arXiv:1212.5864v2 [quant-ph] 2 Jan 2013 aumRb silto nue yvrulpoosi h ul the in virtual by induced oscillation Rabi Vacuum fa inter- an the of where regime (JC) the energy describes Jaynes-Cummings action which the 2], [1, particular, model In quan- light-matter in resonant of model interaction. the fundamental capturing a optics tum been has atom two-level ytmi hw nFg nwihaΞtp three-level lev- Ξ-type atomic a The cavity. which single-mode in els a 1 in confined our Fig. is of atom in configuration shown The is model. system Rabi driven a if occur absent. not would are dif- that photons a a oscillations virtual namely, address Rabi quantum atom, vacuum we dressed of of vacuum-field paper kind form the this of a In effect as ferent [16]. released radiation strength be vacuum coupling can atom-field photons ex- the For virtual modulating consequences. physical by direct ample, have are Hamiltonian, can the they photons in and virtual terms counter-rotating These by generated atom. the around dressed existing vacuum-field photons virtual of number significant [15]. dynamics revivals and transition collapse superradiance and [14], [13], generation non- [12], states blockade asymmetry classical the in [11], as Rabi-splitting phenomena vacuum such of novel regime, theoreti- coupling found ultrastrong addition, also coupled the In have gas investigations [10]. electron cal resonators two-dimensional metamaterial and to quantum 9], doped LC [8, embedding or wells microcavities [6] waveguide [7], coplanar including resonator with in resonators, systems photon cavity related superconducting and various in artificial experiments by plored osiueaRb oe.I diin hr sa ex- an between is transition there the addition, driving In field classical model. ternal Rabi a constitute ω s nteutatogculn eiewhere regime coupling ultrastrong inter- systems research the ion considerable in been trapped est has and there 4] Recently, [3, [5]. QED cavity in plications oprbeto comparable n h hr tmclevel atomic third the and c igemd lcrmgei editrcigwt a with interacting field electromagnetic single-mode A pcfial,w netgt h unu yaisof dynamics quantum the investigate we Specifically, the is regime coupling ultrastrong the in feature key A hs w tmclvl n h aiyfil mode field cavity the and levels atomic two These . | g i and | eateto hsc n nttt fTertclPhysics Theoretical of Institute and Physics of Department ~ e ASnmes 25.q 25.t 42.50.Lc 42.50.Ct, 42.50.Pq, numbers: PACS serve regime. could coupling scheme ampli Rabi ultrastrong interaction the vacuum the the to of Therefore proportional type state. is a ground frequency to Rabi corresponds auxiliary vacuum an process effective to The reversibly and photon. provide coherently photons real c evolve virtual to field, ultrastrong driving atom the external the in an atom of two-level aid the dressed vacuum-field a by ω i ~ A epeeta neato ceeta xiisadnmclc dynamical a exhibits that scheme interaction an present We r ope oacvt edo frequency of field cavity a to coupled are ω λ c n photon a and smc mle hnteeeg scale energy the than smaller much is and htn ogKn pca diitaieRgo,People’s Region, Administrative Special Kong Hong Shatin, ω A uhargm a enex- been has regime a Such . | f i ent htsm the- some that note We . ~ ω c a rmnosap- tremendous has , λ becomes .K Law K. C. | e i aiyfil oeo frequency of mode field cavity where H eae ytmi ieetdiigcngrto [21]. configuration driving different a in system related [18–20]. a experiments in Carusotto demonstrated Recently been circuit Ξ have in and atoms [17], atoms in artificial discussed was three-level QED of aspects oretical ee tmi aiy h tmcstates atomic The cavity. Ξ a a in of scheme atom Interaction level online) (Color 1: FIG. ecie by described ω Here and | ln tegh n h lsia rvn edhsafre- a has field driving classical the quency and strength, pling ehv etcutrrttn em because terms counter-rotating kept have we yaisatrtediigfil stre n oanalyze To on. the turned determine is to field is driving task the Our after field. dynamics driving the of absence aal to parable H Hamiltonian. the in htteculn ewe h aiymd n h level the and mode cavity the | between coupling the that g f p i R R i h aitna forsse sgvnb ( by given is system our of Hamiltonian The ntal h ytmi rprdi h rudsaeof state ground the in prepared is system the Initially and , rvstetasto between transition the drives H hc stelws-nrysaeo h ytmi the in system the of state lowest-energy the is which , sasmdt ewa n ota ti o included not is it that so and weak be to assumed is = | ω e = i h hns nvriyo ogKong, Hong of University Chinese The , 0 H ω rniinmti lmn htenables that element matrix transition a h parameter The . sapoeo rudsaesrcue in structures state ground of probe a as 2 ω ee copne yteeiso fa of emission the by accompanied level ste(ae rniinfeunybetween frequency transition (bare) the is 0 H ω R ueo igevrulpoo nthe in photon virtual single a of tude p ( f uln eie eso ht with that, show We regime. oupling neuneo ita htn carried photons virtual of onsequence R | n nitrcinsrnt .I writing In Ω. strength interaction an and steHmloino h aimdl[22], model Rabi the of Hamiltonian the is e − ω ih + H c silto,adw hwta the that show we and oscillation, ω e R ω 0 nteutatogculn eie Note regime. coupling ultrastrong the in |−| / n netra lsia edo frequency of field classical external an and , f stetasto rqec between frequency transition the is 2 | f g eulco China of Republic ih ih tal. et f g rsrn opigregime coupling trastrong | | )+ cos Ω + ω ω λ ω c p aesuidtednmc of dynamics the studied have c eoe h tmcvt cou- atom-cavity the denotes ω a g e c † a omaqatmRb model Rabi quantum a form | ω e + i p λ − t and ( ( yesuperconducting type f a | f + ih | a f e † i | . | )( g + i | g and | ih − e ih e yethree- type λ ~ | f + | e 1), = | scom- is i (1) ) | | e e n a and ih i H and g (2) | f | R ) i . , 2 the problem, we apply a unitary transformation to sim- where Ω′ = η1/4Ω is a renormalized driving field strength, plify the Hamiltonian. It is known that for low energy and the last term indicates a new coupling between |gi states of the Rabi model, HR can be transformed to into and |fi through the cavity field mode. a form of Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian approximately A further simplification can be made by exploiting res- −S by a unitary operator e [23]. Here the operator S and onance when ωp is tuned to a certain frequency its parameters are defined by: defined by the undriven system. In this paper we con- sider the resonance at λξ † S = (|gihe| + |eihg|)(a − a), (3) 2 ′ ωc λ ξ ω0 ω ωp = ωf + ωc − (ξ − 2) − , (11) ξ = c , (4)  ωc 2  ωc + ηω0 2 2 which corresponds to the transition between |g, 0i to 2λ ξ |f, 1i, since the square bracket term is the approxi- η = exp(− 2 ). (5) ωc mate ground state energy of HR by the transformation ′ S −S method. By the condition (11), |g, 0i and |f, 1i are res- Then it can be shown that HR = e HRe is approxi- mately given by [23–26] onantly coupled, but |f, 1i and |e, 1i is far away from resonance (the corresponding detuning is of order ωc). ω′ Therefore if Ω′ is not too strong, the system is confined H′ ≈ 0 (|eihe| − |gihg|)+ ω a†a + λ′(a|eihg| + a†|gihe|) R 2 c to the two resonantly coupled states, i.e., all off-resonant λ2ξ transitions may be ignored. In this way H′ in the inter- + (ξ − 2)(|eihe| + |gihg|) action picture is reduced to ωc ≡ HJC (6) λξ H′ ≈ − Ω′ (|g, 0ihf, 1| + |f, 1ihg, 0|) . (12) I 2ω where HJC describes a JC model in which the atomic fre- c quency and cavity-atom interaction strength are renor- Eq. (12) indicates that the system would execute a form ′ ′ malized as ω0 = ηω0 and λ =2ηω0ξλ/ωc, respectively. of vacuum Rabi oscillations, in which |g, 0i behaves as an ′ Note that HJC in Eq. (6) is an approximation to HR, excited atom in the vacuum field, and |f, 1i behaves as ′ and the difference HR −HJC describes multi-photon pro- an ground atom with a single photon. In cavity QED, cesses that correspond to higher order corrections [23– such oscillations lead to vacuum Rabi splitting [27–29]. −S 26]. Since |g, 0i is the ground state of HJC , e |g, 0i is an Note that the effective vacuum Rabi frequency here is ′ approximated ground state of HR in the original frame. λξΩ /ωc, which is significant in the ultrastrong coupling The accuracy of such an approximation has been tested regime where λ is comparable to ωc. in Ref. [23]. Specifically, if λ is comparable but smaller It is useful to go back to the original frame in which than ωc, the ground state energy of HJC has a good the Rabi oscillations occur between the states e−S|f, 1i agreement with that of HR obtained by exact numerical and e−S|g, 0i. Since e−S|f, 1i = |f, 1i, an initial ground calculations over a range of parameters. For example in state will evolve to |f, 1i after half of a Rabi period. If the case ωc = ω0 = 2λ, the approximated ground state we switch off the external field at this moment, the single energy obtained by HJC has the percentage error about photon described by |f, 1i will be free to escape the cavity 0.65%. because the atom in the state |fi does not couple to Now we perform the transformation for our system the cavity field when Ω = 0, i.e., the photon cannot be Hamiltonian H, which becomes, reabsorbed by the atom. In this way, a π pulse of the H′ = eSHe−S driving field can generate a real photon deterministically while the atom is excited to the |fi state. ≈ HJC + ωf |fihf| To gain a better insight of the physical process without S −S +Ωcos ωpt(e |eihf| + |fihe|e ). (7) relying on the approximation made in Eqs. (6) and (10), we express the Hamiltonian by the eigenbasis of HR. Let Since eS|ei = cosh[ λξ (a† −a)]|ei+sinh[ λξ (a† −a)]|gi, we ωc ωc |ψni be an eigenvector of HR with the eigenvalue λn, i.e., expand the hyperbolic sine and cosine operator functions HR|ψni = λn|ψni (the ground state is denoted by |ψ0i), in normal order up to first order in λξ/ω0, and consider the expansion |e,ni = m cnm|ψmi with λξ the coefficients cnm = hψm|e,ni. ThereforeP cosh (a† − a) ≈ η1/4, (8)  ωc  ∗ |fihe| = |f,nihe,n| = cnm|f,nihψm|. (13) λξ λξ sinh (a† − a) ≈ η1/4 (a† − a) (9) Xn Xnm  ω  ω c c In this way, the Hamiltonian (1) in the interaction picture Therefore the transformed Hamiltonian becomes, becomes, ′ ′ H ≈ HJC + ωf |fihf| +Ω cos ωpt (|fihe| + |eihf|) i(ωf +nωc−λm)t ∗ HI = Ωcos ωpt e cnm|f,nihψm| + h.c. λξ ′ † Xnm + Ω cos ωpt (|gihf| − |fihg|) (a − a) (10) ωc (14) 3

λ/ω c 1.0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 − 0.1 0.8

− 0.2 0.6 P1f c10 − 0.3 0.4

− 0.4 0.2 − 0.5

0 20 40 60 80 100 ω FIG. 2: (Color online) Probability amplitude of |e, 1i in the ct ground state of HR as a function of the coupling strength λ for the ω0 = ωc case. The solid red line corresponds to exact FIG. 3: (Color online) Probability of |f, 1i as a function numerical values, and the dashed blue line is obtained from − of time for Ω = 0.2ωc(blue long dashed), 0.4ωc(green short the approximated ground state e S|g, 0i according to Eq. (6). dashed) and 0.8ωc (red solid). The parameters used are: λ = 0.5ωc, ωc = ω0 = ωf /3, ωp = ωf + ωc − λ0, and the numerical ground state energy λ0 = −0.633ωc. The figure is At the resonant frequency ωp = ωf + ωc − λ0, |ψ0i and essentially the same if ωp in Eq. (11) is used. |f, 1i are resonantly coupled. If we keep only the resonant terms, then we have

∗ oscillations are less perfect in the sense that the maxi- Ωc10 HI ≈ |f, 1ihψ0| + h.c. (15) mum P ≈ 0.9 is smaller than one. Such a behavior 2 1f is understood because the off-resonance transitions ne- ′ Comparing with HI in Eq. (12) and noting that |ψ0i ≈ glected in Eq. (12) or (15) would generate energy shifts −S e |g, 0i, HI describes the same type of resonant inter- which in turn could bring the driven system out of reso- ′ action as HI . However, we emphasize that HI in Eq. nance. As a result, the amplitude of oscillations in P1f is ′ (15) is a more accurate interaction Hamiltonian than HI reduced. Since these energy shifts are generally propor- 2 because HI is derived directly from the eigenbasis of HR tional to Ω , as long as Ω is small compared with detun- without making use of the approximation in Eq. (6). In ings associated with off-resonance transitions, it would this sense, the resonant condition (11) can be improved be safe to use Eq. (15), and this is demonstrated in Fig. by replacing the square bracket term by λ0. 3 for Ω up to 0.4ωc. The role of virtual photons is now explicitly seen in Eq. Finally, it is worth noting that the Hamiltonian in Eq. (15) through the effective vacuum Rabi frequency Ω|c10|. (14) has higher at ωp = ωf + nωc − λ0 for odd This is because c10 is precisely the probability amplitude positive integers n. The requirement of an odd n is be- of a single virtual photon state in |ψ0i. In other words, cause |ψ0i has a definite parity in which the atomic state we may interpret that the interaction described in Eq. |ei and odd photon numbers are connected. In the case (15) is induced or mediated by a virtual photon. In Fig. n = 3, the driving field at the corresponding ωp would 2, we plot c10 (solid line) as a function of λ/ωc for the resonantly excite the atom to |fi with the emission of case ωc = ω0, and the figure shows that the magnitude of three real photons. The effective Hamiltonian would be ∗ c10 is appreciable in the ultrastrong coupling regime. As of the same form of (15), but with |f, 1i and c10 replaced ∗ a comparison, we also plot the approximate amplitude by |f, 3i and c30, i.e., the effective Rabi frequency is pro- 1/4 −S c10 ≈−η ξλ/ωc (dashed line) obtained from e |g, 0i. portional to |c30|. Such a three-photon resonance was For the parameters used in Fig. 2, we see that the approx- also observed in our numerical calculations. imation agrees well with the exact numerical calculation To conclude, we have shown that virtual photons in up to λ/ωc < 0.6. the ultrastrong coupling regime can play a key role in We have tested our prediction of the virtual-photon- quantum dynamics by providing the transition matrix el- induced Rabi oscillations by solving numerically the ements that allow the system to access relevant quantum Schr¨odinger equation defined by the Hamiltonian (1) states of interest. In our scheme, the system can exhibit a with the initial state |ψ0i. In Fig. 3 we plot the exact nu- form of vacuum Rabi oscillations which can be considered merical probability P1f of the system in the state |f, 1i as as a signature of virtual photons. Since our main focus in a function of time. The parameter λ = ωc/2 used in the this paper is on the interaction induced by virtual pho- figure is served as an example of ultrastrong coupling. We tons, decoherence effects have not been included in the see the Rabi cycles as predicted by the Hamiltonians (12) discussion. However, as long as the decoherence times or (15) for relatively weak driving fields with Ω ≤ 0.4ωc. is sufficiently short, coherent dynamics predicted by the At a stronger driving field with Ω = 0.8ωc (red solid line), Hamiltonian (12) or (15) would be justified. Specifically, ′ and there is a high frequency pattern due to counter ro- given a vacuum Rabi period T ≈ 2πωc/λξΩ , the cav- tating terms of the classical driving field, and the Rabi ity field damping rate γc and atomic decay rate γA, the 4 condition γj T ≪ 1 (j = c, A) ensures that the system the corresponding virtual photon amplitude, our scheme can execute a Rabi cycle without being affected by the can be used to probe the ground state structure of the damping, and this is achievable in the ultrastrong cou- quantum Rabi model. pling regime with moderate small γ’s. For the parameters −2 used in Fig. 3, for example, γj < 10 ωc would be suffi- cient. We emphasize that a finite interaction time within T is of practical importance, since the interaction (12) or Acknowledgments (15) is switchable via the driving field. This feature could be a tool for performing quantum operations on The author thanks Dr. H. T. Ng for discussions. This formed by the atom or the field, as well as for determin- work is partially supported by a grant from the Research istic single-photon generation [30–32]. In addition, since Grants Council of Hong Kong, Special Administrative the effective vacuum Rabi frequency is proportional to Region of China (Project No. CUHK401812).

[1] E. T. Jaynes and F. W. Cummings, Proc. IEEE 51, 89 [18] Mika A. Sillanp¨a¨a, Jian Li, Katarina Cicak, Fabio Al- (1963). tomare, Jae I. Park, Raymond W. Simmonds, G. S. [2] Bruce W. Shore and Peter L. Knight, J. Mod. Opt. 40, Paraoanu, and Pertti J. Hakonen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 1195 (1993). 193601 (2009). [3] H. J. Kimble, Phys. Scr., T76, 127 (1998). [19] A. A. Abdumalikov, Jr., O. Astafiev, A. M. Zagoskin, [4] J. M. Raimond, M. Brune, and S. Haroche, Rev. Mod. Yu. A. Pashkin, Y. Nakamura, and J. S. Tsai, Phys. Rev. Phys. 73, 565 (2001). Lett. 104, 193601 (2010). [5] D. M. Meekhof, C. Monroe, B. E. King, W. M. Itano, [20] R. Bianchetti, S. Filipp, M. Baur, J. M. Fink, C. Lang, and D. J. Wineland, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 1796 (1996). L. Steffen, M. Boissonneault, A. Blais, and A. Wallraff, [6] T. Niemczyk, F. Deppe, H. Huebl, E. P. Menzel, F. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 223601 (2010). Hocke, M. J. Schwarz, J. J. Garcia-Ripoll, D. Zueco, T. [21] I. Carusotto, S. De Liberato, D. Gerace, and C. Ciuti, H¨ummer, E. Solano, A. Marx, and R. Gross, Nat. Phys. Phys. Rev. A 85, 023805 (2012). 6, 772 (2010). [22] I. I. Rabi, Phys. Rev. 49, 324 (1936); 51, 652 (1937). [7] P. Forn-D´ıaz, J. Lisenfeld, D. Marcos, J. J. Garc´ıa-Ripoll, [23] C. J. Gan and H. Zheng, Eur. Phys. J. D 59, 473 (2010). E. Solano, C. J. P. M. Harmans, and J. E. Mooij, Phys. [24] Zhiguo L¨uand Hang Zheng, Phys. Rev. B 75, 054302 Rev. Lett. 105, 237001 (2010). (2007). [8] G. G¨unter, A. A. Anappara, J. Hees, A. Sell, G. Biasiol, [25] Xiufeng Cao, J. Q. You, H. Zheng, A. G. Kofman, and L. Sorba, S. De Liberato, C. Ciuti, A. Tredicucci, A. Franco Nori, Phys. Rev. A 82, 022119 (2010). Leitenstorfer, and R. Huber, Nature 458, 178(2009). [26] Hai-Bin Liu, Jun-Hong An, Chong Chen, Qing-Jun Tong, [9] Y. Todorov, A. M. Andrews, R. Colombelli, S. De Liber- Hong-Gang Luo, and C. H. Oh, arXiv:1208.4295. ato, C. Ciuti, P. Klang, G. Strasser, and C. Sirtori, Phys. [27] J. J. Sanchez-Mondragon, N.B. Narozhny, and J. H. Rev. Lett. 105, 196402 (2010). Eberly, Phys. Rev. Lett. 51, 550 (1983); G. S. Agarwal, [10] G. Scalari, C. Maissen, D. Turcinkova, D. Hagenm¨uller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 53, 1732 (1984). S. De Liberato, C. Ciuti, C. Reichl, D. Schuh, W. [28] R. J. Thompson, G. Rempe, and H. J. Kimble, Phys. Wegscheider, M. Beck, and J. Faist, Science 16, 1323 Rev. Lett. 68, 1132 (1992). (2012). [29] A. Boca, R. Miller, K. M. Birnbaum, A. D. Boozer, J. [11] X. Cao, J. Q. You, H. Zheng, and F. Nori, New. J. Phys. McKeever, and H. J. Kimble, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 233603 13, 073002 (2011). (2004). [12] A. Ridolfo, M. Leib, S. Savasta, and M. J. Hartmann, [30] C. K. Law and H. J. Kimble, J. Mod. Opt. 44, 2067 Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 193602 (2012). (1997). [13] S. Ashhab and F. Nori, Phys. Rev. A 81, 042311 (2010). [31] J. McKeever, A. Boca, A. D. Boozer, R. Miller, J. R. [14] S. Ashhab, Phys. Rev. A (to be published). Buck, A. Kuzmich, and H. J. Kimble, Science 303, 1992 [15] J. Casanova, G. Romero, I. Lizuain, J. J. Garc´ıa-Ripoll, (2004). and E. Solano, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 263603 (2010). [32] B. Darqui´e, M. P. A. Jones, J. Dingjan, J. Beugnon, S. [16] S. De Liberato, D. Gerace, I. Carusotto, and C. Ciuti, Bergamini, Y. Sortais, G. Messin, A. Browaeys, and P. Phys. Rev. A 80, 053810 (2009). Grangier, Science 309, 454 (2005). [17] J. Q. You and Franco Nori, Nature 474, 589 (2011).