Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

Collective P-Wave Orbital Dynamics of Ultracold Fermions

Mikhail Mamaev, Peiru He, Thomas Bilitewski, Vijin Venu, Joseph H. Thywissen, and Ana Maria Rey
Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 143401 – Published 28 September 2021
PDFHTMLExport Citation

Abstract

We consider the nonequilibrium orbital dynamics of spin-polarized ultracold fermions in the first excited band of an optical lattice. A specific lattice depth and filling configuration is designed to allow the px and py excited orbital degrees of freedom to act as a pseudospin. Starting from the full Hamiltonian for p-wave interactions in a periodic potential, we derive an extended Hubbard-type model that describes the anisotropic lattice dynamics of the excited orbitals at low energy. We then show how dispersion engineering can provide a viable route to realizing collective behavior driven by p-wave interactions. In particular, Bragg dressing and lattice depth can reduce single-particle dispersion rates, such that a collective many-body gap is opened with only moderate Feshbach enhancement of p-wave interactions. Physical insight into the emergent gap-protected collective dynamics is gained by projecting the Hamiltonian into the Dicke manifold, yielding a one-axis twisting model for the orbital pseudospin that can be probed using conventional Ramsey-style interferometry. Experimentally realistic protocols to prepare and measure the many-body dynamics are discussed, including the effects of band relaxation, particle loss, spin-orbit coupling, and doping.

  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Received 18 April 2021
  • Revised 2 July 2021
  • Accepted 25 August 2021

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.143401

© 2021 American Physical Society

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Atomic, Molecular & Optical

Authors & Affiliations

Mikhail Mamaev1,2,*, Peiru He1,2, Thomas Bilitewski1,2, Vijin Venu3, Joseph H. Thywissen3, and Ana Maria Rey1,2

  • 1JILA, NIST, and Department of Physics, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309, USA
  • 2Center for Theory of Quantum Matter, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309, USA
  • 3Department of Physics and CQIQC, University of Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A7, Canada

  • *Corresponding author. mikhail.mamaev@colorado.edu

Article Text (Subscription Required)

Click to Expand

Supplemental Material (Subscription Required)

Click to Expand

References (Subscription Required)

Click to Expand
Issue

Vol. 127, Iss. 14 — 1 October 2021

Reuse & Permissions
Access Options
CHORUS

Article Available via CHORUS

Download Accepted Manuscript
Author publication services for translation and copyediting assistance advertisement

Authorization Required


×

Images

  • Figure 1
    Figure 1

    Conceptual schematic. (a) Fermi-Hubbard physics on a single XY plane. The (X-excited) and (Y-excited) atoms tunnel at rates J0 and J1 along their ground and excited directions, respectively. There is an on-site p-wave interaction U between , atoms, as well as nearest-neighbor interactions Vee, V. (b) Bragg dressing coupling , can be implemented with beams (shown in green) that copropagate with the lattice beams (red) when the Bragg-laser wavelength is half that of the lattice beams. The out-of-plane lattice beam is not shown. (c) Effective Bloch sphere of the Bragg-dressed spin states. The , states are equal superpositions of the two flavors of the dressed basis. Using standard coherent control protocols, any direction of the Bloch vector can be initialized.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 2
    Figure 2

    (a),(b) Single-particle spectrum Ek±=E¯k±εk2+(Ω/2)2 and characteristic contrast time evolution for (a) a weak drive Ω/2|εk| and (b) a strong drive Ω/2|εk| for the Fermi-Hubbard+drive model H^FH+H^Ω (green) and spin model H^S (purple). (c) Benchmark comparison of the two models’ agreement. Both models are evolved from a product state |ψ0 with θ=0 to a fixed time tf=50/J1, and their contrast C is compared with a root-mean-square error ΔC=[(1/tf)0tfdt|(2/L)(CSCFH+Ω)|2]1/2, truncated to min(ΔC,0.2) for clarity, using a small system L=3×3. The representative evolutions in panels (a),(b) are indicated by the circle and triangle, respectively. The purple dashed line indicates the collective regime explored further in Fig. 3.

    Reuse & Permissions
  • Figure 3
    Figure 3

    (a) Time evolution of S^x=Ccos(ϕ) to measure the density phase shift ϕ, comparing the Fermi-Hubbard model+drive, H^FH+H^Ω, spin model H^S, and one-axis twisting model H^OAT for system size L=3×3 and inclination angle θ=π/4. The parameters used lie along the purple dashed line in the previous Fig. 2. (b) Time evolution of S^x for a larger system of L=100, using only the OAT model together with its predicted mean-field behavior.

    Reuse & Permissions
×

Sign up to receive regular email alerts from Physical Review Letters

Log In

Cancel
×

Search


Article Lookup

Paste a citation or DOI

Enter a citation
×