Some New Effects in Atom Stern-Gerlach Interferometry

  • R. Mathevet
  • K. Brodsky
  • F. Perales
  • M. Boustimi
  • B. Viaris de Lesegno
  • J. Reinhardt
  • J. Robert
  • J. Baudon
Chapter

Abstract

Stern-Gerlach interferometry is based on the interaction of the magnetic moment of the atom (or molecule) with external magnetic fields. It owes its name to the use of magnetic field gradients to macroscopically split the incident beam into separated partial beams, as in the original Stern and Gerlach experiment. It is a polarization interferometry, which has much in common in its principle with the birefringent crystal-plate optical interferometry : the incident light wave is first linearly polarized at 45° with respect to the neutral axes of the crystal. Then at the entrance side of the plate, the state is a superposition with equal amplitudes of the polarization basis set vectors inside the crystal. Because of the multivalued refraction index, each polarization component accumulates a different phase shift inside the crystal. At the output side, the total state is a combination of two orthogonal polarization states. To be able to observe the interference pattern, one needs to project it on a single state ; this is achieved by the second polarizer, also called the analyzer.

Keywords

Interference Pattern Magnetic Field Gradient Transverse Magnetic Field Atom Interferometer Channel Electron Multiplier 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    R. Mathevet, K. Brodsky, B. J. Lawson-Daku, Ch. Miniatura, J. Robert, and J. Baudon, Phys. Rev. A. 56, 2954 (1997).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. DeGasperis, L. Fonda, and G. C. Ghirardi, Nuovo Cimento A 21, 471 (1974).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    L. Fonda, G. C. Ghirardi, and A. Rimini, Rep. Prog. Phys. 41, 587(1978).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    H. Nagazato, M. Namiki, S. Pascazio, and H. Rauch, Phys. Lett. A 199, 27 (1995).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    [5] B. Misra and E. C. G. Sudarshan, J. Math. Phys. 18, 756 (1977).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Boustimi, V. Bocvarski, B. Viaris de Lesegno, K. Brodsky, F. Perales, J. Baudon, and J. Robert, Phys. Rev. A. 61, 033602 (2000).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    E. Rasel, F. Pereira dos Santos, F. Pavone, F. Perales, C. S. Unnikrishnan , and M. Leduc, Eur. Phys. J. D 7, 311 (1999).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    E. Maréchal, R. Long, J.-L Bossenec, R. Barbé, J.-C Keller and O. Gorceix , Phys. Rev. A6O, 3197 (1999)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Mathevet
    • 1
  • K. Brodsky
    • 1
  • F. Perales
    • 1
  • M. Boustimi
    • 1
  • B. Viaris de Lesegno
    • 1
  • J. Reinhardt
    • 1
  • J. Robert
    • 1
  • J. Baudon
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire de Physique des LasersUniversité Paris-NordVilletaneuseFrance

Personalised recommendations