Macroscopic Quantum Superposition in a Three-Josephson-Junction Loop
Chapter
Abstract
We present microwave-spectroscopy experiments on two quantum levels of a superconducting loop with three Josephson junctions. The level separation between the ground state and first excited state shows an anti-crossing where two classical persistent-current states with opposite polarity are degenerate. This is evidence for symmetric and antisymmetric quantum superpositions of two macroscopic states; the classical states have persistent currents of 0.5 µA and correspond to the center-of-mass motion of millions of Cooper pairs. A study of the thermal occupancies of the two quantum levels shows that the loop is at low temperatures in a non-equilibrium state.
Keywords
Macroscopic quantum mechanics Josephson effect SQUIDs microwave spectroscopyPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- [1]P. W. Anderson, in Lectures on the Many-Body Problem, E. R. Caianiello, Ed. (Academic Press, New York, 1964), vol. 2, pp. 113–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [2]A. J. Leggett, Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 69, 80 (1980).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [3]K. K. Likharev, Sov. Phys. Usp. 26, 87 (1983).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [4]W. H. Zurek, Phys. Today 44, 36 (October 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [5]A. J. Leggett, A. Garg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 857 (1985).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [6]M. F. Bocko et al., IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 7, 3638 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [7]L. B. loffe et al., Nature 398, 679 (1999).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [8]J. E. Mooij et al., Science 285, 1036 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [9]T. P. Orlando et al., Phys. Rev. B. 60, 15398 (1999).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [10][10] We acknowledge that the results presented here do not exclude alternative theories for quantum mechanics (e. g. macro-realistic theories). This would require a type of experiment as proposed by Leggett et al. [5].Google Scholar
- [11][11] C. H. van der Wal et al., submitted to Science.Google Scholar
- [12]J. R. Friedman et al., Nature 406, 43 (2000).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [13]R. Rouse, S. Han, J. E. Lukens, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 1614 (1995).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [14]C. Cosmelli et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 5357 (1999).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [15]S. Han, R. Rouse, J. E. Lukens, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 1300 (2000).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [16]W. Wernsdorfer, R. Sessoli, Science 284, 133 (1999).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [17]M. Arndt et al., Nature 401, 680 (1999).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [18]T. H. Oosterkamp et al., Nature 395, 873 (1998).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [19]Y. Nakamura et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 2328 (1997).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [20]V. Bouchiat et al., Phys. Scr. T76, 165 (1998).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [21]D. J. Flees, S. Han, J. E. Lukens, J. Supercond. 12, 813 (1999).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [22]Y. Nakamura, Yu. A. Pashkin, J. S. Tsai, Nature 398, 786 (1999).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [23]C. H. van der Wal, J. E. Mooij, J. Supercond. 12, 807 (1999).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [24]A. J. Leggett et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. 59, 1 (1987).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [25]N. Prokof’ev, P. Stamp, Rep. Prog. Phys. 63, 669 (2000).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [26]L. Tian et al., to be published; cond-mat/9910062.Google Scholar
- [27]P. Silvestrini et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 3046 (1997).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Copyright information
© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2001