1: % \documentstyle[12pt,amsmath,amsfonts,epsfig,theorem]{article}
2:
3: % % Parameters for A4 paper
4: % \setlength{\textheight}{237mm} % 297mm - 50mm
5: % \setlength{\textwidth}{160mm} % 210mm - 50mm
6: % \setlength{\topmargin}{0mm}
7: % \setlength{\headheight}{0mm}
8: % \setlength{\headsep}{0mm}
9: % \setlength{\evensidemargin}{0mm}
10: % \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{0mm}
11: % \setlength{\footskip}{10mm}
12: % \setlength{\parindent}{0mm}
13: % \setlength{\parskip}{1.5mm}
14:
15: \documentstyle[aps,epsfig,12pt]{revtex}
16:
17: \def\ket#1{|#1\rangle}
18: \def\bra#1{\langle#1|}
19: \def\Lindblad#1{2a #1 a^{\dag} -a^{\dag}a #1 - #1 a^{\dag}a }
20:
21: \def\tr{{\rm tr}}
22: \newcommand{\one}{\mbox{\tt 1}\hspace{-0.057 in}\mbox{\tt l}}
23:
24: \begin{document}
25:
26: \tighten
27:
28: \title{Conditional evolution in single-atom cavity QED}
29:
30: \author{Andrei N. Soklakov\thanks{Direct any correspondence to:
31: a.soklakov@rhul.ac.uk}\ \ and R\"udiger Schack}
32:
33: %\address{Department of Mathematics, Royal Holloway, University of London, \\
34: %Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX, UK}
35:
36: \date{25 April 2001}
37:
38: \maketitle
39:
40: \begin{abstract}
41: We consider a typical setup of cavity QED consisting of a two-level atom
42: interacting strongly with a single resonant electromagnetic field mode
43: inside a cavity. The cavity is resonantly driven and the output undergoes
44: continuous homodyne measurements. We derive an explicit expression for the
45: state of the system conditional on a discrete photocount record. This
46: expression takes a particularly simple form if the system is initially in
47: the steady state. As a byproduct, we derive a general formula for the steady
48: state that had been conjectured before in the strong driving limit.
49: \end{abstract}
50:
51: \section{Introduction} \label{PhysicalSystem}
52:
53: Recently there has been much experimental progress in single-atom cavity QED
54: \cite{HoodEtAl_2000,PinkseEtAl_2000}. In addition to their inherent
55: fundamental importance, these experiments provide insight into the physics of
56: open quantum systems, with potential applications to, e.g., quantum
57: chaos~\cite{LiuEtAl_2000}, quantum control~\cite{DohertyEtAl_2000}, and
58: quantum computing~\cite{Steane_1998}.
59:
60: In this article we consider a typical experimental setup of single-atom cavity
61: QED~\cite{HoodEtAl_1998}, as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{Cavity}. The setup
62: consists of a single two-level atom located inside a high finesse optical
63: cavity, which is externally driven. A set of photodetectors is arranged to
64: monitor the field escaping from the system into the environment. We assume
65: that the leakage of photons from the cavity mode through an output mirror is
66: the only significant channel through which the system interacts with the
67: environment. This assumption can be very realistic for high-finesse
68: cavities~\cite{Rempe_2000}. Also, for simplicity, we adjust the cavity length
69: and the frequency of the driving field so that they both coincide with the
70: frequency of the atomic transition. The cavity output is monitored using
71: continuous homodyne measurements~\cite{PlenioKnight_1998}. These measurements
72: are parameterized by one complex parameter: the reference field $\beta$ which
73: is added to the cavity output on a beam-splitter prior to the detection.
74:
75: Given the output of the photodetectors, it is possible in principle to write
76: the {\it conditional\/} quantum state inside the cavity as a function of time
77: and the measurement record. Usually, the conditional state is computed
78: numerically \cite{AlsingCarmichael_1991,MabuchiWiseman_1998} using the
79: formalism of stochastic master
80: equations~\cite{WisemanMilburn_1993b,Carmichael1993b}; these numerical
81: computations can require very large computational resources. For some
82: experiments, however, the ability to process data in real time is
83: crucial~\cite{HoodEtAl_2000}. It is therefore important to develop analytical
84: tools for conditional state evolution.
85:
86: In this paper we derive explicit expressions for the state conditioned on a
87: discrete homodyne measurement record in the strong coupling regime, where the
88: atom is strongly coupled to the intracavity field. Our calculations are valid
89: for arbitrary driving field strengths.
90: Our results are applicable to
91: experiments such as the atomic cavity
92: microscope~\cite{HoodEtAl_2000,PinkseEtAl_2000}, where the strong coupling is
93: essential, but strong driving leads to the problem of
94: saturation~\cite{Rempe_2000}.
95: We give
96: special attention to the experimentally important case that the system is
97: initially in the steady state.
98:
99:
100: The paper is organized as follows. In Sec.~\ref{MathModel} we describe the
101: equations that model the physical system.
102: In Sec.~\ref{Sec:Measurement} we review the formalism of conditional quantum
103: evolution and introduce the approximations for the strong coupling regime. In
104: Sec.~\ref{Sec:Technical} we derive a general formula for the system state
105: conditioned on a discrete photocount record, for an arbitrary initial system
106: state. In Sec.~\ref{Sec:Steady}, we give a derivation of a general
107: expression for the steady state. In Sec.~\ref{Sec:Cond} we find simple
108: formulas for the conditional evolution in the case that the system
109: is initially in the steady state. We conclude in Sec.~\ref{Sec:Conclusion}.
110:
111:
112: \begin{figure}
113: \begin{center}
114: \epsfig{file=cavity1.eps,width=10cm}
115: \end{center}
116: \caption{Homodyne measurements in cavity QED. Basic parameters
117: of the system are the strength of the atom-cavity coupling $g$,
118: and the cavity field decay rate $\gamma$. The cavity is resonantly
119: driven by an external laser field $E$, and the cavity
120: output field is analyzed by the detectors $D_1$ and $D_2$
121: after being added to the reference field $\beta$ on the
122: beam-splitter.
123: }
124: \label{Cavity}
125: \end{figure}
126:
127:
128: \section{Mathematical model and main approximations} \label{MathModel}
129:
130:
131: Let $|{\rm g }\rangle$ and $|{\rm e}\rangle$ be the ground and excited states
132: of the atom. For simplicity, we choose the cavity length so that the
133: frequency of the resonant optical mode coincides with the frequency
134: of the atomic transition.
135: Using the dipole and the rotating wave approximations
136: the interaction of the two-level
137: atom with the electromagnetic field inside the cavity
138: is described by the Hamiltonian~\cite{Louisell_1990}
139: \begin{equation}
140: H_{\rm int}\equiv ig(a^\dag\sigma-a\sigma^\dag)\,,
141: \end{equation}
142: where $\sigma=|{\rm g}\rangle\langle{\rm e}|$,
143: $g$ is the strength of the atom-cavity coupling, and
144: $a$ is the annihilation operator for the intracavity field.
145: Including dissipation and on-resonant driving of the cavity
146: mode, the total unconditional master equation
147: in a frame rotating at the driving laser frequency reads
148: \begin{equation} \label{OnlyStandardApprox}
149: \dot{\rho}=[-iH_{\rm int}
150: %\,\frac{g}{2}(a+a^\dag)(\sigma-\sigma^{\dag})
151: +E(a^\dag-a),\rho\,]
152: +\frac{\gamma}{2}( \Lindblad{\rho} )\,,
153: \end{equation}
154: where $\rho$ is the joint density operator for the atom and the intracavity
155: field, $E$ is the strength of the driving, and $\gamma$ is the rate of energy
156: loss due to the leakage of photons from the cavity mode through an output
157: mirror.
158:
159:
160: From the experimental point of view the question of the steady state
161: is very important. In fact, using contemporary techniques it is very
162: difficult to prepare the system in question in any other state.
163: Using the Jaynes-Cummings model, Alsing and
164: Carmichael~\cite{AlsingCarmichael_1991} have shown
165: numerically that in the strong
166: driving limit $E\gg g$ the system approaches a steady state of the form
167: \begin{equation} \label{RhoSS1}
168: \rho_{\rm ss}=\frac{1}{2}( \ket{\alpha;+}\bra{\alpha;+}
169: +\ket{\alpha^*;-}\bra{\alpha^*;-})\,,
170: \end{equation}
171: where $\ket{\alpha;+}$
172: and $\ket{\alpha^*;-}$ are two orthogonal
173: quantum states
174: \begin{eqnarray} \label{basis}
175: \ket{\alpha;+}&=&\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}
176: \ket{\alpha}(\ket{{\rm g}}+i\ket{{\rm e}})
177: \equiv \ket{\alpha}\ket{+} \,,\cr
178: \ket{\alpha^*;-}&=&\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\ket{\alpha^*}(\ket{{\rm g}}
179: -i\ket{{\rm e}})
180: \equiv \ket{\alpha}\ket{-} \,,
181: \end{eqnarray}
182: and where $\ket{\alpha}$ is the coherent field state with amplitude
183: \begin{equation}
184: \alpha= (2E+ig)/\gamma\,.
185: \end{equation}
186: This result has been confirmed in a more recent numerical
187: simulation~\cite{MabuchiWiseman_1998}.
188: Using matrix notation for the intra-atomic degrees of freedom
189: in the basis $\{\ket{\pm}\}$,
190: Eq.~(\ref{RhoSS1}) can be rewritten in the convenient form
191: \begin{equation} \label{RhoSS}
192: \rho_{\rm ss}=\frac{1}{2}
193: \left(\begin{array}{cc}
194: |\alpha\rangle\langle\alpha|&0\\
195: 0& |\alpha^*\rangle\langle\alpha^*|
196: \end{array}
197: \right)\,,
198: \end{equation}
199: which will be useful below.
200:
201: In this paper, we work in the strong-coupling regime ($g\gg \gamma $), which
202: justifies considering the evolution on time scales large compared to
203: $1/g$. In Sec.~\ref{Sec:Steady} we give an analytical proof that on those
204: timescales, Eq.~(\ref{RhoSS1}) is a steady state of
205: Eq.~(\ref{OnlyStandardApprox}), for arbitrary values of the driving $E$.
206:
207:
208: \section{The measurement} \label{Sec:Measurement}
209:
210: We now rewrite
211: Eq.~(\ref{OnlyStandardApprox}) in the form
212: \begin{equation} \label{MainApproximateEquation}
213: \dot{\rho}={\cal L}\rho\,,
214: \end{equation}
215: where the superoperator ${\cal L}$ is defined as
216: \begin{equation}
217: {\cal L}\rho\equiv
218: [-iH_{\rm int}+E(a^\dag-a),\rho\,]
219: +\frac{\gamma}{2} ( 2a\rho a^{\dag}-a^{\dag}a\rho
220: -\rho a^\dag a)\,.
221: \end{equation}
222: Let the initial condition be $\rho(0)=\rho_0$.
223: Given superoperators ${\cal S}_0$, ${\cal J}_1$ and ${\cal J}_2$ such that
224: \begin{equation}
225: {\cal S}_0(t)=e^{({\cal L}-{\cal J}_1-{\cal J}_2)t}\,, \label{Eq:SLJ1J2}
226: \end{equation}
227: the solution to Eq.~(\ref{MainApproximateEquation})
228: can be written using a Dyson expansion,
229: \begin{equation} \label{RhoDeltaT}
230: \rho(\Delta t)=\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}
231: \sum_{k_1,\dots,k_m} p(k_1,\dots, k_m ;\Delta t)
232: \rho_{\rm c}(k_1,\dots,k_m ;\Delta t)\;,
233: \end{equation}
234: where $\tr \rho_{\rm c}(k_1,\dots,k_m ;\Delta t)=1$ and
235: \begin{eqnarray} \label{PmRm}
236: && p(k_1,\dots,k_m ;\Delta t)
237: \rho_{\rm c}(k_1,\dots,k_m ;\Delta t)= \cr
238: && \int_0^{\Delta t}dt_{m}\cdots\int_0^{t_3}dt_2\int_0^{t_2}dt_1
239: {\cal S}_0(\Delta t-t_m){\cal J}_{k_m}
240: {\cal S}_0(t_m-t_{m-1}){\cal J}_{k_{m-1}}\cdots {\cal S}_0(t_1)\rho_0\;.
241: \end{eqnarray}
242: Following~\cite{WisemanMilburn_1993b,Carmichael1993b}
243: we define the ``smooth evolution'' operator
244: ${\cal S}_0$ as
245: \begin{equation} \label{defSo}
246: {\cal S}_0(t)\rho\equiv N_0(t)\rho [N_0(t)]^\dag\;,
247: \end{equation}
248: where
249: \begin{equation} \label{defNo}
250: N_0(t)\equiv\exp\left[-iH_{\rm int}t+E(a^{\dag}-a)t
251: -\frac{\gamma}{2}(a^{\dag}a+|\beta|^2)t\right]\;,
252: \end{equation}
253: and the ``jump'' operators ${\cal J}_1$ and ${\cal J}_2$ as
254: \begin{equation} \label{Ck}
255: {\cal J}_{k}\rho\equiv C_k \rho C_k^{\dag}\;, {\mbox{\rm \ \ where\ \ \ }}
256: C_k\equiv\sqrt{\gamma/2}\,e^{i\pi(k-1)/2}[a+(-1)^k\beta]\;.
257: \end{equation}
258: The following lemma, included for completeness, shows that the definitions of
259: ${\cal S}_0$, ${\cal J}_1$ and ${\cal J}_2$ just given are consistent with
260: Eq.~(\ref{Eq:SLJ1J2}).\\
261:
262: \noindent{\bf Lemma 1}
263: {\it The above definitions satisfy the requirement
264: \begin{equation} \label{SequalExp}
265: {\cal S}_0(t)=e^{({\cal L}-{\cal J}_1-{\cal J}_2)t}
266: \end{equation}
267: and therefore Eqns.~(\ref{RhoDeltaT}) and (\ref{PmRm}) indeed give
268: a solution to (\ref{MainApproximateEquation}).
269: }\\
270: {\bf Proof}\\
271: Keeping terms to first order in $\tau$ we have
272: \begin{eqnarray} \label{SdeltaT}
273: {\cal S}_0(\tau)\rho&=&N_0(\tau)\rho[ N_0(\tau)]^{\dag} \cr
274: &=&\rho+\Big([-iH_{\rm int}+E(a^{\dag}-a),\rho] \cr
275: &&{\phantom{=\rho+\Big(\;\;}}
276: -\frac{\gamma}{2}(a^{\dag}a\rho +\rho a^\dag a)
277: -\gamma |\beta|^2\rho
278: \Big)\tau +O(\tau^2) \cr
279: &=&(\one+\tau \cdot{\cal L})\rho
280: -\gamma(a\rho a^{\dag}+|\beta|^2\rho)\tau + O(\tau^2)\,.
281: \end{eqnarray}
282: On the other hand by direct calculation we have
283: \begin{equation}
284: {\cal J}_k\rho=\frac{\gamma}{2}[a\rho a^{\dag}+(-1)^k(\beta\rho a^{\dag}
285: +\beta^*a\rho) +|\beta|^2\rho]
286: \end{equation}
287: which implies that
288: \begin{equation}
289: ({\cal J}_1+{\cal J}_2)\rho=\gamma(a\rho a^{\dag}+|\beta|^2\rho)\,.
290: \end{equation}
291: Equation (\ref{SdeltaT}) therefore becomes
292: \begin{equation}
293: {\cal S}_0(\tau)\rho
294: = (\one+\tau\cdot [{\cal L}-({\cal J}_1+{\cal J}_2)])\rho +O(\tau^2)
295: \end{equation}
296: Taking the limit $\tau\to 0$ we have Eq.~(\ref{SequalExp}) as required.
297: $\Box$\\
298:
299: There are many different definitions of ${\cal S}_0$, ${\cal J}_1$ and ${\cal
300: J}_2$ that satisfy the above lemma. However, definitions (\ref{defSo})
301: and~(\ref{Ck}) are somewhat special: the quantities $\rho_{\rm
302: c}(k_1,\dots,k_m ;\Delta t)$ and $p(k_1,\dots,k_m ;\Delta t)$ which they
303: define have an important physical meaning \cite{Carmichael1993b}. Suppose
304: that the continuous measurements were performed over the time interval $\Delta
305: t$ and recorded as a sequence $(k_1,\dots, k_m ;\Delta t)$ of photodetector
306: labels in the order of photodetections. For example, $k_j=1$ would mean that
307: the $j$th photodetection was registered by the first detector. Then the
308: probability of the measurement record $(k_1,\dots, k_m ;\Delta t)$ is given by
309: $p(k_1,\dots, k_m ; \Delta t)$, and the corresponding conditional state is
310: $\rho_{\rm c}(k_1,\dots,k_m ;\Delta t)$.
311:
312: We will now prepare to consider the conditional system evolution
313: on time scales large compared to $1/g$.
314: First we notice that
315: \begin{equation}
316: H_{\rm int}=H_0+H_1\,,
317: \end{equation}
318: where
319: \begin{equation}
320: \begin{array}{llll}
321: H_0&\equiv& -g(a^\dag+a)\sigma_y/2\,, &
322: \ \ \ \sigma_y\equiv i(\sigma^\dag-\sigma) \cr
323: H_1&\equiv& ig(a^\dag-a)\sigma_x/2\,, &
324: \ \ \ \sigma_x\equiv \sigma^\dag+\sigma\,.
325: \end{array}
326: \end{equation}
327: We define
328: \begin{equation} \label{defQ}
329: Q\equiv \exp(-iH_0t-iH_1t+Ft)\,,
330: \end{equation}
331: where
332: \begin{equation}
333: F\equiv E(a^\dag-a)-\gamma a^\dag a/2\,.
334: \end{equation}
335: These definitions are connected to the definition~(\ref{defSo}) of the
336: smooth evolution operator via the relation
337: \begin{equation}
338: N_0\equiv e^{-\gamma|\beta|^2t/2}Q\,.
339: \end{equation}
340: We rewrite $Q$ in the form
341: \begin{equation} \label{QRo}
342: Q=e^{-iH_0t}R_0\,,
343: \end{equation}
344: so that
345: \begin{equation}
346: \frac{dQ}{dt}=-iH_0e^{-iH_0t}R_0+e^{-iH_0t}\frac{dR_0}{dt} {\,.}
347: \end{equation}
348: From the definition~(\ref{defQ})
349: and Eq.~(\ref{QRo}) we have:
350: \begin{equation}
351: \frac{dQ}{dt}=(F-iH_0-iH_1)e^{-iH_0t}R_0\,.
352: \end{equation}
353: Combining the last two equations we obtain that $R_0$ obeys
354: the equation
355: \begin{equation} \label{dRoOVERdt}
356: \frac{dR_0}{dt}=\left(X(t)+e^{iH_0t}Fe^{-iH_0t}\right)R_0\,,
357: \end{equation}
358: where
359: \begin{equation}
360: X(t)\equiv - e^{iH_0t} iH_1 e^{-iH_0t}\,.
361: \end{equation}
362: Using the Corollary to Theorem 1 from the Appendix together with
363: the identity $e^{-ya^\dag}a=(a+y) e^{-ya^\dag}$ we obtain
364: \begin{eqnarray}
365: 2X(t)&=&g\,e^{iH_0t}(a^\dag-a)\sigma_x e^{-iH_0t}\cr
366: &=&g\,(a^\dag-a-ig\sigma_yt)e^{iH_0t}\sigma_x e^{-iH_0t}\,.
367: \end{eqnarray}
368: The identity $e^{iA\sigma_y}=\cos A+i\sigma_y\sin A$ gives
369: \begin{equation}
370: e^{iH_0t}\sigma_x e^{-iH_0t}
371: =\sigma_x\cos[gt(a^\dag+a)]-\sigma_z\sin[gt(a^\dag+a)]\,,
372: \end{equation}
373: where $\sigma_z\equiv i\sigma_y\sigma_x$.
374: Finally we obtain
375: \begin{equation}
376: 2X(t)=g(a^\dag -a -ig\sigma_y t)
377: \left( \sigma_x\cos[gt(a^\dag+a)] -\sigma_z\sin[gt(a^\dag+a)]
378: \right)\,.
379: \end{equation}
380: At time scales large compared to $1/g$ we can neglect terms oscillating at
381: frequency $1/g$ in Eq.~(\ref{dRoOVERdt}). This means we can set
382: $X(t)=0$ in Eq.~(\ref{dRoOVERdt}), which becomes
383: \begin{equation} \label{APPROXdRoOVERdt}
384: \frac{dR_0}{dt}\approx e^{iH_0t}Fe^{-iH_0t} R_0\,.
385: \end{equation}
386: This approximation has some similarity with the standard rotating-wave
387: approximation.
388:
389: Now consider the operator
390: \begin{equation}
391: M\equiv \exp (-iH_0t+Ft)\,.
392: \end{equation}
393: Using the same technique as in Eqns.~(\ref{QRo} -- \ref{dRoOVERdt})
394: it is easy to show that
395: \begin{eqnarray}
396: M=e^{-iH_0t} R_1\,,
397: \end{eqnarray}
398: where $R_1$ obeys the equation:
399: \begin{equation}
400: \frac{dR_1}{dt}= e^{iH_0t}Fe^{-iH_0t} R_1\,.
401: \end{equation}
402: This equation coincides with (\ref{APPROXdRoOVERdt}), which means
403: that at time scales $\delta t\gg 1/g$ the operator $Q$ can be replaced
404: with $M$. The smooth evolution ${\cal S}_0$ can therefore be
405: approximated as
406: \begin{equation} \label{SoS}
407: {\cal S}_0\approx {\cal S} \,,
408: \end{equation}
409: where ${\cal S}$ is defined as
410: \begin{equation} \label{defS}
411: {\cal S}(t)\rho\equiv N(t)\rho [N(t)]^\dag\,,
412: \end{equation}
413: and where
414: \begin{equation} \label{defN}
415: N(t)\equiv\exp\left[-iH_0t+E(a^{\dag}-a)t
416: -\frac{\gamma}{2}(a^{\dag}a+|\beta|^2)t\right]\,.
417: \end{equation}
418:
419:
420:
421: \section{Conditional evolution for arbitrary initial states} \label{Sec:Technical}
422:
423: In this section we derive a general formula for the state, $\rho_{\rm
424: c}(k_1,\dots, k_m ;\Delta t)$, conditioned on a discrete photocount record
425: for an arbitrary initial state. The formula is a direct consequence of two
426: technical theorems, whose proofs are given in the Appendix.
427: At time scales $\delta t\gg 1/g$, the theorems allow us to simplify
428: Eq.~(\ref{PmRm}) by changing the order in
429: which the smooth evolution operators ${\cal S}$ and the jump operators
430: ${\cal J}_k$ appear.
431:
432: Using these theorems we can proceed with the calculation of the
433: conditional density matrix $\rho_{\rm c}(k_1,\dots, k_m ;\Delta t)$.
434: We have from Eqns.~(\ref{PmRm}), (\ref{Ck}) and
435: Eqns.~(\ref{SoS}--\ref{defN}) that
436: \begin{eqnarray}
437: && \hspace{-10mm} p(k_1,\dots, k_m ;\Delta t)\rho_{\rm c}(k_1,\dots, k_m ;\Delta t)\cr
438: && \hspace{-8mm} \approx \frac{1}{m!} \int_0^{\Delta t}dt_m\cdots
439: \int_0^{\Delta t}dt_{2}\int_0^{\Delta t}dt_1
440: [N(\Delta t-t_m)C_{k_m}\cdots N(t_2-t_{1})C_{k_{1}}N(t_1)]
441: \rho_0[\cdots]^{\dag}\;.
442: \end{eqnarray}
443: We can now use Theorem~2 to compute the operator in the square
444: brackets. We have, for instance,
445: \begin{equation}
446: C_{k_{1}}N(t_1)=N(t_1) f_k\bigg[e^{-\gamma t_1/2}a
447: +\frac{1-e^{-\gamma t_1/2}}{\gamma}
448: (2E+ig\sigma_y)+(-1)^{k_1}\beta\bigg]\,.
449: \end{equation}
450:
451:
452: Then, using the identity $N(t_2-t_1)N(t_1)=N(t_2)$, we see that repeating
453: the same type of calculations we have
454: \begin{eqnarray}
455: && N(\Delta t-t_m)C_{k_m}\cdots N(t_2-t_{1})C_{k_{1}}N(t_1)=\cr
456: &&\hspace{15mm} N(\Delta t)\prod_{p=1}^{m}f_{k_p} \bigg[e^{-\gamma t_p/2}a
457: +\frac{1-e^{-\gamma t_p/2}}{\gamma}
458: (2E+ig\sigma_y)+(-1)^{k_p}\beta\bigg]\,.
459: \end{eqnarray}
460: Using the identity $f_kf_k^*=\gamma/2$ we therefore have
461: \begin{equation} \label{pMrhoM}
462: p(k_1,\dots, k_m ;\Delta t)\rho_{\rm c}(k_1,\dots, k_m ;\Delta t)
463: = \frac{\gamma^m}{2^mm!}
464: N(\Delta t)G(\rho_0,\beta)N^{\dag}(\Delta t)\,,
465: \end{equation}
466: where
467: \begin{eqnarray} \label{RrhoSub0}
468: G(\rho_0,\beta)
469: &=&
470: \int_0^{\Delta t}dt_m\int_0^{\Delta t}dt_{m-1}\cdots\int_0^{\Delta t}dt_1 \cr
471: && \bigg(\prod_{p=1}^{m}\bigg[e^{-\gamma t_p/2}a
472: +\frac{1-e^{-\gamma t_p/2}}{\gamma}
473: (2E+ig\sigma_y)+(-1)^{k_p}\beta \bigg]\bigg)
474: \rho_0\bigg(\cdots\bigg)^{\dag}\;.
475: \end{eqnarray}
476: For notational convenience, we do not indicate explicitely the dependence
477: of $G(\rho_0,\beta)$
478: on the measurement record $(k_1,\dots, k_m ;\Delta t)$
479: which, however, should always be remembered.
480:
481: Equations (\ref{pMrhoM}) and~(\ref{RrhoSub0}) have a relatively simple
482: structure. The terms $N(\Delta t)$, which are given in factored form by
483: Theorem 1, are the same for all possible measurement records. This means
484: that all the information about the measurement records is contained in
485: the function $G(\rho_0,\beta)$.
486: The integrand in $G(\rho_0,\beta)$ is a polynomial in $a$, $\sigma_y$ and
487: $\rho_0$. The scalar coefficients of this polynomial are constants or
488: proportional to either $e^{-\gamma t_p/2}$ or $e^{-\gamma t_p}$. Therefore all
489: the integrals in Eq.~(\ref{RrhoSub0}) can be easily evaluated, so that
490: $G(\rho_0,\beta)$ takes the form of a polynomial in $a$, $\sigma_y$ and
491: $\rho_0$ with known coefficients. In this way, Eqns.~(\ref{pMrhoM})
492: and~(\ref{RrhoSub0}) provide an explicit solution for the conditional
493: evolution on the time scales considered.
494:
495:
496: \section{Derivation of the steady state} \label{Sec:Steady}
497:
498: In this section we show that, at timescales $\delta t\gg 1/g$,
499: the state $\rho_{\rm ss}$ defined
500: by~(\ref{RhoSS}) is a steady state of
501: the master equation~(\ref{MainApproximateEquation}).
502: Notice that the only free parameter in our homodyne measurements is
503: the complex parameter $\beta$. If we can find a value of $\beta$
504: such that for any measurement record $(k_1,\dots, k_m ;\Delta t)$,
505: the conditional density matrix satisfies
506: \begin{equation} \label{BlankMeasurement1}
507: \rho_{\rm c}(k_1,\dots, k_m ;\Delta t) =\rho_{\rm ss}\;,
508: \end{equation}
509: then $\rho_{\rm ss}$ must be a steady state.
510: This is because the solution~(\ref{RhoDeltaT}) of the
511: unconditional master equation~(\ref{MainApproximateEquation}) becomes,
512: in this case,
513: \begin{equation} \label{BlankMeasurement2}
514: \rho(\Delta t)=\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}\sum_{k_1,\dots, k_m}
515: p(k_1,\dots, k_m ;\Delta t)\rho_{{\rm ss}}=\rho_{\rm ss}
516: \end{equation}
517: for any $\Delta t$. Intuitively, one would expect that, if subjected to a
518: nontrivial measurement, the system would normally depart from the steady
519: state. In our case, however, we will find that Eq.~(\ref{BlankMeasurement1}) is
520: satisfied for all real values of $\beta$.
521:
522: Before we proceed with our rigorous analysis it may be helpful to
523: develop some intuition about the dependence of the conditional
524: evolution on $\beta$. In particular we are interested in the dependence
525: of the conditional evolution on the phase $\phi=\arg\beta$.
526: In our analysis we deal with the conditional evolution conditioned
527: on a discrete photocount record, which is the most general case.
528: However, a lot of insight about the dependence of the conditional
529: evolution on the phase $\phi$ can be gained by taking the limit
530: $|\beta|\to\infty$. In this limit the detectors are registering
531: continuous photocurrents rather than discrete photocounts.
532: Because the resulting measurement records can be viewed
533: as continuous functions of time it becomes possible to derive
534: a master equation for the conditional density matrix~$\rho_{\rm c}$.
535: According to Ref.~\cite{WisemanMilburn_1993b}, this can be done by
536: taking the double limit $|\beta|\propto\epsilon^{-1}\to\infty$
537: and $\gamma \Delta t\propto \epsilon^{3/2}\to 0$ in the Dyson
538: expansion (\ref{RhoDeltaT}).
539: If the measurement record consists of the difference photocurrent
540: $I_{-}=I_2-I_1$, where $I_1$ and $I_2$ are the photocurrents
541: detected by the first and the second detectors respectively, then
542: the resulting master equation for the conditional density
543: matrix becomes~\cite{WisemanMilburn_1993a,WisemanMilburn_1993b}
544: \begin{equation} \label{StochasticME}
545: \dot{\rho}_{\rm c}=
546: {\cal L}\rho
547: +\sqrt{\gamma\eta}
548: \Big(e^{-i\phi}a\rho_{\rm c}+e^{i\phi} \rho_{\rm c}a^{\dag}
549: -\tr\!\left[\rho_{\rm c}(e^{-i\phi}a+e^{i\phi}a^{\dag})\right]
550: \rho_{\rm c}
551: \Big)\xi\,,
552: \end{equation}
553: where $\eta$ is the efficiency of the photodetection,
554: and $\xi$ is the Gaussian white noise which,
555: in practice, should be taken from experimental observations of the
556: difference photocurrent $I_{-}$
557: via the relation
558: \begin{equation} \label{DiffPhotocurrent}
559: I_{-}
560: =|\beta|\left(\gamma\eta\;\tr\!\left[\rho_{\rm c}(e^{i\phi}a^\dag+e^{-i\phi} a)
561: \right]
562: +\sqrt{\gamma\eta}\xi\right)\;.
563: \end{equation}
564: Compared to the unconditional master
565: equation~(\ref{OnlyStandardApprox}),
566: Eq.~(\ref{StochasticME}) has an additional term
567: \begin{equation}
568: \sqrt{\gamma\eta}
569: \Big(e^{-i\phi}a\rho_{\rm c}+e^{i\phi}\rho_{\rm c} a^\dag
570: -\tr\!\left[\rho_{\rm c}(e^{-i\phi}a+e^{i\phi}a^\dag)\right]
571: \rho_{\rm c}\Big)\xi\,,
572: \end{equation}
573: which, for $\phi=0$ and $\rho_{\rm c}=\rho_{\rm ss}$, is proportional to
574: $\rho_{\rm ss}$. This means that, if ${\cal L}\rho_{\rm ss}=0$, i.e., if
575: $\rho_{\rm ss}$ is a steady state of the unconditional evolution, then
576: conditional and unconditional evolution coincide for $\phi=0$.
577: This situation is similar to the one described by
578: Eqns.~(\ref{BlankMeasurement1}) and (\ref{BlankMeasurement2}), which suggests
579: to consider the case of real $\beta$ in the following rigorous derivation.
580:
581: We now substitute $\rho_0=\rho_{\rm ss}$ from Eq.~(\ref{RhoSS}) into
582: Eq.~(\ref{RrhoSub0}), keeping $\beta$ arbitrary for the moment.
583: We obtain
584: \begin{equation} \label{NewEquationForR}
585: G(\rho_{{\rm ss}},\beta) =
586: \int_0^{\Delta t}dt_m\int_0^{\Delta t}dt_{m-1}\cdots\int_0^{\Delta t}dt_1
587: \Big( \prod_{p=1}^{m}e^{-\gamma t_p/2}[a + f(\sigma_y,\beta)]
588: \Big)
589: \rho_{{\rm ss}}
590: \Big( \cdots \Big)^{\dag}\;,
591: \end{equation}
592: where
593: \begin{equation}
594: f(\sigma_y,\beta)\equiv\frac{e^{\gamma t_p/2}-1}{\gamma}
595: (2E+ig\sigma_y)+(-1)^{k_p}\beta e^{\gamma t_p/2}\,.
596: \end{equation}
597: We note that
598: \begin{equation}
599: [\sigma_y, \rho_{\rm ss}]=0\ \ \ {\rm and}\ \ \ (\sigma_y)^2=\one\,.
600: \end{equation}
601: Using the first of these properties and the expression for $\rho_{\rm ss}$
602: as given by Eq.~(\ref{RhoSS}), we have by direct calculation
603: \begin{eqnarray} \label{aPlusF}
604: [a+f(\sigma_y,\beta)]\rho_{\rm ss} [a+f(\sigma_y,\beta)]^{\dag}
605: &=& \Big( f(\sigma_y,\beta) [f(\sigma_y,\beta)]^{\dag}
606: +2{\rm Re}[f(\sigma_y,\beta)] {\rm Re}(\alpha) \cr
607: && +2{\rm Im}[f(\sigma_y,\beta)] {\rm Im}(\alpha)\sigma_y
608: +|\alpha|^2
609: \Big)\rho_{\rm ss}\,,
610: \end{eqnarray}
611: where $\alpha=(2E+ig)/\gamma$. We will use this equation for imaginary $\beta$
612: in the next section.
613:
614: For the rest of this section, we assume that $\beta$ is real. Using this
615: and the fact that $(\sigma_y)^2=\one$, we find that
616: \begin{equation}
617: f(\sigma_y)[f(\sigma_y)]^{\dag}
618: =\frac{4E^2+g^2}{\gamma^2}[e^{\gamma t_p/2}-1]^2
619: +\beta^2e^{\gamma t_p}
620: +\frac{4E\beta}{\gamma}(-1)^{k_p}
621: (e^{\gamma t_p}-e^{\gamma t_p/2})\,,
622: \end{equation}
623: and
624: \begin{equation}
625: {\rm Re}[f(\sigma_y)] {\rm Re}(\alpha)
626: +{\rm Im}[f(\sigma_y)] {\rm Im}(\alpha)\sigma_y
627: =\frac{4E^2+g^2}{\gamma^2}(e^{\gamma t_p/2}-1)
628: +\frac{2E\beta}{\gamma}(-1)^{k_p}e^{\gamma t_p/2}\,.
629: \end{equation}
630: Because $|\alpha|^2=|2E+ig|^2/\gamma^2=(4E^2+g^2)/\gamma^2$
631: we therefore have according to Eq.~(\ref{aPlusF}):
632: \begin{equation}
633: [a+f(\sigma_y,\beta)]\rho_{{\rm ss}}[a+f(\sigma_y,\beta)]^\dag
634: = e^{\gamma t_p} [\frac{4E^2+g^2}{\gamma^2}
635: +(-1)^{k_p}\frac{4E\beta}{\gamma}+\beta^2]\,.
636: \end{equation}
637: Substituting this into (\ref{NewEquationForR}) we obtain:
638: \begin{equation} \label{RrhoSubSS}
639: G(\rho_{\rm ss},\beta) =(\Delta t)^m \prod_{p=1}^{m}
640: \Big(
641: \frac{4E^2+g^2}{\gamma^2}+(-1)^{k_p}\frac{4E\beta}{\gamma}+\beta^2
642: \Big)
643: \rho_{\rm ss}\;.
644: \end{equation}
645: Therefore, according to Eq.~(\ref{pMrhoM}),
646: \begin{equation} \label{IDontKnowHowToCallIt}
647: \rho_{\rm c}(k_1,\dots,k_m ; \Delta t)
648: \propto N(\Delta t)\rho_{\rm ss}N^{\dag}(\Delta t)\,,\ \
649: \ {\rm for\ any\ real}\ \beta\,.
650: \end{equation}
651: As the final step of our argument, we now prove a lemma that, together with
652: Eq.~(\ref{IDontKnowHowToCallIt}) and
653: the normalization of the density matrix, implies Eq.~(\ref{BlankMeasurement1}).\\
654:
655: \noindent{\bf Lemma 2} {\it
656: Smooth evolution leaves $\rho_{\rm ss}$ invariant in the following sense:}
657: \begin{equation}
658: N(\Delta t)\rho_{\rm ss}N^{\dag}(\Delta t)\propto \rho_{\rm ss}\,.
659: \end{equation}
660: {\bf Proof}\\
661: Because $\sigma_y$ and $\rho_{\rm ss}$ commute, we can see from
662: Eq.~(\ref{RhoSS}) that the smooth evolution leaves $\rho_{\rm ss}$ diagonal:
663: \begin{equation} \label{LeavesRhoSSDiagonal}
664: N(\Delta t)\rho_{\rm ss}[N(\Delta t)]^{\dag}
665: =
666: \left(\begin{array}{cc}
667: \Lambda_1&0\\
668: 0& \Lambda_2
669: \end{array}
670: \right)\,.
671: \end{equation}
672: Using Theorem~1 we have
673: \begin{eqnarray} \label{BothLambdas}
674: 2e^{-2Z_1}\Lambda_1 &=&
675: \Big(e^{-\frac{\gamma\Delta t}{2}a^{\dag}a}
676: e^{Z_2^{+}a^{\dag}}
677: e^{Z_3^{-}a}
678: \Big) |\alpha\rangle\langle\alpha|\Big(\cdots\Big)^{\dag}\,,\cr
679: 2e^{-2Z_1}\Lambda_2 &=&
680: \Big(e^{-\frac{\gamma\Delta t}{2}a^{\dag}a}
681: e^{Z_2^{-}a^{\dag}}
682: e^{Z_3^{+}a}
683: \Big) |\alpha^*\rangle\langle\alpha^*|\Big(\cdots\Big)^{\dag}\,,
684: \end{eqnarray}
685: where
686: \begin{eqnarray}
687: &&\hspace{-10mm}
688: Z_2^{\pm}\equiv\frac{2E\pm ig}{\gamma}(e^{\gamma\Delta t/2}-1)\,,\cr
689: &&\hspace{-10mm}
690: Z_3^{\pm}\equiv\frac{2E\pm ig}{\gamma}(e^{-\gamma\Delta t/2}-1)\,.
691: \end{eqnarray}
692: In order to calculate $\Lambda_1$ we use the identity
693: $e^{\lambda a^{\dag}}|\alpha\rangle\langle\alpha |e^{\lambda^* a}
694: =e^{|\alpha+\lambda|^2-|\alpha|^2}
695: |\alpha+\lambda\rangle\langle\alpha+\lambda|$
696: which gives
697: \begin{equation}
698: 2e^{-2Z_1}\Lambda_1=
699: |e^{Z_3^{-}\alpha}|e^{|\alpha+Z_2^{+}|^2-|\alpha|^2}
700: \Big( e^{-\frac{\gamma\Delta t}{2}a^{\dag}a}
701: |\alpha+Z_2^{+}\rangle\langle\alpha+Z_2^{+}|
702: e^{-\frac{\gamma\Delta t}{2}a^{\dag}a}\Big)\,.
703: \end{equation}
704: Now, with the help of the identity $ e^{-\lambda a^\dag a}|\alpha\rangle\langle\alpha|e^{-\lambda a^{\dag}a}
705: =e^{|\alpha|^2(e^{-2\lambda}-1)}
706: |\alpha e^{-\lambda}\rangle\langle\alpha e^{-\lambda}|$ we have
707: \begin{equation}
708: 2e^{-2Z_1}\Lambda_1=
709: |e^{Z_3^{-}\alpha}|
710: e^{|\alpha+Z_2^{+}|^2 e^{-\gamma\Delta t} -|\alpha |^2 }
711: |(\alpha+Z_2^{+})e^{-\frac{\gamma \Delta t}{2}}\rangle
712: \langle(\alpha+Z_2^{+})e^{-\frac{\gamma \Delta t}{2}}|\,.
713: \end{equation}
714: Using the definition of $Z_2^{+}$ and the value of
715: $\alpha=(2E+ig)/\gamma$ we see that
716: \begin{equation}
717: (\alpha+Z_2^{+})e^{-\frac{\gamma \Delta t}{2}}=\alpha.
718: \end{equation}
719: Therefore
720: \begin{equation}
721: 2e^{-2Z_1}\Lambda_1=
722: |e^{Z_3^{-}\alpha}|
723: | \alpha\rangle\langle \alpha|\,.
724: \end{equation}
725: Repeating the same arguments for $\Lambda_2$ we have from
726: Eq.~(\ref{BothLambdas}):
727: \begin{equation}
728: 2e^{-2Z_1}\Lambda_2=
729: |e^{Z_3^{+}\alpha^*}|
730: | \alpha^*\rangle\langle \alpha^*|\,.
731: \end{equation}
732: Because $|e^{Z_3^{-}\alpha}|= |e^{Z_3^{+}\alpha^*}|$ we can now see that
733: \begin{equation}
734: \left(\begin{array}{cc}
735: \Lambda_1&0\\
736: 0& \Lambda_2
737: \end{array}
738: \right)
739: \propto \left(\begin{array}{cc}
740: | \alpha\rangle\langle \alpha| &0\\
741: 0& | \alpha^*\rangle\langle \alpha^*|
742: \end{array}
743: \right) = 2\rho_{\rm ss}\,.
744: \end{equation}
745: Together with Eq.~(\ref{LeavesRhoSSDiagonal}) this completes the proof.
746: $\Box$
747:
748:
749: \section{Conditional evolution starting from the steady state} \label{Sec:Cond}
750:
751: In the previous section we have shown that, for a real value of $\beta$, a
752: homodyne measurement does not give any information about the system once
753: it has reached the steady state $\rho_{\rm ss}$. Although this fact was useful
754: in confirming that $\rho_{\rm ss}$ is indeed a steady state of the system,
755: such a measurement would be pointless in practice.
756:
757: We therefore consider the case of purely imaginary $\beta$, for which the
758: homodyne measurement does provide information about the system. We write
759: $\beta$ in the form $\beta=i\beta_0$, where
760: $\beta_0$ is real. To find the conditional density matrix in this case, we go
761: back to Eqns.~(\ref{NewEquationForR}--\ref{aPlusF}) and obtain by direct
762: calculation:
763: \begin{equation}
764: f(\sigma_y)[f(\sigma_y)]^{\dag}
765: =\frac{4E^2+g^2}{\gamma^2}
766: (e^{\gamma t_p/2}-1)^2
767: +\beta_0^2 e^{\gamma t_p}
768: +(-1)^{k_p}\frac{2g\beta_0}{\gamma}
769: (e^{\gamma t_p}-e^{\gamma t_p/2})\,,
770: \end{equation}
771: and
772: \begin{equation}
773: {\rm Re}[f(\sigma_y)] {\rm Re}(\alpha)
774: +{\rm Im}[f(\sigma_y)] {\rm Im}(\alpha)\sigma_y
775: =
776: \frac{4E^2+g^2}{\gamma^2}(e^{\gamma t_p/2}-1)
777: +(-1)^{k_p}\frac{g\beta_0}{\gamma} e^{\gamma t_p/2}\sigma_y\,.
778: \end{equation}
779: Therefore
780: \begin{eqnarray}
781: G(\rho_{\rm ss}, i\beta_0)
782: &=&
783: \int_0^{\Delta t}dt_m\int_0^{\Delta t}dt_{m-1}\cdots\int_0^{\Delta t}dt_1 \cr
784: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \prod_{p=1}^{m}
785: \Big(
786: \frac{4E^2+g^2}{\gamma^2}+\beta_0^2
787: +(-1)^{k_p}\frac{2g \beta_0}{\gamma}
788: [\one+(\sigma_y-\one)e^{-\gamma t_p/2}]
789: \Big)\rho_{\rm ss}\,.
790: \end{eqnarray}
791: Performing the integration we obtain
792: \begin{eqnarray}
793: G(\rho_{\rm ss}, i\beta_0)
794: &=&\prod_{p=1}^{m}
795: \Big[\Delta t\cdot \Big(
796: \frac{4E^2+g^2}{\gamma^2}+\beta_0^2
797: +(-1)^{k_p}\frac{2g \beta_0}{\gamma}\Big)\cr
798: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ +
799: (-1)^{k_p} 4g \beta_0(\sigma_y-\one)
800: \frac{1- e^{-\gamma \Delta t/2}}{\gamma^2}
801: \Big]\rho_{\rm ss}\;.
802: \end{eqnarray}
803: Because $\rho_{\rm ss}$ and $\sigma_y$ are both diagonal
804: in the basis $\{\ket{\pm}\}$ defined in Eq.~(\ref{basis}),
805: the conditional density matrix can be written in the form
806: \begin{equation}
807: \rho_{\rm c}(k_1,\dots,k_m;\Delta t)=
808: \left(\begin{array}{cc}
809: \lambda_1 |\alpha\rangle\langle\alpha|&0\\
810: 0& \lambda_2 |\alpha^*\rangle\langle\alpha^*|
811: \end{array}
812: \right)\,,
813: \end{equation}
814: where $\alpha=(2E+ig)/\gamma$. For the eigenvalues $\lambda_1$ and
815: $\lambda_2=1-\lambda_1$ we have the following simple formula:
816: \begin{equation}
817: \frac{\lambda_1}{\lambda_2}=
818: \prod_{p=1}^{m}\frac{b+(-1)^{k_p}}{b
819: +(-1)^{k_p}(1-\frac{4}{\gamma\Delta t}
820: (1-e^{-\gamma\Delta t/2}))}\,,
821: \end{equation}
822: where $b\equiv (4E^2+g^2+\gamma^2\beta_0^2)/(2g\gamma\beta_0)$. Similarly
823: simple expressions can be obtained for any complex reference field
824: $\beta$.
825:
826: \section{Conclusion} \label{Sec:Conclusion}
827:
828: In this paper, we have given explicit formulas for the quantum state evolution
829: conditioned on a discrete homodyne photocount record for a typical
830: experimental setup in single-atom cavity QED. These formulas have potential
831: applications for the real-time processing of experimental data.
832: The general methods developed here can be applied to a wide class of similar
833: systems. For example, it should be straightforward to generalize our results
834: to the case of heterodyne measurements.
835:
836:
837:
838: \acknowledgements
839:
840: We would like to thank Howard Wiseman for helpful comments on a
841: previous version of this manuscript. This work was supported by the EU
842: IST programme.
843:
844:
845: \section*{Appendix}
846:
847:
848: \noindent{\bf Theorem 1}
849: {\it The operator
850: \begin{equation} \label{defM}
851: M(t)=\exp\left[ig\frac{\sigma_y}{2}(a^\dag+a)t+E(a^{\dag}-a)t
852: -\frac{\gamma t}{2}a^{\dag}a \right]
853: \end{equation}
854: can be factorized as
855: \begin{equation}
856: M(t)= e^{Z_1}
857: e^{-\frac{\gamma t}{2}a^{\dag}a}
858: e^{Z_2 a^{\dag}}
859: e^{Z_3 a}\;,
860: \end{equation}
861: where
862: \begin{eqnarray}
863: Z_1&=&\frac{4E^2+g^2}{\gamma^2}(1-e^{-\gamma t/2}-\gamma t/2) \cr
864: Z_2&=& \frac{2E+ig\sigma_y}{\gamma}(e^{\gamma t/2}-1)\cr
865: Z_3&=&\frac{2E-ig\sigma_y}{\gamma}(e^{-\gamma t/2}-1)
866: \end{eqnarray}}\\
867: {\bf Proof}\\
868: Because $a, a^\dag$, $a^\dag a$ and $\one$ span a Lie algebra, $M(t)$
869: can be factorized in a systematic way as follows. First we find
870: a function $x(t)$ such that
871: \begin{equation} \label{FirstFactor}
872: M(t)=e^{x(t)a^{\dag}a}\tilde{M}(t)\;,
873: \end{equation}
874: where $\tilde{M}(t)$ is an exponential of a linear combination of
875: $a$ and $a^{\dag}$. We will then repeat the same procedure factorizing
876: $\tilde{M}$ which will conclude the prove of the theorem.
877:
878: Equation (\ref{FirstFactor}) gives
879: \begin{equation}
880: \frac{d{M}}{dt}=\dot{x}a^{\dag}a\; e^{x a^{\dag}a}\tilde{M}
881: +e^{x a^{\dag}a}{d\tilde{M}\over dt}\;.
882: \end{equation}
883: On the other hand, Eq.~(\ref{defM}) gives
884: \begin{equation}
885: \frac{d{M}}{dt}=[ig\frac{\sigma_y}{2}(a^\dag+a)+E(a^{\dag}-a)
886: -\frac{\gamma}{2} a^{\dag}a ]e^{x a^{\dag}a}\tilde{M}\;.
887: \end{equation}
888: Comparing this expression with the previous one we have
889: \begin{equation} \label{dotTildeM}
890: {d\tilde{M}\over dt}= [\chi(x)
891: -(\dot{x}+\gamma/2) a^{\dag}a] \tilde{M}\;,
892: \end{equation}
893: where
894: \begin{equation}
895: \chi(x)=e^{-x a^{\dag}a}
896: [ig\frac{\sigma_y}{2}(a^\dag+a)+E(a^{\dag}-a)]
897: e^{x a^{\dag}a}\;.
898: \end{equation}
899: Using the identity $e^{-xa^{\dag} a}a e^{x a^{\dag}a}=ae^{x}$,
900: the above equation can be rewritten as
901: \begin{equation}
902: \chi(x)=(E+ig\frac{\sigma_y}{2})e^{-x} a^{\dag}
903: -(E-ig\frac{\sigma_y}{2})e^{x} a\;.
904: \end{equation}
905: Looking at Eq.~(\ref{dotTildeM}) we demand that
906: \begin{equation} \label{ForX}
907: \dot{x}+\gamma/2=0\;,
908: \end{equation}
909: thereby making $d\tilde{M}/dt$ independent of $a^{\dag}a$.
910: From Eq.~(\ref{defM}) we see that $M(0)=\one$ and therefore,
911: we choose, in accordance with Eq.~(\ref{FirstFactor}), that
912: \begin{equation}
913: x(0)=0 {\mbox{\rm \ \ and\ \ }} \tilde{M}(0)=\one\;.
914: \end{equation}
915: With these conditions equation (\ref{ForX})
916: can be integrated to give, according to Eqns.~(\ref{FirstFactor})
917: and (\ref{dotTildeM}),
918: \begin{equation}
919: M(t)=e^{-\frac{\gamma t}{2}a^{\dag}a}\tilde{M}(t)\;,
920: \end{equation}
921: where
922: \begin{equation} \label{tildeM}
923: {d\tilde{M}\over dt}=
924: [(E+ig\frac{\sigma_y}{2})e^{\gamma t/2}a^{\dag}
925: -(E-ig\frac{\sigma_y}{2})e^{-\gamma t/2}a
926: ]e^{ya^{\dag}}\tilde{M}'\;.
927: \end{equation}
928: The proof of the theorem will be completed if we repeat the same
929: procedure for factorizing $\tilde{M}$. As before we introduce a function
930: $y(t)$ such that
931: \begin{equation} \label{SecondFactor}
932: \tilde{M}(t)=e^{y(t)a^{\dag}}\tilde{M}'(t)\,.
933: \end{equation}
934: We therefore have
935: \begin{equation}
936: {d\tilde{M}\over dt}
937: =\dot{y}a^{\dag}e^{ya^{\dag}}\tilde{M}'
938: +e^{y a^{\dag}}{d\tilde{M}'\over dt}\;.
939: \end{equation}
940: Combined with Eq.~(\ref{tildeM}) this gives
941: \begin{equation}
942: {d\tilde{M}'\over dt}=
943: [(E+ig\frac{\sigma_y}{2})e^{\gamma t/2}a^{\dag}
944: -(E-ig\frac{\sigma_y}{2})e^{-\gamma t/2} e^{-ya^{\dag}}ae^{ya^{\dag}}
945: -\dot{y}a^{\dag}
946: ]\tilde{M}'\,.
947: \end{equation}
948: Using the identity $e^{-ya^{\dag}}ae^{ya^{\dag}}=a+y$
949: we rewrite the above expression as
950: \begin{equation} \label{dotTildeMprime}
951: {d\tilde{M}'\over dt}=
952: \left([(E+ig\frac{\sigma_y}{2})e^{\gamma t/2}-\dot{y}] a^{\dag}
953: -(E-ig\frac{\sigma_y}{2})e^{-\gamma t/2} (a+y)
954: \right)\tilde{M}'\,.
955: \end{equation}
956: We eliminate $a^{\dag}$ from this expression by setting
957: \begin{equation} \label{dotY}
958: \dot{y}=(E+ig\frac{\sigma_y}{2})e^{\gamma t/2}\,.
959: \end{equation}
960: Equation (\ref{SecondFactor}) suggests the boundary conditions
961: \begin{equation}
962: y(0)=0 {\mbox{\rm \ \ and\ \ }} \tilde{M}'(0)=\one\;.
963: \end{equation}
964: Performing integration in (\ref{dotTildeMprime}) and in (\ref{dotY})
965: using these boundary conditions and the fact that $\sigma_y^2=\one$
966: we have according to (\ref{SecondFactor})
967: \begin{equation}
968: \tilde{M}(t)=\exp[\frac{2E+ig\sigma_y}{\gamma}(e^{\gamma t/2}-1)
969: a^{\dag}]\tilde{M}'(t)\,,
970: \end{equation}
971: where
972: \begin{equation}
973: \tilde{M}'(t)=\exp[\frac{4E^2+g^2}{\gamma^2}
974: (1-e^{-\gamma t/2}-\gamma t/2)]
975: \exp[-\frac{2E-ig\sigma_y}{\gamma}(1-e^{-\gamma t/2})a]\,.
976: \end{equation}
977: This completes the proof of the theorem.
978: $\Box$ \\
979:
980: \noindent{\bf Corollary}
981: \begin{equation}
982: e^{-iH_0t}=e^{-g^2t^2/8}e^{igt\sigma_y a^\dag/2}
983: e^{igt\sigma_y a/2}\,.
984: \end{equation}
985: {\bf Proof}\\
986: This can be established easily by repeating the arguments of Theorem 1 for
987: $E=0$ and $\gamma=0$. $\Box$ \\
988:
989:
990: \noindent{\bf Theorem 2}
991: {\it Using the definition
992: \begin{equation} \label{fk}
993: f_k\equiv\sqrt{\gamma/2}\,e^{i\pi(k-1)/2}
994: \end{equation}
995: and the notation of Theorem 1, we have
996: \begin{equation} \label{CkM}
997: C_kM(t)=M(t) f_k [e^{-\gamma t/2}a
998: +\frac{1-e^{-\gamma t/2}}{\gamma}
999: (2E+ig\sigma_y)+(-1)^k\beta]\,.
1000: \end{equation}}\\
1001: {\bf Proof}\\
1002: By definition [Eqns. (\ref{Ck}) and (\ref{fk})] and using
1003: Theorem~1 we have
1004: \begin{equation}
1005: C_kM(t)=f_ke^{Z_1}[a+(-1)^k\beta]
1006: e^{-\frac{\gamma t}{2}a^{\dag}a}
1007: e^{Z_2 a^{\dag}}
1008: e^{Z_3 a}\;,
1009: \end{equation}
1010: where $Z_1$, $Z_2$ and $Z_3$ are specified in the statement of
1011: Theorem~1. Using subsequently the identities
1012: $e^{-xa^{\dag} a}a e^{x a^{\dag}a}=ae^{x}$
1013: and then $e^{-ya^{\dag}}ae^{ya^{\dag}}=a+y$ we have
1014: \begin{eqnarray}
1015: C_kM(t)&=&f_ke^{Z_1}
1016: e^{-\frac{\gamma t}{2}a^{\dag}a}
1017: [e^{-\gamma t/2}a+(-1)^k\beta]
1018: e^{Z_2 a^{\dag}}
1019: e^{Z_3 a}\cr
1020: &=&f_ke^{Z_1}
1021: e^{-\frac{\gamma t}{2}a^{\dag}a}
1022: e^{Z_2 a^{\dag}}
1023: [e^{-\gamma t/2}(a+Z_2)+(-1)^k\beta]
1024: e^{Z_3 a}\cr
1025: &=&f_kM(t) [e^{-\gamma t/2}(a+Z_2)+(-1)^k\beta]\,.
1026: \end{eqnarray}
1027: Putting the value of $Z_2$ from Theorem~1 we have
1028: Eq.~(\ref{CkM}) as required.
1029: $\Box$\\
1030:
1031:
1032:
1033: %\bibliographystyle{prsty}
1034: %\bibliography{andrei.bib}
1035:
1036: \begin{thebibliography}{10}
1037:
1038: \bibitem{HoodEtAl_2000}
1039: C.~J. Hood {\it et~al.}, Science {\bf 287}, 1447 (2000).
1040:
1041: \bibitem{PinkseEtAl_2000}
1042: P.~W.~H. Pinkse, T. Fischer, P. Maunz, and G. Rempe, Nature {\bf 404}, 365
1043: (2000).
1044:
1045: \bibitem{LiuEtAl_2000}
1046: X.~M. Liu, M. Hug, and G.~J. Milburn, Phys.\ Rev.\ A {\bf 62}, 043801 (2000).
1047:
1048: \bibitem{DohertyEtAl_2000}
1049: A.~C. Doherty {\it et~al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ A {\bf 62}, 012105 (2000).
1050:
1051: \bibitem{Steane_1998}
1052: A. Steane, Rep. Prog. Phys. {\bf 61}, 117 (1998).
1053:
1054: \bibitem{HoodEtAl_1998}
1055: C.~J. Hood, M.~S. Chapman, T.~W. Lynn, and H.~J. Kimble, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.
1056: {\bf 80}, 4157 (1998).
1057:
1058: \bibitem{Rempe_2000}
1059: G. Rempe, Phys.\ World$\ $ {\bf 13}, 37 (2000).
1060:
1061: \bibitem{PlenioKnight_1998}
1062: M.~B. Plenio and P.~L. Knight, Rev.\ Mod.\ Phys.$\ $ {\bf 70}, 101 (1998).
1063:
1064: \bibitem{AlsingCarmichael_1991}
1065: P. Alsing and H.~J. Carmichael, Quantum\ Opt.$\ $ {\bf 3}, 13 (1991).
1066:
1067: \bibitem{MabuchiWiseman_1998}
1068: H. Mabuchi and H.~M. Wiseman, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 81}, 4620 (1998).
1069:
1070: \bibitem{WisemanMilburn_1993b}
1071: H.~M. Wiseman and G.~J. Milburn, Phys.\ Rev.\ A {\bf 47}, 642 (1993).
1072:
1073: \bibitem{Carmichael1993b}
1074: H.~J. Carmichael, {\em An Open Systems Approach to Quantum Optics} (Springer,
1075: Berlin, 1993).
1076:
1077: \bibitem{Louisell_1990}
1078: W.~H. Louisell, {\em Quantum Statistical Properties of Radiation} (Wiley, New
1079: York, 1990).
1080:
1081: \bibitem{WisemanMilburn_1993a}
1082: H.~M. Wiseman and G.~J. Milburn, Phys.\ Rev.\ A {\bf 47}, 1652 (1993).
1083:
1084: \end{thebibliography}
1085:
1086:
1087: \end{document}
1088:
1089: