24

amplitude, which then has ?uctuations. These ?uctuations are called vacuum ?uctuations, because they exist even in the vacuum, i.e., even when no clas- sical ?eld exists. The vacuum ?eld has a continuous spectrum. When this is used with the quantized ?eld version of (3.78) (see Sect. 14.3), we ?nd the
spontaneous emission rate constant called A by Einstein and ? in (3.89). To ?nd the value of A intuitively, we can use the rate given by (3.117) if we can guess what the energy density U (?) of the vacuum ?eld is. We note that the number of ?eld modes per unit volume between ? and ? + d? is ?2/?2c3 [see (14.46)]. Multiplying this number by the energy k? of one photon, we have Uspon(?) = k?3/?2c3. Using this in (3.117) gives the spontaneous emission
rate

A = B k?

= ? ?

. (3.118)

?2c3

3??0kc3

The lifetime of the upper level is 1/A. This is the same result (14.60) as
derived in detail in Sect. 14.3. This section also shows that spontaneous
absorption does not occur.
We can use these facts to derive informally the Planck blackbody spec- trum

k?3/?2c3
U (?) = ek?/?

, (3.119)

where kB is Boltzmann’s constant and T is the absolute temperature. We
describe the response of the atoms to the blackbody radiation in terms of the number of atoms na in the upper state and the number nb in the lower state.
Due to the three processes of spontaneous emission, stimulated emission, and
stimulated absorption, these numbers change according to the rate equations
n? a = ?Ana ? BU (?)(na ? nb) , (3.120)
n? b = +Ana + BU (?)(na ? nb) . (3.121)

We solve these equations in steady state, de?ned by n? a = n? b = 0. Either equation (note that n? a = ?n? b) gives
A/B
U (?) = n /n 1 ,


which with (3.118) becomes

b a ?

k?3/?2c3

U (?) = n /n

1 , (3.122)


Furthermore according to Boltzmann, in thermodynamic equilibrium the ra- tio of the number of atoms na in the upper state to that nb in the lower state
is given by
na = e?k?/kB T . (3.123)
nb
Substituting this into (3.120), we ?nd the Planck formula (3.119).


Rabi Flopping

Blackbody radiation is emitted by a collection of atoms in thermal equilib- rium with the radiation ?eld. On a microscopic basis the atoms constantly exchange energy with the ?eld in such a way that macroscopically no change is noticed. As we see in Sect. 5.1, this limit is valid in the rate equation approximation, for which the ?eld amplitude varies slowly (here not at all) compared to the atomic response.
Now let us consider the opposite extreme for which we ignore atomic damping altogether, and for simplicity we take the monochromatic ?eld
(3.113) with frequency ? approximately equal to the two-level transition fre- quency ? = ?a ? ?b. Examining the interaction energy (3.77, 3.81), we see that in the rotating-wave approximation we keep the e?i?t term for ?ni > 0. In the present case, ?> 0, and hence in the rotating-wave approximation we
keep only

1
Vab c ? 2 ?E0e?

i?t

. (3.124)

For Vba we use ei?t. Because ? may di?er somewhat from ?, it is convenient to write ?(r, t) slightly di?erently from (3.98), namely, as
. . 1 . .

?(r, t) = Ca(t)exp i

2 ? ? ?a

t ua(r)

+Cb(t)exp

. . 1 . .
i ? 2 ? ? ?b t

ub(r) , (3.125)

where the frequency shift ? = ? ? ?. This choice places the wave function in the rotating frame used for the Bloch vector in Sect. 4.3. Substituting this
expansion for ? into the Schro¨dinger equation (3.5) and projecting onto the eigenfunctions ua and ub as in the derivation of (3.20), we ?nd

1

C? a =
C? b =

2 i(??Ca + R0Cb) , (3.126)
1
2 i(?Cb + R?Ca) , (3.127)

where |R0| is the Rabi ?opping frequency de?ned by
?E0

R0 ?

(3.128)
k


after Rabi (1936), who studied the similar system of a spin– 1 magnetic dipole in nuclear magnetic resonance. Equations (3.126, 3.127) provide a simple ex- ample of two coupled equations, a combination we see repeatedly in phase conjugation (Chaps. 2, 10) and in linear stability analysis (Chap. 11). Equa-
tion (3.78) solves the n-level probability amplitude to ?rst order in the in-
teraction energy. Here, we solve the two-level probability amplitudes to all
orders in that energy.



Before solving (3.126, 3.127) generally, we can very quickly discover the basic physics by considering exact resonance, for which ? = 0. We can then
di?erentiate (3.127) with respect to time and substitute (3.128) to ?nd

1 2
¨ = ? 4 |R0| Cb ,

i.e., the di?erential equation for sines and cosines. In particular if at time
t = 0 the atom is in the lower state [Cb(0) = 1, Ca(0) = 0], then

1
Cb(t) = cos 2 |R0|t (3.129)


which from (3.127) gives




1
Ca(t) = i sin 2 |R0|t. (3.130)

The probability that the system is in the lower level |Cb(t)|2 = cos2 1 |R0|t =

(1 + cos|R0|t)/2, while |Ca|2 = sin2 1 |R0|t

= (1

? cos

|R0|t)/2. Hence the

wave function oscillates between the lower and the upper states sinusoidally at the frequency |R0|. In total contrast with blackbody radiation, instead of
coming to an equilibrium with constant probability for being in the upper
and lower levels, here the probabilities oscillate back and forth. In this case the atoms maintain a de?nite phase relationship with the inducing electric ?eld, while for blackbody radiation any such relationship averages to zero. As we see in Chap. 4 on the density matrix, Rabi ?opping preserves atomic coherence, while blackbody radiation destroys it. Further discussions on the irreversibility of coupling to a continuum are given in Sect. 14.3 on the theory of spontaneous emission, and more generally in Chap. 15.
To solve the coupled equations (3.126, 3.127) including a nonzero detuning
?, we write them as a single matrix equation
d . Ca(t) . = i . ?? R0 .. Ca(t) . . (3.131)

dt Cb(t)

? Cb(t)


This is a vector equation of the form dC/dt = 1 iMC, which has solutions of the form exp( 1 i?t). Accordingly substituting C(t) = C(0) exp( 1 i?t) into
2 2
(3.131), we ?nd that det(M ? ?I) = 0. This yields the eigenvalues ? = ±R,
where R is the generalized Rabi ?opping frequency
R? ,?2 + |R0|2 . (3.132)

Equation (3.131) has simple sinusoidal solutions of the form

1 1
Ca(t) = Ca(0) cos 2 Rt + A sin 2 Rt,


1 1
Cb(t) = Cb(0) cos 2 Rt + B sin 2 Rt.
Substituting these values into (3.126, 3.127) and setting t = 0, we immedi- ately ?nd the constants A and B. Collecting the results in matrix form, we
have the general undamped solution

. Ca(t) . . cos 1 Rt ? i?R?1

sinRt iR0R?1

sin 1 Rt

.. Ca(0) . .

Cb(t)

iR? ?1 1

1 ?1 1

C (0)

0 R sin 2 Rt cos 2 Rt + i?R

sin 2 Rt

b
(3.133)

The 2×2 matrix in this equation is precisely the Schro¨dinger evolution matrix
U (t) of (3.63) for the problem at hand. This U -matrix solution is valuable
for the discussion of coherent transients in Chap. 12 and in general whenever
damping can be neglected. It yields the ?rst-order perturbation result (3.115) in the limit of a weak ?eld (R ? ?). Section 4.1 shows how to account for
possibly unequal level decay from both levels. More general decay schemes
require the use of a density matrix as discussed in Sect. 4.2. Note that the matrix in (3.133) is a U matrix [see (3.62)]. For further discussion, see Probs.
3.14–3.16 and Sect. 14.1.


Pauli Spin Matrices

In treating two-level atoms it is often handy to use a 2 × 2 matrix notation. The eigenfunctions ua and ub are then represented by the column vectors


ua ??

. 1 .
0


ub ??

. 0 .
1


, (3.134)



and the wave function by the column vector
. Ca .




(3.135)

? ?? Cb .

The energy and electric dipole operators are conveniently written in terms of the Pauli spin matrices


?x =

. 0 1 .
1 0


?y =

. 0 ?i .
i 0 z

. 1 0
= 0 ?1

.
. (3.136)


While these matrices are Hermitian, the “spin-?ip” operators


?? =

. 0 0 .
1 0


?+ =

. 0 1 .
0 0


(3.137)


are not Hermitian. ?? ?ips the system from the upper level to the lower level

. 1 .
?? 0

. 0 .
= 1 ,


while ?+ ?ips from lower to upper. This property is handy for representing
transitions caused by the interaction energy.
By choosing the energy zero to be half way between the upper and lower levels, we can write the Schr¨odinger picture Hamiltonian (3.18) with the interaction energy (3.114) in the rotating wave approximation as
1 . k? ??E0e?i?t .

H = 2

or

??E0ei?t ?k?

k? 1

i?t

H = 2 ?z ? 2 [?E0?+e?

+ adjoint] . (3.138)

The pair of interaction-picture coupled equations (3.126, 3.127) can be writ- ten on resonance (? = 0) as
d . Ca . = i . 0 R0 .. Ca . . (3.139)

dt Cb

2 R0 0 Cb


Section 4.1 uses such a matrix representation to solve a generalization of these equations including ?eld detuning and atomic damping.


3.4 Simple Harmonic Oscillator

The simple harmonic oscillator plays a central role in quantum optics. Chap- ter 13 discusses its connection with the quantum theory of radiation in detail. It is also used in simple models of vibrational states of molecules, comes into the description of large ensemble of two-level atoms, etc....
The classical energy of a harmonic oscillator of frequency ? and unit mass
is
Hc = p2/2 + ?2q2/2 . (3.140)
where p is the momentum and q the position operator, satisfying the canonical commutation relation |q, p| = ik. (Note that for notational clarity we omit
the “hat” on the operators in the following when no ambiguity is possible.)
Using the coordinate representation correspondence

d
p = ?ik dq , (3.141)

we readily obtain the corresponding quantum-mechanical Hamiltonian

k2 d2 2 2
H = ? 2 dq2 + ? q /2 . (3.142)

The eigenfunctions of this system are well known and may be expressed in terms of Hermite polynomials [Hn(?q)]

. ? 2 2

un(q) =

??2nn! Hn(?q) exp(?? q /2) , (3.143)

where ? = ,?/k, with corresponding eigenenergies
k?n = k?(n + 1/2) ,n = 0, 1, 2,... (3.144)

Although this summarizes in principle the theory of the harmonic oscillator, it is useful to look at it from another point of view which provides further
physical insight into its properties. We introduce two new operators a and a†
de?ned as
?

a = 1/

2k?(?q + ip) (3.145)

?

a† = 1/

2k?(?q ? ip) . (3.146)


Inverting these expressions, we ?nd the position and momentum
q = ,k/2?(a + a†) (3.147)
p = i,k?/2(a ? a†) . (3.148)

Right now this is a purely mathematical exercise, but we shall see that a and a† have important and simple physical interpretations. With the com- mutation relation [q, p] = ik, we readily ?nd that a and a† obey the boson
commutation relation
[a, a†] = 1 . (3.149)
Substituting (3.147, 3.148) into (3.140), we ?nd the Hamiltonian in terms of
a and a† as

H = k?

. 1 .
a†a + 2

. (3.150)

In the Heisenberg picture, the time evolution of a and a† is given by (Prob. 3.13)

da = i [

, a] =

i?a . (3.151)


This has the solution

dt k H ?



Similarly we ?nd that

a(t) = a(0) e?i?t . (3.152)

a†(t) = a†(0) ei?t . (3.153)

Consider now an energy eigenstate |H) of the harmonic oscillator with eigenvalue k?
H|H) = k?|H) , (3.154)
and evaluate the energy of the state |Hr) = a|H). From (3.151), we have
Ha = aH? k?a, so that
Ha|H) = aH|H) ? k?a|H) = k(? ? ?)a|H) . (3.155)


That is, a|H) is again an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian, but of eigenenergy k? lower than |H). Because a lowers the energy, it is called an annihilation operator. Repeating the operation m times, we ?nd
Ham|H) = k(? ? m?)am|H) . (3.156) We can see that the lowest of these eigenvalues is positive as follows. For an
arbitrary vector |?), the expectation value of H is


(?|k?

. 1 .
a†a + 2


|?) = k?(?r|?r) + k?/2 > 0 ,


where |?r) = a|?). Calling the lowest eigenvalue k?0 with eigenstate |0), we
have



and from (3.150)

a|0) = 0 (3.157)


H|0) = k?(a† a + 1/2)|0) = k?0|0) , (3.158)

that is, the lowest-energy eigenvalue k?0 = k?/2.
Using the commutation relation (3.149), we ?nd
Ha†|0) = [a†H + k?a†]|0) = k?(1 + 1/2)a†|0) ,
i.e., the eigenstate |1) has eigenvalue k?(1+1/2). Because a† raises the energy, it is called a creation operator. Substituting successively higher eigenstates into equation, we ?nd
H(a†)n|0) = k?(n + 1/2)(a†)n|0) . (3.159) and hence the eigenstates |n)? (a†)n|0) has the eigenvalue (3.144). To ?nd
the constant of proportionality, we note that
a|n) = sn|n ? 1) , (3.160) where sn is some scalar. This implies
(n|a†a|n) = |sn|2(n ? 1|n ? 1) = |sn|2 . (3.161)
Since a†a|n) = n|n), this gives sn = ?n. Thus
a|n) = ?n|n ? 1) (3.162)
a†|n) = ?n + 1|n + 1) (3.163)

With (3.159), this yields the normalized eigenstates

1
|n) = ? (a†)n|0) . (3.164)
n


Since a†a|n) = n|n), a†a is called the number operator. It gives the number
of quanta of excitation of the harmonic oscillator.
We can obtain the coordinate representation u0(q) of the ground state |0)
by substituting (3.145) for a into (3.157) to ?nd
(?q + ip)u0(q) = 0 (3.165)
Using (3.7) in one dimension (p = ?ikd/dq), we ?nd
d ?
dq u0(q) = ? k qu0(q) ,

which has the normalized solution

u0(q) = (?/?k)1/4e?(?/2k)q

, (3.166)


in agreement with (3.143). Similarly substituting (3.146) into (3.164) and using (3.166), we have


1 n
un(q) = ?n! (a†)

1 .
u0(q) = ,n!(2k?)2

d .n
?q ? k dq


u0(q) , (3.167)


which yields (3.143).
We mentioned that the commutation relation [a, a†] = 1 is called a bo-
son commutation relation. As is well known, there are two kinds of quantum
particles, bosons and fermions. In the context of quantum optics, the most famous kind of boson is the photon, which is introduced in some detail in Chapter 13 on ?eld quantization. Other types of bosons include a number of atomic isotopes, such as 87Rb, 23Na and 7Li, to mention just three isotopes of alkali atoms of particular importance in the context of Bose-Einstein con- densation experiments. Some other atomic isotopes, including for example 6Li, as well as electrons and protons, are fermions. As we discuss in Sect. 13.7, there are circumstances where massive particles such as electrons and atoms are conveniently described in terms of a matter-wave ?eld that is in many respects analogous to the optical ?eld. In the case of fermions, the an-
nihilation and creation operators c and c† that describe that ?eld obey the
anticommutation relations
[c, c†]+ = cc† + c†c = 1, (3.168)
[c, c]+ = [c†, c†]+ = 0. (3.169)
Section 13.7 shows how these anticommutation relations imply Pauli’s exclu- sion principle.


Problems


Show that with (3.11), the completeness relation (3.12) is equivalent to the alternative de?nition that any function f (r) can be expanded as
f (r) = . dnun(r) .
n

Show that the operator matrix element of (3.16) written in terms of eigenfunctions has the same value as that of (3.42) written in terms of eigen- vectors.
Compare and contrast (3.78) for the transition probability |C(1)(t)|2 with (2.16) for the phase matching of the generation of a di?erence frequency in a nonlinear medium.
What is the expectation value of the electric dipole operator er for a system in an energy eigenstate? Why?
Calculate the expectation value of the dipole moment operator er for an atom with the wave function
?(r, t) = C210u210(r)e?i?210 t + C100u100(r)e?i?100 t .
Hint: Use spherical coordinates and write the position vector in the form 1
r = r sin?[(xˆ iyˆ)ei? + (xˆ + iyˆ)e?i?] + r cos ?zˆ .
2

What is the expectation value of the energy (3.6) for the wave function (3.13)? Is this value ever actually measured?

Derive the wave-function Schr¨odinger equation (3.5) from the state vector version (3.44) by appropriate projections.
Starting with the initial conditions Ca(0) = 1 and Cb(0) = 0, solve the equations of motion (3.126, 3.127) to third-order in the electric-dipole interaction energy.

Given (3.133), (a) What is the free evolution matrix? (b) What are the matrices for ? and ?/2 pulses? (c) How do you describe photon echo (a pulse,
a free evolution, a second pulse, and a second free evolution) in terms of these
matrices? (Don’t solve, just set up) Answer: see Sect. 12.3.

Draw the level diagram for and write the general solution to the three- level equations of motion (taking R0 real)


C? 1 =
C? 2 =
C? 3 =


1
2 iR0C2 ,
1
2 iR0(C1 + C3) ,
1
2 iR0C2 .


Verify that the Pauli spin operator communication relations

[?x, ?y ] ? ?x?y ? ?y ?x = 2i?z ,
[?y , ?z ] = 2i?x; [?z , ?x] = 2i?y .

Calculate the simple harmonic oscillator eigenfunction u1(q) using (3.167). Show that it is orthogonal to the ground-state eigenfunction u0(q).

Show that [x, f (p)] = ikdf /dp. Hint: use the momentum representation. Also show that [p, e?kK?/?p] = ?kK.

A useful alternative basis for the two-level system consists of dressed states, which are the eigenvectors of the matrix M in the equation of mo- tion (3.122). Speci?cally, show that the eigenvectors satisfying the eigenvalue
equations (taking R0 real)
. u . = . ?? R0 .. u . = ? . u . , (3.170)




are given by

Mr v

R0 ? v v

. u2 . = 1

. R? ? . = . cos ? . , (3.171)

v2 ,(R ? ?)2 + R2 R0

sin ?

for the eigenvalue ? = R and
. u1 . = . ? sin ? . (3.172)
v1 cos ?
for ? = ?R. Hint: to ?nd (3.160), in the bottom component equation given by (3.161) with ? = R, equate u2 to the coe?cient of v2 and vice versa, and normalize the resulting vector. Show that cos 2? = ??/R and sin 2? = R0/R.

The dressed states of (3.160, 3.161) de?ne the transformation matrix
. cos ? sin ? .

U = ? sin ? cos ?

, (3.173)


which diagonalizes the matrix M by


U MU ?1 =

. R 0 . .
0 ?R


This transformation matrix relates the dressed-state probability amplitudes to the “bare-state” amplitudes by
. C2(t) . = U . Ca(t) . , (3.174)

C1(t)

Cb(t)

where the probability amplitudes C2 and C1 obey the equations of motion 1

C? 2 =

2 iRC2 , (3.175)
1

C? 1 = ? 2 iRC1 . (3.176)

Derive (3.124) by solving (3.164, 3.165), writing the initial values C1(0) and C2(0) in terms of Ca(0) and Cb(0) using (3.163), and then using the inverse of (3.163) to ?nd Ca(t) and Cb(t). 3.16 Using the transformation matrix of

(3.162), calculate the Pauli spin ?ip operators of (3.128) in the dressed-atom basis. Answer for ?+:


?+ =

. cos ? sin ? cos2 ? .
? sin2 ? ? cos ? sin ?


. (3.177)


Show by mathematical induction that
. a, a†m . = m(a†)m?1 , (3.178)
. a†, am . = ?mam?1 . (3.179)

Hint: show validity for m = 1, then write out commutator, assume relation is true for m ? 1 and use (3.140).
Prove the operator identity

eB Xe?B = X + [B, X]+ 1 [B, [B, X]] + ... + 1 [B, [B,... [B, X] .. .]] + ... .

2! n!


(3.180)

In particular, prove the Baker-Hausdor? relation
eA+B = eAeB e? 2 [A,B] (3.181)

provided [A, [A, B]] = [B, [A, B]] = 0. Alternative method: show that the derivative of the operator f (?) = e?B X e??B is f r(?) = [B, f (?)]. Using this derivative and its derivatives in turn, expand f (?) in a Maclaurin series. Setting ? = 1 in this series yields (3.169).

Show that for any pair of operators p and q satisfying the canonical commutation relation [q, p] = ik one has





and


[q, f (p)] = ik

df (p) (3.182)
dp

dg(q)

[p, g(q)] = ?ik

dq . (3.183)


This and the next two problems discuss important aspects of the La- grangian and Hamiltonian formulation of the interaction between charges and electromagnetic ?elds, and their connection to the minimum coupling Hamiltonian. This topic is discussed pedagogically in great detail in Cohen- Tannoudji, Dupont-Roc and G rynberg (1989).
The classical Lagrangian describing the coupling of the electromagnetic ?eld to a collection of charges {q?} at locations r? and with velocities r? ? is

L = . , m? r? 2 + q r


• A(r


, t) ? q


U (r


, t)

2 ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
+ s0 . .,
(??U (r?, t) ? A? (r?, t))2 ? c2(?× A(r?, t))2

= . m? r? 2 + ¸ d3r

J(r, t)

A(r, t)

?(r, t)U (r, t)

2 ? { • ?
?
+ s0 .E(r, t)2 c2B(r, t)2., , (3.184)
2
where the total charge is





and the current is

? = . q??(r ? r?(t)) (3.185)
?

J = . r? ?(t)?(r ? r?(t)) . (3.186)
?


Show that the when applied to this Lagrangian, the Lagrange equations of motion for the ?eld F ,

?L ?L

d ?L


= 0 , (3.187)

?Fi ? ? ?(?Fi) ? dt ?F?i
yield the Maxwell equations
1 ?E
?× B = c2 ?t + ?0J (3.188)
?

?• E =
0

. (3.189)

Here the coordinates Fi of F are the vector potential A and the scalar po-

tential U , respectively, and the corresponding velocities are A?
also that the Lagrange equations of motion for a particle,

and U? . Show

?L d

?L = 0 , (3.190)

?r? ? dt ?r? ?
yield the Lorentz equations of motion
m?¨r? = q?[E(r?, t) + r? ? × B(r?, t)] . (3.191) Hint: Use the vector identity
?(A • B) = (B • ?) • A + (A • ?) • B + B × (?× A)+ A × (?× B) . (3.192)

3.22 Starting from the Lagrangian of Problem (3.20), show that the conju- gate momenta of r? and A are
?L



and

p? = ?r?

= m?r? ? + q?A(r?, t) (3.193)

? = ?L
?A?

= s0E(r, t) . (3.194)

What is the conjugate momentum of the scalar potential U ?
From these results, show that the Hamiltonian corresponding to that La-
grangian is the minimum coupling Hamiltonian
H = .[p? ? q?A(r?, t)]2 + . q?U (r?, t)

?
¸
+ s0

?
d3r[E2(r, t) + c2B2(r, t)] + E(r, t) • ?U (r, t) , (3.195)


or, in the radiation gauge,
¸ . 1

H = .
?

d3r

2m?

[p? ? q?A(r?, t)]2?(r ? r?)

¸
+ s0

.
d3r[E2(r, t) + c2B2(r, t)]

. (3.196)


This is the same Hamiltonian as ((3.103), except that it contains also a free ?eld part that is, as we have seen, important to obtain Maxwell’s equations. The minimum coupling Hamiltonian (3.103), complemented by Maxwell equations, describes therefore the same physics as (Min coup ham v2).

3.22 Consider the form of the minimum coupling Hamiltonian (3.103), and use the Hamilton-Jacobi equations of motion
p? = ?H = ?•H
?
r? = ? ?p (3.197)


to prove that the motion of a particle of charge q is governed by the Lorentz
equation

m¨r = q

.
??U ?

?A .
?t

+ qr? × (?× A), (3.198)

or, with E = ??A/?t, B = ?× A and U = 0,
m¨r = qE + q(r? × B) . (3.199) Hint: Use the same vector identity as in Problem (3.20).

4 Mixtures and the Density Operator











In this chapter we generalize our treatment of two-level systems to include various kinds of damping. Some of these can be incorporated directly into the equations of motion for the probability amplitudes. However, two important kinds cannot: upper to lower level decay, and more rapid decay of the electric dipole than the average level decay rate. For these two damping mechanisms, we need a more general description than can be provided by the state vector. Speci?cally, we need to consider systems for which we do not possess the maximum knowledge allowed by quantum mechanics. In other words, we do not know the state vector of the system, but rather the classical probabilities for having various possible state vectors. Such situations are described by
the density operator ?, which is a sum of projectors |?i)(?i| onto the possible state vectors |?i), each weighted by a classical probability Pi.
We refer to a problem described by a single normalized state vector as
a pure case, while a system described by a density operator consisting of an incoherent sum of pure-case contributions is a mixed case or a mixture. Such mixtures occur in particular when we consider only part of a total system. We are often confronted with situations where an atom is coupled to a large number of modes of the electromagnetic ?eld, but are not interested in what happens to the ?eld; instead we are only interested in what happens to the atom. Hence we write equations for the atom alone, and ignore what happens to the ?eld. The “truncation” of the total problem automatically reduces our knowledge and usually results in a mixture. Chapter 15 discusses such problems in more generality.
The projectors |?i)(?i| used in the density operator formalism involve bi-

linear combinations of probability amplitudes, such as CiaC?

and CiaC? for

the case of two-level atoms. Although this might appear to be an added di?-
culty, it often simpli?es the mathematical analysis. To appreciate this point, note that the results of our discussions in Chap. 3, such as the probability of a transition or the value of the induced dipole moment, are invariably expressed in terms of bilinear combinations of the amplitudes. In fact, the expectation value of any observable involves bilinear combinations.
The sum over all possible projectors performed in the density operator is analogous to the incoherent or partially incoherent addition of light ?elds. If two electric ?eld amplitudes are added coherently, they interfere and the


interference term is uniquely speci?ed by the amplitudes. However, if the addition is only partially coherent, the interference term is smaller than that speci?ed by the individual amplitudes. For the two-level atom, the coherence
term (electric dipole term) for the state vector |?i) is given by CiaC? . The
polarization of the medium resulting from many such systems is given by a weighted sum of these individual CiaC? . This sum is the matrix element ?ab = (a|?|b) of the density operator. For a number of systems with random phases between the upper and lower state probability amplitudes, ?ab tends to average to zero, even though the corresponding sum of probabilities CiaC?
is una?ected by the random phases.
Section 4.1 shows how simple level decay can be incorporated into the two-level probability-amplitude equations of motion, and solves these equa- tions for arbitrary tuning. This level decay causes the two-level probabil- ity amplitudes to decrease exponentially in time, thereby destroying the wave function’s normalization. Such an unnormalized wave function actually describes a simple mixed case. Section 4.2 introduces the density matrix for two-level and more general cases. It also gives a simple derivation of the dipole decay constant, which due to collisions is in general larger than the average level decay constant. This phenomenon is an important manifestation of the partial coherence of a mixed case. Section 4.3 shows how the density matrix can be visualized in three dimensions by transforming to the Bloch vector. The Bloch-vector equations of motion provide an alternative to the Schr¨odinger equation. They are popular in the literature and are particu- larly useful in studying coherent transients (Chap. 12). The results of this chapter are needed in our treatments of lasers, optical bistability, nonlinear spectroscopy, phase conjugation, optical instabilities, and coherent transients.


4.1 Level Damping

We have sees how the populations of excited atomic levels decay in time because of spontaneous emission. They can also decay because of collisions and other phenomena. In Fig. 4.1, we indicate one kind of such decay from
both the a and the b levels, a situation which occurs in typical laser media.
The loss of excited level probability corresponds to an increase of probability
for lower-lying levels that we do not consider explicitly. For reasons that will become apparent in Chap. 15, it turns out that the ?nite level lifetimes can be described quite well by adding phenomenological decay terms to the equations of motion (3.126, 3.127). This is true provided that one is not interested in the explicit dynamics of the levels populated by these decay mechanisms. We write
1 1
C? a = ? 2 (?a + i?)Ca + 2 iR0Cb (4.1)
1 1
C? b = ? 2 (?b ? i?)Cb + 2 iR0Ca , (4.2)




Fig. 4.1. Energy level diagram for two-level atom, showing decay rates ?a and ?b
for the probabilities |Ca|2 and |Cb|2

where ? = ? ? ? and the Rabi ?opping frequency R0 = ?E0/k is assumed to be real. The factors of 1 are included in the decay terms so that, for example,
the probability |Ca|2 decays as exp (??at) in the absence of E0. The lifetimes are de?ned as the times at which the probabilities have decayed to 1/e of their
original values. Hence they are given by the reciprocals of the decay constants
?a and ?b.
We can solve these equations by ?rst-order perturbation theory as in
Sect. 3.2, or by the more exact formulations of Sect. 3.3. We note here that for the simple case of equal decay constants, ?a = ?b = ?, the substitutions

b(t) = Cb(t)e
Cr

?t/2 ?t/2

, (4.3)

a(t) = Ca(t)e ,

reduce (4.1, 4.2) to the undamped versions (3.126, 3.127). The solutions for this damped case are, then, just those for the undamped case multiplied by
the exponential decay factor exp(??t/2). In particular to lowest order in
perturbation theory, the probability that stimulated absorption takes place
changes from that given by (3.115) to the form


|Ca(t)|2 c |C(1)(t)|2 =


1 2 ??t
4 R0

.s sin[(?? ?)t/2] .2
(? ? ?)/2


. (4.4)

This is illustrated in Fig. 4.2. Since the probability amplitudes decay away in time, the corresponding two-level wave function fails to remain normalized and as such describes a simple kind of mixed case.
We can ?nd the spectral distribution for stimulated emission by starting with the atom in the upper level and calculating the total probability that











(1) 2

e??t

|Cn (t)|







t

Fig. 4.2. Transition probability of (4.4) with ?a = ?b = ?


it decays by spontaneous emission from the lower level to some other distant state (s). This follows because stimulated emission is needed to get from the
a level to the b level in order that spontaneous emission from the b level can occur. The total probability of decay from the b level is given by
¸ ?

Ps = ?b
0

dtr|Cb(tr)|2 , (4.5)


since ?b|Cb(t)|2 is the probability per unit time that the atom decays from the b level. For an initially excited atom (i.e., Ca(0) = 1), |Cb(t)|2 is given for su?ciently small values of |R0/?|2 by (4.4), since the role of the levels a and b is reversed from the case of (4.4). Substituting this into (4.5), we ?nd that the pro?le is Lorentzian with width ?, that is,


1
Ps = 2 (?


2
?)2 + ?2 . (4.6)

Of course, if the probability |Cb(t)|2 fails to remain always much less than
unity, (4.6) cannot be trusted. To generalize (4.6) accordingly and in antici-
pation of future need, we now solve (4.1, 4.2) exactly.
As for (3.131), we seek solutions of the form C = C(0)ei?t and ?nd the eigenvalues
1
?1,2 = 2 (i?ab ± ?) , (4.7)
where the average decay rate constant

1
?ab = 2 (?a + ?b) , (4.8)


and where the complex Rabi ?opping frequency

.. 1 .2
? = ? ? 2 i(?a ? ?b)



+ R2 . (4.9)


Hence the solutions have the form
. 1 .. 1 1 .

Ca(t) = exp

? 2 ?abt

Ca(0) cos 2 ?t + A sin 2 ?t

. 1 .. 1 1 .

Cb(t) = exp

? 2 ?abt

Cb(0) cos 2 ?t + B sin 2 ?t .


Substituting these values into the equations of motion (4.1, 4.2) at the time
t = 0, we ?nd
??abCa(0) + ?A = ?(?a + i?)Ca(0) + iR0Cb(0) ,
??abCb(0) + ?B = ?(?b ? i?)Cb(0) + iR0Ca(0) .

This gives the integration constants ?A = ?[ 1 (?a ? ?b)+ i?]Ca(0) + iR0Cb(0) and ?B = [ 1 (?a ? ?b) + i?]Cb(0) + iR0Ca(0), that is,

. Ca(t) . =
Cb(t)
. cos 1 ?t ? ??1. 1 (?a ? ?b) + i?. sin 1 ?t iR0??1 sin 1 ?t .
2 2 2 2
iR0??1 sin 1 ?t cos 1 ?t + ??1. 1 (?a ? ?b) + i?. sin 1 ?t
2 2 2 2
1 . Ca(0) .

× exp . ?

?abt.
2

Cb(0)

. (4.10)


To ?nd the corresponding pro?le for stimulated emission, we substitute
Cb(t) from (4.10) with the initial values Ca(0) = 1 and Cb(0) = 0 into (4.5)
and ?nd (with some algebra)


1
Ps = 2 (?

2
?)2 + ?2(1 + I ) , (4.11)

? b 0
where the dimensionless intensity I0 is given by
I0 = |R0|2/?a?b . (4.12)

Comparing (4.6, 4.11), we see that the frequency response of the atom to an applied ?eld is broadened not only because of decay, but also because of saturation. This second e?ect is called power broadening. Note that on
resonance (? = ?) the stimulated emission pro?le of (4.11) approaches the constant value ?ab/?b as I0 becomes large.


4.2 The Density Matrix

The semiclassical situations discussed in the ?rst part of this book (Chaps. 5–12) almost invariably use the Schro¨dinger picture (see Sect. 3.1). Hence for the two-level system we write the wave function with the Schro¨dinger picture
amplitudes ca and cb de?ned by the general expression (3.22) for two levels,
that is,

?(r, t) = ca(t)ua(r) + cb(t)ub(r) (4.13a) or equivalently by the state vector

|?(t)) = ca(t)|a) + cb(t)|b) . (4.13b) The corresponding density operator is de?ned as the projector ? = |?)(?|
onto this state, and the density matrix elements ?ij = (j|?|i) are given by
the bilinear products
?aa = cac? , probability of being in upper level;
?ab = cac? , dimensionless complex dipole moment1;
?ba = cbc? = ?? ,
a ab
?bb = cbc? , probability of being in lower level.
In matrix notation, the density operator ? is therefore

? = . cac?
cbc?

cac? . =
cbc?

. ?aa ?ab .
?ba ?bb


. (4.14)


This density matrix is precisely the outer product
. ca .

? =
b

(c?

c?) .


In terms of the 2 × 2 density matrix of (4.14), the expectation value (3.24) of an operator O is given by
(O) = ?aaOaa + ?abOba + ?baOab + ?bbObb . (4.15)
In particular the dipole moment is given in the ua, ub basis by
(er) = ??ab + c.c.. (4.16) Equation (4.15) and, more generally, (3.24) is just the trace of the matrix
product ?O :
(O) = . . ?nmOmn = .(?O)nn = tr(?O) . (4.17)
n m n

1 Provided an electric-dipole transition is allowed between the a and b levels.

4.2 The Density Matrix 99

We show at the end of this section that this result holds in all generality.
We can derive the equations of motion for the elements of the density ma- trix from the Schro¨dinger equations of motion for the probability amplitudes
ca(t) and cb(t) of (4.13). From (3.23) including phenomenological decays, we
have
c?a = ?(i?a + ?a/2)ca ? ik?1Vabcb , (4.18)
c?b = ?(i?b + ?b/2)cb ? ik?1Vbaca , (4.19) where Vab = (a|V|b). Proceeding one element at a time, we have
??aa = c?ac? + cac??
a a
= (?i?aca ? ?aca/2 ? ik?1Vabcb)c?
+ca(i?ac? ? ?ac? /2 + ik?1Vbac?)
a a b
= ??a?aa ? [ik?1Vab?ba + c.c.] . (4.20)

It is not surprising to ?nd the complex conjugate in this equation, for prob- abilities are real. Similarly, we ?nd
??bb = ??b?bb + [ik?1Vab?ba + c.c.] . (4.21) Apart from the decay terms, this value is equal in magnitude and opposite in
sign from that in (4.20). This expresses the fact that probability is transferred between the a and b levels by the interaction energy Vab. The o?-diagonal element ?ab obeys the equation of motion
??ab = c?ac? + cac??
b b
= (?i?aca ? ?aca/2 ? ik?1Vabcb)c?
+ca(i?bc? ? ?bc?/2 + ik?1Vbac? )
b b a
= ?(i? + ?ab)?ab + ik?1Vab(?aa ? ?bb) . (4.22)

The example treated so far can be described equally well by an unnormal- ized state vector or by a density operator. However, the unnormalized state vector description becomes usually inadequate as soon as we consider more complex situations such as those encountered in the description of many- system phenomena. The phenomenological damping factors in (4.1, 4.2) ac- tually result from the interaction of an atom with the many modes of the elec- tromagnetic ?eld. To treat more complicated cases, e.g., a decay of the dipole
term ?ab independent of the decay of the level probabilities pii the wave func-
tion becomes by itself very cumbersome to use, or even incorrect. Such dipole
decay results from an incoherent superposition of simple pure-case density matrices and can be cast in terms of system-reservoir coupling, a general approach followed in Chap. 15. That chapter will show that in general, it becomes necessary in such situations to abandon the idea of describing the system via a state vector. One needs to introduce instead a density opera- tor whose evolution is irreversible and governed by nonhermitian dynamics.