Studies of the Quantum Dynamics of Rydberg Electrons in Superintense Laser Fields Using Discrete Variable Representations

  • J. T. Muckerman
  • R. V. Weaver
  • T. A. B. Kennedy
  • T. Uzer
Chapter
Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (ASIC, volume 412)

Abstract

We present calculations on the quantum dynamics of Rydberg states in intense laser fields using a new discrete variable representation adapted to the Coulomb problem to obtain the time-dependent wavefunction. We have observed stabilization against ionization in regimes approximately predicted by the ponderomotive energy criterion of Pont and Shakeshaft. We have analyzed our wavefunctions in terms of the bound and continuum states of the field-free hydrogen atom, and find clear evidence that stabilization is associated with the excitation of very high Rydberg states, which are very stable against ionization, thereby trapping population.

Keywords

Legendre Polynomial Laser Field Ionization Rate Quadrature Rule Rydberg State 
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    For some recent lasers, peak intensities of around 1015 W/cmz with a turn-on time of 50 femtoseconds have been reported, though some others have reported higher intensities than these in diffraction-limited focal spots.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    For a review, see R. Shakeshaft, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 4, 705 (1987).Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    F.H.M. Faisal, Theory of Multiphoton Processes ( Plenum, New York, 1987 ).Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    M. Pont, Phys. Rev. A 44, 2141 (1991).Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    M. Pont and M. Gavrila, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 2362 (1990).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    M. Pont, Phys. Rev. A 44, 2152 (1991).Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    For a recent review, see J.H. Eberly, J. Javanainen, and K. Rzazewski, Phys. Rep. 204, 331 (1991).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    X. Tang and R. Shakeshaft, Z. Phys. D 6, 113 (1987).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    K.C. Kulander, Phys. Rev. A 35, 445 (1987).Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    R.M. Potvliege and R. Shakeshaft, Phys. Rev. A 38, 4597 (1988).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    R.M. Potvliege and R. Shakeshaft, Phys. Rev. A 40, 3061 (1989).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    K.C. Kulander, in Multiphoton Processes, Cambridge Studies in Modern Optics, Volume 8, S.J. Smith and P.L. Knight, eds. ( Cambridge University Press, New York 1988 ), p. 116.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    E.g., X. Tang, H. Rudolph, and P. Lambropoulos, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 3269 (1990) and references therein.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    M. Pont, D. Proulx, and R. Shakeshaft, Phys. Rev. A 44, 4486 (1991).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    M. Pont, Phys. Rev. A 44, 2141 (1991).Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    K. LaGattuta, Phys. Rev. A 41, 5110 (1990); ibid. A 43, 5157 (1991).Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    R. Shakeshaft, R.M. Potvliege, M. Dorr, and W.E. Cooke, Phys. Rev. A 42, 1656 (1990).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    K.J. Schaefer and K.C. Kulander, Phys. Rev. A 42, 5794 (1990).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    K.J. Schaefer and K.C. Kulander, Comput. Phys. Commun. 63, 427 (1991).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    C. Cerjan and K.C. Kulander, Comput. Phys. Commun. 63, 529 (1991).ADSMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    K.C. Kulander, K.J. Schaefer, and J.L. Krause, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 2601 (1991).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    C. Cerjan, J. Opt. Soc. Am, B 7, 680 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    K. Burnett, P.L. Knight, B.R.M. Piraux, and V.C. Reed, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 301 (1991).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    B. Piraux, E. Huens, and P. Knight, Phys. Rev. A 44, 721 (1991).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    M. Pont, N.R. Valet, M. Gavrila, and C.W. McCurdy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 939 (1988).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    W.C. Henneberger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 21, 368 (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    H.A. Kramers, in Les Particles Elementaires, Proceedings of the Eighth Solvay Conference, edited by R. Stoops ( Wiley, New York, 1950 ).Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    J.I. Gersten and M.H. Mittelman, J. Phys. B 9, 2561 (1976).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    M. Gavrila and J.Z. Kaminski, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 613 (1984).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    V.C. Reed and K. Burnett, Phys. Rev. A 42, 3152 (1990).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    V.C. Revd, P.L.. Knight, and K. Burnett, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 1415 (1991).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    Q. Su, J.H. Eberly, and J. Javanainen, Phys.Rev.Lett. 64, 862 (1990) and references therein.Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    E.g., P.H. Bucksbaum, in Atomic and Molecular Processes with Short Intense Laser Pulses, NATO ASI Series, Series B: Physics Volume 171.Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    W.E. Cooke and R. Shakeshaft, Phys. Rev. A 43, 251 (1991).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. [35]
    M. Pont and R. Shakeshaft, Phys. Rev. A 44, R4110 (1991).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. [36]
    A. Bugacov, B. Piraux, M. Pont, and R. Shakeshaft, Phys. Rev. A 45, 3041 (1992).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. [37]
    J. Javanainen, J.H. Eberly, and Q. Su, Phys. Rev. A 38, 3430 (1988).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. [38]
    J.H. Eberly, Q. Su, and J. Javanainen, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 6, 1289 (1989).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. [39]
    J.H. Eberly, Q. Su, J. Javanainen, K.C. Kulander, B.W. Shore, and L. Roso-Franco, J. Mod. Opt. 36, 829 (1989).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. [40]
    J.H. Eberly, Q. Su, W.G. Greenwood, and J. Javanainen, Acta Physica Polonica A 78, 705 (1990).Google Scholar
  41. [41]
    Q. Su and J.H. Eberly, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 7, 565 (1990).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. [42]
    Q. Su and J.H. Eberly, Phys. Rev. A 43, 2474 (1991).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. [43]
    M.V. Fedorov and M. Yu. Ivanov, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 7, 569 (1990).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. [44]
    J. Parker and C.R. Stroud, Jr., Phys. Rev. A 41, 1602 (1990).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. [45]
    J. Grochimalicki, M. Lewenstein, and K. Rzazewski, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 1038 (1991).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. [46]
    X. Tang and S. Basile, Phys. Rev. A 44, R1454 (1991).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. [47]
    G.D. Billing, N.E. Henriksen, and C. Leforestier, Phys. Rev. A 45, R4229 (1992).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. [48]
    M. Pont, M.J. Offerhaus, and M. Gavrila, Z. Phys. D 9, 297 (1988); J.L. Madajczyk, M. Pont, R.M. Potvliege, R. Shakeshaft and H.S. Taylor, Phys. Rev. A 45, 4848 (1992).Google Scholar
  49. [49]
    F. Benvenuto, G. Casati, and D.L. Shepelyansky, Phys. Rev. A 45, R7670 (1992).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. [50]
    J.C. Light, I.P. Hamilton and J.V. Lill, J. Chem. Phys. 82, 1400 (1985).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. [51]
    I.P. Hamilton and J.C. Light, J. Chem. Phys 84, 306 (1986); Z. Bacic and J.C. Light, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 40, 469 (1989); S.E. Choi and J.C. Light, J. Chem. Phys. 90, 2593 (1989).Google Scholar
  52. [52]
    R.V. Weaver, J.T. Muckerman, and T. Uzer, in Time-Dependent Quantum Molecular Dynamics: Experiment and Theory (J. Broeckhove, ed.).Google Scholar
  53. [53]
    M. Pont and R. Shakeshaft, Phys. Rev. A 44, R4110 (1991).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. [54]
    R.J. Vos and M. Gavrila, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 170 (1992).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. [55]
    R.R. Jones and P.H. Bucksbaum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 3215 (1991).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. [56]
    T. Seideman and W.H. Miller, J. Chem. Phys. 96, 4412 (1992).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. [57]
    D. Kosloff and R. Kosloff, J. Comput. Phys. 52, 35 (1983).ADSMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. [58]
    C.C. Marsten and G.G. Balint-Kurti, J. Chem. Phys, 91, 23 (1988).Google Scholar
  59. [59]
    D.E. Manolopoulos and R.E. Wyatt, Chem. Phys. Lett. 152, 23 (1988).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. [60]
    F.J. Lin and J.T. Muckerman, Comp. Phys. Commun. 63, 538 (1991).MathSciNetADSMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. [61]
    C. Leforestier, R.H. Bisseling, C. Cerjan, M.D. Feit, R. Friesner, A. Guldberg, A. Hammerlich, G. Jolicard, W. Karrlein, H.-D. Meyer, N. Lipkin, O. Roncero, and R. Kosloff, J. Comp. Phys. 94, 59 (1991).ADSMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. [62]
    C. Cerjan and K.C. Kulander, Comp. Phys. Commun. 63, 529 (1991).ADSMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. [63]
    J. T. Muckerman, Chem. Phys. Lett. 173, 200 (1990).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. [64]
    S.P. Goldman, Phys. Rev. A 40, 1185 (1989).Google Scholar
  65. [65]
    M. Rotenberg, Ann. Phys. 19, 262 (1962); Adv. At. Mol. Phys. 6, 223 (1970)Google Scholar
  66. [66]
    R.V. Jensen, S.M. Susskind, and M.M. Sanders, Phys. Rep. 201, 1 (1991).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. [67]
    R. Shakeshaft, Phys. Rev. A 34, 5119 (1986).Google Scholar
  68. [68]
    S.E. Choi and J.C. Light, J. Chem. Phys. 92, 2129 (1990).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. [69]
    E. Yurtsever, O. Yilmaz, and D.D. Shillady, Chem. Phys. Lett. 85, 111 (1982).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. [70]
    The comparative advantages of the p • A and d • E gauges are discussed in C. Baxter, M. Babiker, and R. Loudon, J. Mod. Opt. 37, 685 (1990).Google Scholar
  71. [71]
    Y. Guan, J.T. Muckerman, and T. Uzer, J. Chem. Phys. 93, 4400 (1990).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. [72]
    H.A. Bethe and E.E. Salpeter, Quantum Mechanics of One-and Two-Electron Atoms ( Plenum, New York, 1977 ).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. T. Muckerman
    • 1
  • R. V. Weaver
    • 2
  • T. A. B. Kennedy
    • 2
  • T. Uzer
    • 2
  1. 1.Chemistry DepartmentBrookhaven National LaboratoryUpton, Long IslandUSA
  2. 2.School of PhysicsGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations