: stationary states by Capuzzi {\it et al.} \cite{capu,capu1} based
150: essentially
151: on a Thomas-Fermi-Weizs\"acker approximation.
152:
153:
154:
155:
156:
157:
158:
159:
160: Zakharov and Shabat \cite{0b}
161: have shown that
162: the
163: dimensionless nonlinear Schr\"odinger
164: (NLS) equation in the repulsive
165: or
166: self-defocusing case \cite{1}
167: \begin{equation}\label{nls}
168: i u_t+u_{xx}- |u|^2u=0.
169: \end{equation}
170: sustains the following
171: dark and grey solitons \cite{5}:
172: \begin{eqnarray}\label{DS}
173: u(x,t)=r(x-ct) \exp[-i\{\phi(x-ct)-\mu t \}],
174: \end{eqnarray}
175: with
176: \begin{eqnarray}r^2(x-ct)& = & \eta -2\kappa^2
177: \mbox{sech}^2[\kappa(x-ct)], \\
178: \phi(x-ct)&=&\tan^{-1}[-2 \kappa/c \hskip 0.05cm \tanh\{\kappa (x-ct)\}],
179: \\
180: \kappa &=& \sqrt{(2\eta - c^2)}/2,
181: \end{eqnarray}
182: where $c$ is the velocity of the soliton, $\mu$ the parametric energy,
183: and $\eta$ related to intensity. Soliton (\ref{DS})
184: having a ``notch" over a
185: background density is grey in general. It is dark if density
186: $|u|^2=0$ at the minimum.
187: The soliton can move freely with
188: velocity $c$ and at zero velocity the soliton becomes a dark soliton:
189: $|u(x,t)|= \sqrt {\eta} \tanh [x\sqrt{\eta/2}]$.
190:
191: The
192: similarity of the NLS equation (\ref{nls})
193: to the GP equation (\ref{a}) (below)
194: imply the possibility of a dark
195: soliton in a trapped
196: BEC \cite{bur}. It has been suggested that the dark soliton of a
197: trapped BEC
198: could be a stationary eigenstate of the GP equation \cite{bur,5b} as in
199: the
200: case of the trap-less NLS equation. The usual search for a dark soliton in
201: the GP
202: equation proceeds through time evolution starting
203: with the ansatz \cite{tanh,tanh1}
204: $u_{\small \mbox{DS}}= \tanh
205: (x) u_{\small \mbox{G}}(x)$, where $ u_{\small \mbox{G}}$ is the
206: ground
207: state
208: of the GP equation and the $\tanh (x)$ factor is introduced in analogy
209: with the dark soliton in the NLS equation. However, the function
210: $u_{\small \mbox{DS}}$ is not an eigenfunction of the GP equation and
211: hence this procedure leads to numerical instability on time evolution
212: \cite{tanh,tanh1}.
213: It has been demonstrated \cite{dsa} that
214: the time evolution of the GP equation
215: with the initial state $u_{\small \mbox{DS}}$
216: leads to a dark soliton which is the lowest vibrational excitation of the
217: system. Exploring this, a stable numerical procedure has been suggested
218: \cite{dsa}
219: for the simulation of dark soliton which we use in this investigation.
220:
221:
222:
223:
224:
225: We study
226: the formation of fermionic dark solitons in a DFG mixed
227: with a BEC in a harmonic as well as a periodic optical-lattice trap.
228: There have been experimental \cite{exdks} and theoretical \cite{thdks}
229: studies of the formation of dark solitons in a
230: harmonically
231: trapped BEC. In view of this, here we study for the first time
232: the possibility of the
233: formation of a fermionic dark soliton in a DFG using a mean-field model
234: for a mixture of DFG and BEC.
235:
236:
237: Collective excitations in the form of solitons and vortices in trapped
238: fermions have also been investigated recently by Damski et al. \cite{x}
239: and Karpiuk et al. \cite{y}. However, they considered isolated ultra-cold
240: fermions and not a realistic mixture of trapped DFG and BEC as in the
241: experiments and as discussed in this paper. Also they did not demonstrate
242: the existence of stable dark solitons with a zero at the center of the
243: notch as in the present study. They identified grey soliton-like structure
244: with a shallow dip in the isolated fermionic density distribution quite
245: distinct from the stable fermionic dark solitons in a DFG-BEC mixture as
246: noted in this investigation.
247:
248:
249: Though the present dark solitons are numerically stable in the
250: mean-field formulation, they could be unstable physically
251: due to quantum
252: fluctuations
253: \cite{z}. The effect of quantum fluctuations is lost in the mean-free
254: model and can only be studied in a field-theoretic approach.
255: Moreover being an excited state they are thermodynamically unstable.
256: There have been suggestions about how to excite a dark soliton by phase
257: imprinting
258: method \cite{x,y}.
259: The dark soliton is the lowest vibrational excitation of the
260: BEC \cite{dsa} and there have also been investigations about how to attain
261: such
262: excited
263: states \cite{yu}.
264: Nevertheless, despite different
265: suggestions about how to excite a dark soliton \cite{x,y,yu}, experiments
266: to date have not yet generated a stationary
267: dark soliton.
268: Experimentally, so far the dark solitons have been unstable
269: \cite{bur,5b}.
270: Although we cannot make definite suggestion(s) for the formation of
271: stable fermionic dark solitons, considering that they are stationary
272: excitations
273: of the mean-field equation their creation seems possible at least as a
274: non-stationary dark soliton which may turn grey and oscillate before
275: decaying due to quantum fluctuations and thermodynamic effects.
276:
277:
278:
279: Lately, the periodic optical-lattice potential has played an essential
280: role in many theoretical and experimental studies of Bose-Einstein
281: condensation, e. g., in the study of Josephson oscillation \cite{j} and
282: its disruption \cite{jd},
283: interference
284: of matter-wave \cite{i}, BEC dynamics on periodic trap \cite{d}, etc. The
285: periodic optical-lattice confinement generated experimentally by a
286: standing-wave laser
287: field
288: creates a BEC in an entirely different
289: shape and trapping condition form a conventional harmonic oscillator
290: trapping. In view of this we study the possibility of the formation of a
291: fermionic dark soliton in an optical-lattice potential. The formation of a
292: bosonic dark soliton in an optical-lattice potential has already been
293: investigated \cite{tanh1}.
294:
295:
296: The central notch is the earmark of a dark soliton. Experimentally, a
297: dark soliton is identified after removing the traps so that a free
298: expansion of the DFG allows the notch to widen and be photographed
299: clearly. In view of this we study a free expansion of dark solitons in a
300: DFG-BEC mixture and study the possibility of detection of a fermionic dark
301: soliton in the laboratory.
302:
303:
304:
305:
306:
307:
308:
309:
310:
311: In section 2 we present an account of the time-dependent mean-field model
312: consisting of a set of coupled partial differential equations
313: involving a BEC and a DFG.
314: In the case
315: of a cigar-shaped system with stronger radial trapping,
316: the above model is reduced to an effective
317: one-dimensional form appropriate for the study of dark solitons. In
318: section 3 we present our results for stationary fermionic dark
319: solitons as well as a
320: study of their free expansion in a boson-fermion mixture.
321: Finally,
322: a summary of our findings is given in section 4.
323:
324: \section{Nonlinear mean-field-hydrodynamic model}
325:
326:
327:
328: The time-dependent BEC wave
329: function $\Psi({\bf r},t)$ at position ${\bf r}$ and time $t $
330: may
331: be described by the following mean-field nonlinear GP equation
332: \cite{11}
333: \begin{eqnarray}\label{a} \biggr[- i\hbar\frac{\partial
334: }{\partial t}
335: -\frac{\hbar^2\nabla_{\bf r}^2 }{2m_{{B}}}
336: + V_{{B}}({\bf r})
337: + g_{{BB}} n_B
338: \biggr]\Psi_{{B}}({\bf r},t)=0,
339: \end{eqnarray}
340: with normalization $ \int d{\bf r} |\Psi_B({\bf r},t)|^2 = N_B. $
341: Here $m_{{B}}$
342: is
343: the mass and $N_{{B}}$ the number of bosonic atoms in the
344: condensate, $n_B\equiv |\Psi_{{B}}({\bf r},t)|^2$ is the boson
345: probability density,
346: $g_{{BB}}=4\pi \hbar^2 a_{{BB}}/m_{{B}} $ the strength of
347: inter-atomic interaction, with
348: $a_{{BB}}$ the boson-boson scattering length.
349: The trap potential with axial symmetry may be written as $
350: V_{{B}}({\bf
351: r}) =\frac{1}{2}m_B \omega ^2 (\rho^2+\nu^2 z^2)$ where
352: $\omega$ and $\nu \omega$ are the angular frequencies in the radial
353: ($\rho$) and axial ($z$) directions with $\nu$ the anisotropy parameter.
354: The probability density $n_F$ of an isolated DFG in the
355: Thomas-Fermi
356: approximation
357: is given by
358: \cite{zzz}
359: \begin{eqnarray}\label{b}
360: n_F= \frac{[\mbox{max}(0,\{\epsilon_F-V_F({\bf r})\})]^{3/2}}{A^{3/2}},
361: \end{eqnarray}
362: where
363: $A=\hbar^2 (6
364: \pi^2
365: )^{2/3}/ (2m_F)$, $\epsilon_F$ is the Fermi energy, $m_F$ is the
366: fermionic mass, and the function $\mbox{max}$ denotes the larger of the
367: arguments. The confining trap potential
368: $V_F({\bf
369: r})$ has axial symmetry. The number of fermionic atoms $N_F$
370: is given by the normalization $\int d{\bf r} n_F=N_F$.
371:
372: We developed a set of practical time-dependent mean-field-hydrodynamic
373: equations for the interacting boson-fermion mixture starting from the
374: following Lagrangian density \cite{ska} \begin{eqnarray}\label{yy} {\cal
375: L}&=& \frac{i}{2}\hbar \left[ \Psi_B\frac{\partial \Psi_B^*}{\partial t} -
376: \Psi_B^* \frac{\partial \Psi_B}{\partial t} \right] +
377: \frac{i}{2}\hbar \left[ \sqrt{n_F}\frac{\partial {\sqrt n_F} ^*}{\partial
378: t} - {\sqrt n_F}^* \frac{\partial \sqrt{n_F}}{\partial t} \right]
379: \nonumber \\ &+& \left(\frac{\hbar^2|\nabla_{\bf r} \Psi_B|^2
380: }{2m_B}+V_B|\Psi_B|^2+\frac{1}{2}g_{BB} |\Psi_B|^4\right)\nonumber \\ &+&
381: \left(\frac{\hbar^2 |\nabla_{\bf r} \sqrt{n_F}|^2 }{6m_F}+
382: V_F|n_F|+\frac{3}{5} A |n_F|^{5/3}\right)\nonumber \\ &+& g_{BF} n_F
383: |\Psi_B|^2, \end{eqnarray} where $g_{BF}=2\pi \hbar^2 a_{BF}/m_R$ with the
384: boson-fermion reduced mass $m_R=m_Bm_F/(m_B+m_F),$ where $ a_{BF}$ is the
385: boson-fermion scattering length.
386:
387:
388:
389: It
390: may not be entirely proper to define an average fermionic
391: wave function $\Psi_F=\sqrt n_F$ in a DFG
392: like in a BEC. The correct fermionic wave function is to be
393: calculated from a
394: Slater determinant Schr\"odinger equation for degenerate fermions
395: \cite{yyy1}.
396: However, the probability
397: density $n_F$ of a DFG calculated in this fashion should lead to
398: reasonable results
399: \cite{yyy1} and has led to proper probability distribution
400: for a DFG
401: \cite{capu1,ska} as well as results for collapse of a
402: DFG \cite{zzz,capu1,ska} in agreement with experiment. This approach has
403: also been used successfully to predict a fermionic bright soliton in a
404: boson-fermion mixture \cite{fbs}.
405:
406: The terms in the first round bracket on the right-hand side of
407: (\ref{yy}) are the standard
408: Gross-Pitaevskii terms for the bosons and are related to a
409: Schr\"odinger-like equation \cite{11}. However,
410: terms in the second round bracket, although bear
411: a resemblance with the first,
412: are derived from the hydrodynamic equation of motion of the fermions
413: including a Weisz\"acker kinetic energy
414: and are not related to a Schr\"odinger-like equation \cite{capu}. Hence,
415: the second kinetic energy term
416: has a different mass factor $6m_F$ and not the
417: conventional Schr\"odinger mass factor $2m_B$ as in the first term.
418: Finally, the
419: last term in this equation
420: corresponds to an interaction between bosons
421: and fermions. The interaction between bosons and between
422: bosons and fermions are described by contact potentials parametrized by
423: coupling constants $g_{BB}$ and $g_{BF}$ defined above.
424: The interaction between fermions in
425: spin polarized state is highly suppressed due
426: to Pauli blocking
427: and has been neglected in (\ref{yy}) and will be
428: neglected throughout this paper.
429:
430:
431:
432:
433:
434: Recently, Jezek {\it et al.} \cite{jz} used the Thomas-Fermi-Weizs\"acker
435: kinetic energy term $T_F$ of fermions in their formulation which, in our
436: notation, will correspond to a fermionic kinetic energy of
437: $\hbar^2|\nabla_{\bf r}\sqrt{n_F}|^2/(9m_F) $ in (\ref{yy}) in place
438: of the present term $\hbar^2|\nabla_{\bf r}\sqrt{n_F}|^2/(6m_F) $. This
439: kinetic energy term contributes little to this problem compared to the
440: dominating $3A|n_F|^{5/3}/5$ term in (\ref{yy}) and is usually
441: neglected in the Thomas-Fermi approximation. However, its inclusion leads
442: to a probability density which is a smooth and analytic function of the
443: space variable \cite{jz}. For a
444: discussion of these two fermionic kinetic energy terms we refer the reader
445: to \cite{capu,jz,pi}.
446:
447:
448:
449: With the Lagrangian density (\ref{yy}), the Euler-Lagrange equations of
450: motion become \cite{ska}: \begin{eqnarray}\label{e} \biggr[ &-&
451: i\hbar\frac{\partial }{\partial t} -\frac{\hbar^2\nabla_{\bf
452: r}^2}{2m_{{B}}} + V_{{B}}({\bf r}) + g_{{BB}}n_B + g_{{BF}}
453: |n_F|
454: \biggr]\Psi_{{B}}({\bf r},t)=0,
455: \end{eqnarray}
456: \begin{eqnarray}\label{f} \biggr[& -& i\hbar\frac{\partial
457: }{\partial t}
458: -\frac{\hbar^2\nabla_{\bf r}^2}{6m_{{F}}}
459: + V_{{F}}({\bf r})
460: + A |n_F|^{2/3}
461: + g_{{BF}} n_B
462: \biggr]\sqrt{n_{{F}}({\bf r},t)}=0.
463: \end{eqnarray}
464:
465:
466: When the nonlinearity in (\ref{f})
467: is very large,
468: the kinetic energy term in this equation can be neglected and the
469: time-independent stationary form of this equation becomes
470: \begin{equation}\label{mod}
471: n_F= \frac{[\mbox{max}(0,\{\epsilon_F-V_F({\bf
472: r})-g_{BF}n_B\})]^{3/2}}{A^{3/2}},
473: \end{equation}
474: which is the generalization of (\ref{b}) in the presence of
475: boson-fermion coupling. Equation (\ref{mod}) has been used by
476: Modugno
477: {\it et al.} \cite{zzz} for an analysis of a BEC coupled to a DFG. We
478: shall see in the following that in actual experimental
479: condition the nonlinearity in (\ref{f}) is quite large and
480: (\ref{mod}) is a good approximation. We note that the
481: Lagrangian density of the formulation of Jezek {\it et al.}
482: \cite{jz} reduces to the present Lagrangian density in this
483: approximation upon the neglect of the fermionic kinetic energy term.
484:
485:
486:
487:
488: The solution of the coupled three-dimensional equations above
489: for studying dark solitons in a
490: boson-fermion mixture is
491: a formidable task. Hence,
492: we shall reduce (\ref{e}) and (\ref{f}) to the minimal
493: one-dimensional form suitable
494: for the study of dark solitons in a cigar-shaped geometry for $\nu <<1$.
495: We perform this
496: reduction below where we
497: take $V_B({\bf r})=V_F({\bf r})= \frac{1}{2}m_B\omega^2(
498: \rho^2+\nu^2 z^2)+V_0\sin^2(2\pi z/ \lambda )$ which corresponds to a
499: suppression of $\omega$ and
500: $\nu \omega$ for fermions
501: by a factor
502: $\sqrt{m_B/m_F}$ as in the study by
503: Modugno {\it et al.} \cite{zzz} and Jezek {\it et al.} \cite{jz}.
504: In the confining potential we also include the following optical-lattice
505: potential: $V_0\sin^2(2\pi z/ \lambda )$ \cite{catas}. Here $V_0$ is the
506: strength of
507: the optical-lattice potential and $\lambda $ is the wave length of the
508: laser.
509:
510:
511:
512: For $\nu << 1$, (\ref{e})
513: and (\ref{f}) can be reduced to an effective
514: one-dimensional form by considering solutions of the type
515: $\Psi_B({\bf r},t)= \phi_B(z,t)\psi_B^{(0)}( \rho)$ and
516: $\sqrt{n_F({\bf r},t)}= \phi_F(z,t)\psi_F^{(0)}( \rho), $
517: where
518: \begin{eqnarray}
519: |\psi_i^{(0)}(\rho)|^2&\equiv&
520: {\frac{M_i\omega}{\pi\hbar}}\exp\left(-\frac{M_i
521: \omega
522: \rho^2}{\hbar}\right), \quad i=B,F,
523: \end{eqnarray}
524: corresponds to the respective circularly symmetric
525: ground state wave function in the absence of nonlinear interactions and
526: satisfies
527: \begin{eqnarray}
528: -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m_B}\nabla_\rho ^2\psi_B^{(0)}
529: +
530: \frac{1}{2}m_B\omega^2\rho^2
531: \psi_B^{(0)}&=&\hbar\omega
532: \psi_B^{(0)},\\
533: -\frac{\hbar^2}{6m_F}\nabla_\rho^2\psi_F^{(0)}+
534: \frac{1}{2}m_B\omega^2\rho
535: ^2\psi_F^{(0)}&=&\sqrt{\frac{m_B}{3m_F}}\hbar\omega
536: \psi_F^{(0)},\nonumber \\
537: \end{eqnarray}
538: with normalization
539: $2\pi \int_{0}^\infty |\psi_i^{(0)}(\rho)|^2 \rho d\rho=1.$
540: Now the dynamics is carried by $ \phi_i(z,t)$ and the radial dependence is
541: frozen in the ground state $\psi_i^{(0)}(\rho)$. The separation of
542: the variables is suggested by the structure of (\ref{e}) and
543: (\ref{f}).
544:
545:
546: Averaging over the radial mode $\psi_i^{(0)}(\rho)$,
547: i.e., multiplying
548: (\ref{e}) and (\ref{f})
549: by $\psi_i^{(0)*}(\rho)$
550: and integrating over $\rho$, we obtain the following one-dimensional
551: dynamical equations \cite{abdul}:
552: \begin{eqnarray}\label{i} \biggr[ &-& i\hbar\frac{\partial
553: }{\partial t}
554: -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m_{{B}}}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial z^2}
555: + \frac{1}{2}m_B\nu^2 \omega^2 z^2
556: +V_0\sin^2\left( \frac{2\pi
557: z}{\lambda} \right) \nonumber \\ &+&F_{BB}|
558: \phi_B|^2
559: + F_{BF}| \phi_F|^2
560: \biggr] \phi_{{B}}(z,t)=0,
561: \end{eqnarray}
562: \begin{eqnarray}\label{j}
563: \biggr[& -& i\hbar\frac{\partial
564: }{\partial t}
565: -\frac{\hbar^2}{6m_F}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial z^2}
566: + \frac{1}{2}m_B\nu ^2\omega^2 z^2+V_0\sin^2\left( \frac{2\pi
567: z}{\lambda}\right) \nonumber \\
568: &+&F_{FF}|
569: \phi_F|^{4/3}
570: + F_{BF}| \phi_B|^2
571: \biggr] \phi_{{F}}(z,t)=0,
572: \end{eqnarray}
573: where
574: \begin{eqnarray}
575: F_{BB}=g_{BB}\frac{\int_0^\infty|\psi_B^{(0)}|^4\rho d\rho}
576: {\int_0^\infty|\psi_B^{(0)}|^2\rho d\rho}=
577: g_{BB}{\frac{m_B\omega}{2\pi\hbar}},
578: \end{eqnarray}
579: \begin{eqnarray}
580: F_{BF}=g_{BF}\frac{\int_0^\infty|\psi_F^{(0)}|^2|\psi_B^{(0)}|^2\rho
581: d\rho}{\int_0^\infty|\psi_B^{(0)}|^2\rho d\rho}
582: =g_{BF}{\frac{M_{BF}\omega}{\pi\hbar}},
583: \end{eqnarray}
584: \begin{eqnarray}
585: F_{FF}=A
586: \frac{\int_0^\infty|\psi_F^{(0)}|^{2+4/3}\rho
587: d\rho}{\int_0^\infty|\psi_B^{(0)}|^2\rho
588: d\rho} =
589: {\frac{3A}{5}}\left[
590: \frac{M_F\omega}{\pi \hbar} \right]^{2/3}.
591: \end{eqnarray}
592: In (\ref{i}) and (\ref{j}) we have included the optical-lattice
593: potential and
594: the normalization there
595: is given by $\int_{-\infty}^\infty |\phi_i(z,t)|^2
596: dz = N_i$.
597:
598:
599:
600: For calculational purpose it is convenient to reduce
601: the sets (\ref{i}) and (\ref{j}) to
602: dimensionless form
603: by introducing convenient dimensionless variables. Although the algebra is
604: quite straightforward, the expressions become messy with different
605: factors
606: of masses.
607: As we shall not be interested in a particular
608: boson-fermion
609: system in this
610: paper, but be concerned with the formation of fermionic
611: dark solitons
612: in general, we take in the rest of this paper $m_B=3 m_F=
613: m(^{87} \mbox{Rb})$,
614: whence $m_R=3m_F/4, M_B=M_F=m_B,$ and
615: $M_{BF}=m_B/2 $ and where $m(^{87}{\mbox{Rb}})$ is the mass of the Rb
616: atom.
617: In
618: the two experimental
619: situations of \cite{exp4,exp5}
620: $m_B \approx
621: 3m_F$.
622:
623:
624:
625:
626:
627: In (\ref{i}) and (\ref{j}), $\nu << 1 $ and
628: we consider the dimensionless variables
629: $\tau=t\nu \omega/2$,
630: $y=z /l_z$,
631: ${\chi}_i=
632: \sqrt{(l_z/N_i)} \phi_i$, with $l_z=\sqrt{\hbar/(\nu \omega m_B)}$,
633: so that
634: \begin{eqnarray}\label{m} \biggr[& - & i\frac{\partial
635: }{\partial \tau}
636: -\frac{d^2}{dy^2}
637: + y^2+v_0\sin^2\left(\frac{2 \pi y}{\lambda_ 0}
638: \right)+
639: N_{BB}
640: \left|{{\chi}_B}\right|^2\nonumber \\
641: &+& N_{BF}
642: \left|{{\chi}_F}\right|^2
643: \biggr]{\chi}_{{B}}({y},\tau)=0,
644: \end{eqnarray}
645: \begin{eqnarray}\label{n} \biggr[& - & i\frac{\partial
646: }{\partial \tau}-\frac{d^2}{dy^2}
647: + y^2+v_0\sin^2\left(\frac{2 \pi y}{\lambda_ 0} \right)+
648: N_{FB}
649: \left|{{\chi}_B} \right|^2 \nonumber \\
650: &+&
651: N_{FF}
652: \left|{{\chi}_F}
653: \right|^{4/3}
654: \biggr]{\chi}_{{F}}(y,\tau)=0,
655: \end{eqnarray}
656: where
657: $N_{BB}=(4/\nu)a_{BB}N_B/l_z,$
658: $N_{BF}=(8/\nu)a_{BF}N_F/l_z,$
659: $N_{FB}=(8/\nu)a_{BF}N_B/l_z,$ and
660: $N_{FF}=9(6\pi N_F/\nu)^{2/3}/5. $
661: In
662: (\ref{m}) and (\ref{n}),
663: the normalization condition is given by
664: $\int_{-\infty}^\infty |\chi_i(y,\tau)|^2 dy =1 $ and
665: $v_0\equiv 2V_0/(\hbar \omega\nu)$ is the reduced strength of the
666: optical-lattice potential and $\lambda_0\equiv \lambda /l_z$ is the
667: dimensionless wave length.
668:
669:
670:
671:
672:
673:
674:
675:
676:
677: \section{Numerical Result}
678:
679:
680:
681: The coupled mean-field-hydrodynamic equations
682: (\ref{m}) and
683: (\ref{n}) for dark solitons are solved
684: numerically using a time-iteration
685: method based on the Crank-Nicholson discretization scheme
686: elaborated in \cite{sk1}.
687: We
688: discretize the mean-field-hydrodynamic equations
689: using time step $0.0005$ and space step $0.025$.
690:
691:
692:
693:
694:
695: We performed the time evolution of the set of equations (\ref{m}) and
696: (\ref{n}) setting
697: $N_{BB}=N_{BF}=N_{FB}=N_{FF}=v_0=0$ and starting with the
698: eigenfunction of
699: the lowest excited state of the
700: linear harmonic oscillator problem as suggested recently \cite{dsa},
701: e.g., with
702: $\chi_B(y,\tau)=\chi_F(y,\tau)=
703: \sqrt 2 \pi^{-1/4}y\exp(-y^2/2)\exp(-3i\tau)$.
704: During the course of time evolution the nonlinear terms are switched on
705: very slowly and the resultant solutions iterated (about 50000 times)
706: until convergence was
707: obtained. If converged solutions are obtained, they correspond to the
708: required dark solitons. In the present approach the time evolution starts
709: with and proceeds through successive eigenfunctions of the coupled
710: mean-field equations (\ref{m}) and (\ref{n}). Hence it leads to stable
711: numerical results. The usual numerical procedure for the calculation of
712: the dark solitons starts with an approximate solution
713: of the mean-field
714: equation and hence leads to numerical instability on time evolution
715: \cite{tanh,tanh1,dsa}.
716:
717:
718:
719: \begin{figure}%[!ht]
720:
721: \begin{center}
722: \includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{fig1a.ps}
723: \includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{fig1b.ps}
724: \includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{fig1c.ps}
725: \end{center}
726:
727: \caption{(a) The
728: stationary function $|\phi(z,t)|$ for bosonic and
729: fermionic dark solitons vs. $z$ with $N_F=N_B=100$, $\nu=0.1$
730: and $a_{BB}=a_{BF}=5 $ nm. We show in
731: (b) and (c) the profiles of the bosonic and fermionic
732: functions $|\phi_B(z,t)|$ and $|\phi_F(z,t)|$, respectively, of the
733: degenerate mixture (a) during
734: free expansion at regular intervals of
735: time. The nonlinearities are $N_{BB}=20, N_{BF}=40, N_{FB}=40,
736: N_{FF}=1275.$}
737:
738:
739: \end{figure}
740:
741:
742:
743:
744:
745:
746: We solve (\ref{m}) and (\ref{n}) for dark solitons.
747: %taken as the lowest vibrational excitation.
748: In this case the nonlinearity $N_{FF}$ could be very large for
749: $N_F>100$, which may require special care
750: for obtaining accurate numerical
751: solutions. In our calculation we use $\nu = 0.1$, $v_0=0$,
752: $\nu \omega= 2\pi \times 100$ Hz and $m_B$ to be the mass of
753: $^{87}$Rb. Consequently, $l \approx 1$ $\mu$m and unit of time
754: $\tau=2/(\nu
755: \omega)$ is 3 ms. We also take $N_F=100$,
756: $N_B=100$, $l_z=1$ $\mu$m, and $a_{BB}=a_{BF}=5$ nm.
757: With
758: these
759: parameters the nonlinearities in (\ref{m}) and (\ref{n}) are
760: $N_{BB}=20 $, $N_{BF}= 40$, $N_{FB}= 40$, and $N_{FF}= 1275$.
761:
762:
763:
764: \begin{figure}%[!ht]
765:
766: \begin{center}
767: \includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{fig2a.ps}
768: \includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{fig2b.ps}
769: \end{center}
770:
771: \caption{The profiles of the oscillating function
772: $|\phi(z,t)|$ for (a) bosonic and
773: (b) fermionic dark solitons of figure 1 (a) vs. $z$.
774: The oscillation was originated by jumping the boson-fermion scattering
775: length so that the nonlinearities $N_{BF}$ and $N_{FB}$ are suddenly
776: jumped from 40 to 44. }
777: \end{figure}
778:
779:
780:
781: \begin{figure}%[!ht]
782:
783: \begin{center}
784: \includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{fig3.ps}
785: \end{center}
786:
787: \caption{ The
788: stationary function $|\phi(z,t)|$ for bosonic and
789: fermionic dark solitons vs. $z$ with $N_F=N_B=100$, $\nu=0.1$
790: and $a_{BB}=a_{BF}=5 $ nm in the presence of an optical-lattice potential
791: with $\lambda_0 = 5$ and
792: $v_0 = 5$.
793: The nonlinearities are $N_{BB}=20, N_{BF}=40, N_{FB}=40,
794: N_{FF}=1275.$}
795:
796: \end{figure}
797:
798:
799:
800:
801:
802:
803:
804: The results of the present study on dark solitons are presented in
805: figures 1. In figure 1 (a) we plot the stationary functions $|\phi(z,t)|$
806: of
807: the boson
808: and fermion dark solitons. Both functions have a notch in the
809: middle. The notch in
810: the bosonic function is wider than that in the fermionic
811: function. In this case the fermionic nonlinearity (1275) is large.
812: Consequently, the extension of the fermionic
813: function in figure 1 (a) is also much larger than the bosonic
814: function.
815:
816: One way to observe the dark solitons experimentally is to allow
817: them to expand freely while the central notch will become wider in size to
818: be visible and photographed. With this in mind we study the free
819: expansion of the boson-fermion
820: mixture. The snapshots of the bosonic and fermionic functions at regular
821: intervals of time during this expansion are shown in figures 1 (b) and
822: (c),
823: respectively. After expansion, the central notch in the bosonic dark
824: soliton expands as we find from figure 1 (b) but the
825: notch in the fermionic dark soliton in figure 1 (c) does not expand enough
826: to be
827: visible. This will
828: make the fermionic dark soliton more difficult to observe
829: experimentally. However, this behavior is quite expected in a freely expanding
830: fermionic dark soliton with a large nonlinear repulsion. In the fermionic
831: equation both the fermion-fermion and fermion-boson interactions are
832: highly repulsive. The dark soliton has a notch (hollow region) at the
833: center.
834: Because of the very strong repulsion, the DFG
835: tends to expand in all directions including the radially inward
836: direction to fill the central hollow space
837: as well as outward directions. This inward repulsive force balances
838: partially the
839: outwards kinetic pressure and does not allow the central notch to expand
840: substantially during free expansion so as to be easily
841: observable. This is not the case for a moderately repulsive or
842: attractive pure single-component BEC, where the outward kinetic pressure
843: overcomes any repulsion among the atoms and
844: the BEC expands
845: only in
846: the radially outward direction with a widening of the notch.
847: In the bosonic wave function of figure 1 (b)
848: the notch expands reasonably during the expansion of the BEC. However,
849: during the expansion in figures 1 (b) and (c) the central notch of both
850: the
851: bosonic and fermionic condensates
852: has always a
853: zero at the origin.
854:
855:
856:
857: Next we study the stability of the solitons illustrated in figures 1 under
858: a small perturbation inflicted by a sudden change in the boson-fermion
859: scattering length $a_{BF}$. After the solitons of figures 1 are formed we
860: increase
861: $a_{BF}$ by 10$\%$ at $t=0$ so that the nonlinearities $N_{BF}$ and
862: $N_{FB}$ are suddenly increased from 40 to 44. This can be performed
863: experimentally by varying a background magnetic field near a Feshbach
864: resonance in the boson-fermion system \cite{fesh}. The solitons then
865: execute small breathing oscillation around a mean position. The snapshot
866: of the soliton profiles shown in figures 3 (a) and (b) under this
867: perturbation demonstrates their stability.
868:
869:
870:
871:
872:
873: Finally, we calculate the dark solitons in the boson-fermion mixture with
874: the parameters of figure 1 (a) in the presence of an optical-lattice
875: potential with $v_0=\lambda_0 = 5.$
876: We plot in figure 3 the function $\phi(z,t)$
877: for the dark soliton in this case.
878: The presence of the optical-lattice
879: potential creates modulations in both fermionic and bosonic
880: functions.
881: Because of the very strong
882: repulsion, the fermions tend to occupy the
883: whole
884: available region
885: in space and do not allow the formation of pronounced notches with
886: hollow region inside at each optical-lattice site. Consequently, the
887: modulation in the fermionic
888: function is less pronounced than the modulation in the bosonic
889: function. The
890: bosonic function of figure 3 has pronounced notches compared
891: to the smooth function in figure 1 (a), whereas the fermionic
892: function of figure 3 with small modulations is qualitatively more similar
893: to the fermionic component of figure 1 (a).
894: %The notch at the center remains stable after time evolution in both
895: %fermions and bosons.
896: We also studied free expansion of the dark solitons
897: in this case. The central notch in the fermionic dark soliton does not
898: also expand in this case. No new interesting physics emerges and the
899: results are not shown here.
900:
901:
902:
903: \section{Summary}
904:
905: We use a coupled set of time-dependent mean-field-hydrodynamic
906: equations for a trapped degenerate boson-fermion mixture to study the
907: formation of a
908: fermionic dark soliton (vibrational excitation)
909: in a DFG as
910: stationary
911: states.
912: We calculate the stationary functions with a notch at the center for
913: fermionic dark soliton
914: of the
915: boson-fermion mixture. The existence of a central notch in the
916: wave function for a dark soliton
917: is typical of vibrational excitation. We perform numerical simulation of
918: the dark solitons for a harmonic as well as a harmonic plus
919: optical-lattice traps.
920: The simulation is started with a time evolution of the mean-field
921: equations with the eigenfunction of the lowest excited state of the linear
922: oscillator problem setting all the nonlinearities to zero. The
923: nonlinearities are introduced slowly during time evolution and
924: the iteration continued until convergence is obtained.
925: We demonstrate the stability of the dark soliton upon the application of
926: a perturbation while the soliton executes small breathing oscillation.
927:
928:
929: The present time-dependent formulation also permits us to study
930: non-equilibrium free expansion of the coupled degenerate boson-fermion
931: mixture. One
932: way to observe the notch experimentally is to allow the dark
933: soliton to undergo free expansion.
934: We find that for a repulsive boson-fermion
935: interaction,
936: after a free expansion the notch in
937: the fermion function for a relatively small fermion number
938: of 100 does
939: not increase in
940: size significantly so as to be easily observable.
941:
942: In the present investigation we used a set of mean-field equations for
943: the DFG-BEC mixture. A proper treatment of the DFG should be performed
944: using a fully antisymmetrized many-body Slater determinant wave
945: function \cite{yyy1}. Although
946: we believe the present conclusion about fermionic dark soliton to be true
947: in
948: general, it would be of interest to establish their existence using such a
949: fully antisymmetrized fermionic many-body wave function in the future.
950: Also, a dark soliton features a particular spatial phase distribution,
951: i.e. a
952: step of $\pi$ phase. In a BEC, this phase profile is supported due to the
953: macroscopic phase of the condensate. Although a macroscopic phase of the
954: fermionic component should emerge in the present mean-field model,
955: to the best of our knowledge
956: its
957: existence in a fermionic many-body wave function has not been
958: established rigorously. However, such a study is beyond the scope of this
959: paper and
960: would be a work of future interest. Nevertheless, it would be proper
961: to call the fermionic excitation of the present paper by the term dark
962: soliton due to its appropriate density distribution with a central notch.
963:
964:
965: \ack
966:
967: %\acknowledgments
968:
969: The work is supported in part by the CNPq
970: of Brazil.
971:
972:
973: \section*{References}
974:
975: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
976:
977:
978:
979: \bibitem{exp1}DeMarco B and Jin D S 1999 {\it Science} {\bf 285} 1703
980:
981:
982: \bibitem{exp2} O'Hara K M, Hemmer S L, Gehm M E, Granade S R
983: and
984: Thomas J E 2002 {\it Science} {\bf 298} 2179
985:
986:
987: \bibitem{exp3}Schreck F, Khaykovich L, Corwin K L, Ferrari G,
988: Bourdel T,
989: Cubizolles J and Salomon C 2001 {\it
990: Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 87} 080403
991:
992: Truscott A G, Strecker K E, McAlexander W I,
993: Partridge G B and Hulet R G 2001 {\it Science} {\bf 291} 2570
994:
995:
996:
997: \bibitem{exp4} Hadzibabic Z, Stan C A,
998: Dieckmann K, Gupta S, Zwierlein M W, Gorlitz A and Ketterle W 2002
999: {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 88} 160401
1000:
1001:
1002: \bibitem{exp5}Modugno G, Roati G, Riboli F, Ferlaino F,
1003: Brecha R J
1004: and Inguscio M 2002 {\it Science} {\bf 297} 2240
1005:
1006: \bibitem{exp5x} Roati G, Riboli F, Modugno G and Inguscio M 2002
1007: {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 89} 150403
1008:
1009:
1010:
1011:
1012: \bibitem{exp6}Strecker K E, Partridge G B and Hulet R G 2003
1013: {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 91} 080406
1014:
1015: Hadzibabic Z,
1016: Gupta S, Stan C A, Schunck C H, Zwierlein M W,
1017: Dieckmann K and Ketterle W 2003 {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 91}
1018: 160401
1019:
1020:
1021:
1022: \bibitem{yyy} Roth R 2002 {\it Phys. Rev. } A {\bf 66} 013614
1023:
1024: Roth R and
1025: Feldmeier H 2002 \PR A {\bf 65} 021603R
1026:
1027: Miyakawa T,
1028: Suzuki T and Yabu H 2001 \PR A {\bf 64} 033611
1029:
1030:
1031: Liu X-J and Hu H 2003 \PR A
1032: {\bf 67} 023613
1033:
1034:
1035: Vichi L, Amoruso M, Minguzzi A, Stringari S
1036: and Tosi M 2000 {\it Eur. Phys. J. } D {\bf 11} 335
1037:
1038: \bibitem{yyy1} Molmer K 1998 {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.}
1039: {\bf 80} 1804
1040:
1041:
1042: \bibitem{zzz}Modugno M, Ferlaino F, Riboli F, Roati G, Modugno G
1043: and
1044: Inguscio M 2003
1045: {\it Phys. Rev. } A {\bf 68} 043626
1046:
1047:
1048: Liu X-J, Modugno M and Hu H 2003 \PR A
1049: {\bf 68} 053605
1050:
1051:
1052: \bibitem{capu} Capuzzi P, Minguzzi A and Tosi M P 2004
1053: {\it Phys. Rev. } A {\bf 69}
1054: 053615
1055:
1056:
1057: Capuzzi P, Minguzzi A and Tosi M P 2003
1058: {\it Phys. Rev. } A
1059: {\bf 67} 053605
1060:
1061: \bibitem{capu1} Capuzzi P, Minguzzi A and Tosi M P 2003
1062: {\it Phys. Rev. } A
1063: {\bf 68} 033605
1064:
1065:
1066: \bibitem{ska} Adhikari S K 2004 {\it Phys. Rev. } A {\bf 70} 043617
1067:
1068:
1069: \bibitem{11} Dalfovo F, Giorgini S, Pitaevskii L P and
1070: Stringari S 1999 {\it
1071: Rev. Mod. Phys.} {\bf 71} 463
1072:
1073:
1074:
1075:
1076: \bibitem{0b}
1077: Zakharov V E and Shabat A B 1972 {\it Sov. Phys. JETP} {\bf 34} 62
1078:
1079: Zakharov V E and Shabat A B 1973 {\it Sov. Phys. JETP} {\bf 37} 823
1080:
1081:
1082:
1083:
1084: \bibitem{1} Kivshar Y S and Agrawal G P 2003 {\it Optical
1085: Solitons
1086: - From
1087: Fibers to Photonic Crystals} (San Diego: Academic Press)
1088:
1089:
1090:
1091:
1092: \bibitem{5}
1093: Drazin P G and Johnson R S 1989 {\it Solitons: An Introduction}
1094: (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
1095:
1096:
1097:
1098: %Reinhardt W P and Clark C W 1997 \jpb {\bf 30} L785
1099:
1100:
1101:
1102: \bibitem{bur} Morgan S A, Ballagh R J and Burnett K 1997 \PR A
1103: {\bf 55} 4338
1104:
1105: \bibitem{5b} Busch T and Anglin J R 2000 {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf
1106: 84}
1107: 2298
1108:
1109:
1110:
1111: \bibitem{tanh}
1112: Frantzeskakis D J , Theocharis G,
1113: Diakonos F K, Schmelcher P and Kivshar Y S 2002 {\it Phys. Rev. } A
1114: {\bf
1115: 66}
1116: 053608
1117:
1118: Dziarmaga J, Karkuszewski Z P and Sacha K 2003 \jpb
1119: {\bf 36} 1217
1120:
1121: D'Agosta R, Malomed B A and Presilla C 2000 {\it
1122: Phys. Lett. } A {\bf
1123: 275} 424
1124:
1125: Parker N G, Proukakis N P, Barenghi C F and
1126: Adams C S 2004 \jpb {\bf 37}
1127: S175
1128:
1129:
1130: \bibitem{tanh1}
1131: Kevrekidis P G, Carretero-Gonz\'alez R, Theocharis G,
1132: Frantzeskakis D J and Malomed B A 2003 {\it Phys. Rev. } A {\bf 68}
1133: 035602
1134:
1135:
1136:
1137: \bibitem{dsa}Adhikari S K 2005 submitted to \PL A
1138:
1139:
1140:
1141:
1142: \bibitem{exdks} Anderson B P, Haljan P C, Regal C A, Feder D L,
1143: Collins L A, Clark C W and Cornell E A 2001 \PRL { \bf
1144: 86}
1145: 2926
1146:
1147:
1148:
1149: \bibitem{thdks} Burger S, Carr L D, Ohberg P, Sengstock K
1150: and Sanpera A 2002 \PR A {\bf 65} 043611
1151:
1152: Denschlag J, Simsarian J E, Feder D L, Clark C W, Collins L A,
1153: Cubizolles J,
1154: Deng L, Hagley E W, Helmerson K, Reinhardt W P, Rolston S L,
1155: Schneider B I and
1156: Phillips W D 2000 {\it Science} {\bf 287} 97
1157:
1158:
1159:
1160: Burger S, Bongs K, Dettmer S, Ertmer W, Sengstock K, Sanpera A,
1161: Shlyapnikov G V and Lewenstein M 1999 {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 83}
1162: 5198
1163:
1164: Damski B, Karkuszewski Z P, Sacha K and
1165: Zakrzewski J 2002 {\it Phys. Rev. A} {\bf 65} 013604
1166:
1167: Yukalov V I, Yukalova E P and Bagnato V S 1997 \PR A
1168: {\it 56} 4845
1169:
1170:
1171:
1172: Kamchatnov A M and Shchesnovich V S 2004 \PR A {\bf 70} 023604
1173:
1174:
1175: Brazhnyi V A and Konotop V V 2003 {\it Phys. Rev. A} {\bf 68} 043613
1176:
1177:
1178: Wu B, Liu J and Niu Q 2002
1179: {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 88} 034101
1180:
1181: \bibitem{x} Damski B, Sacha K and Zakrzewski 2002 \jpb {\bf 35} L153
1182:
1183: \bibitem{y}Karpiuk T, Brewczyk M and Rz\c a\.zewski K 2002 \jpb {\bf 35}
1184: L315
1185:
1186: Witkowska E and
1187: Brewczyk M 2005 \PR A {\bf 72} 023606
1188:
1189: %\bibitem{z}Karpiuk T, Brewczyk M, Ospelkaus-Schwarzer S, Bongs K, Gajda M
1190: %and Rz\c a\.zewski K 2004 \PRL {\bf 93} 100401
1191:
1192: \bibitem{z}
1193: Dziarmaga J 2004 \PR A {\bf 70} 063616
1194:
1195: Dziarmaga J 2003 \jpb {\bf 36} 1217
1196:
1197:
1198: \bibitem{yu}Yukalov V I, Yukalova E P and Bagnato V S 1997
1199: \PR A {\bf 56} 4845
1200:
1201:
1202: Yukalov V I, Marzlin K P and Yukalova E P 2004 \PR A {\bf 69} 023620
1203:
1204: \bibitem{j}Cataliotti F S, Burger S, Fort C, Maddaloni P, Minardi F,
1205: Trombettoni A, Smerzi A and Inguscio M 2001 Science {\bf 293} 843
1206:
1207:
1208:
1209: Adhikari S K 2005 \PR A {\bf 72} 013619
1210:
1211: \bibitem{jd} Cataliotti F S, Fallani L, Ferlaino F, Fort C,
1212: Maddaloni P and Inguscio M 2003 \NJP {\bf 5} 71
1213:
1214:
1215: Adhikari S K 2004 {\it Nucl. Phys. A} {\bf 737} 289
1216:
1217: \bibitem{i} Greiner M, Mandel O, Esslinger T, Hansch T W
1218: and Bloch I 2002
1219: { Nature} {\bf 415} 39
1220:
1221:
1222: Adhikari S K and Muruganandam P 2003 {\it Phys. Lett. A} {\bf 310}
1223: 229
1224: \bibitem{d} Morsch O, M\"uller J H,
1225: Ciampini D,
1226: Cristiani M, Blakie P B, Williams C J, Julienne P S and
1227: Arimondo E 2003 {\it Phys. Rev.} A {\bf 67} 031603(R)
1228:
1229: Adhikari S K 2003 \jpb {\bf 36} 3951
1230:
1231:
1232: \bibitem{fbs}Adhikari S K 2005 submitted to \PR A
1233:
1234: \bibitem{jz} Jezek D M, Barranco M, Guilleumas M, Mayol R and
1235: Pi M 2004 \PR A
1236: {\bf 70}
1237: 043630
1238:
1239:
1240: \bibitem{pi} Pi M, Vi\~nas X, Garcias F and Barranco M 1988
1241: {\it Phys. Lett. B}
1242: {\bf 215} 5
1243:
1244:
1245:
1246:
1247: \bibitem{catas}
1248: Adhikari S K 2003 {\it Eur. Phys. J. D} {\bf 25} 161
1249:
1250:
1251:
1252:
1253:
1254: \bibitem{abdul}
1255: Abdullaev F K and Galimzyanov R 2003 \jpb {\bf
1256: 36}
1257: 1099
1258:
1259:
1260:
1261:
1262:
1263: \bibitem{sk1}
1264: Adhikari S K and Muruganandam P 2002 \jpb {\bf 35} 2831
1265:
1266: Muruganandam P and Adhikari S K 2003 \jpb
1267: {\bf 36} 2501
1268:
1269:
1270:
1271:
1272: \bibitem{fesh}Stan C A, Zwierlein M W, Schunck C H,
1273: Raupach S M F and Ketterle W 2004 \PRL {\bf 93} 143001
1274:
1275: Inouye S, Goldwin J, Olsen M L, Ticknor C, Bohn J L and Jin D S
1276: 2004 \PRL
1277: {\bf 93} 183201
1278:
1279:
1280: \end{thebibliography}
1281:
1282: \end{document}
1283:
1284: