Paper detail

Classical phases and quantum angles in the description of interfering Bose-Einstein condensates

The interference of two Bose-Einstein condensates, initially in Fock states, can be described in terms of their relative phase, treated as a random unknown variable. This phase can be understood, either as emerging from the measurements, or preexisting to them; in the latter case, the originating states could be phase states with unknown phases, so that an average over all their possible values is taken. Both points of view lead to a description of probabilities of results of experiments in terms of a phase angle, which plays the role of a classical variable. Nevertheless, in some situations, this description is not sufficient: another variable, which we call the "quantum angle", emerges from the theory. This article studies various manifestations of the quantum angle. We first introduce the quantum angle by expressing two Fock states crossing a beam splitter in terms of phase states, and relate the quantum angle to off-diagonal matrix elements in the phase representation. Then we consider an experiment with two beam splitters, where two experimenters make dichotomic measurements with two interferometers and detectors that are far apart; the results lead to violations of the Bell-Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality (valid for local-realistic theories, including classical descriptions of the phase). Finally, we discuss an experiment where particles from each of two sources are either deviated via a beam splitter to a side collector or proceed to the point of interference. For a given interference result, we find "population oscillations" in the distributions of the deviated particles, which are entirely controlled by the quantum angle. Various versions of population oscillation experiments are discussed, with two or three independent condensates.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.