2
$\begingroup$

I am studying the concept of a "gain medium" inside a laser cavity. The active atoms are taken to have the two levels $a$ and $b$, separated by energy $\hbar \omega$ and represented by a density matrix $\rho$. The atoms are stationary.

The equation of motion of the density matrix is

$$\dot{\rho} = -i[H, \rho] - \dfrac{1}{2}\left(\Gamma \rho + \rho \Gamma \right) + \lambda,$$

where

$$\rho = \begin{bmatrix} \rho_{aa} & \rho_{ab} \\ \rho_{ba} & \rho_{bb} \end{bmatrix}, \ \ \ \ \ H = \begin{bmatrix} W_{a} & V \\ V & W_{b} \end{bmatrix}, \\ \Gamma = \begin{bmatrix} \gamma_{a} & 0 \\ 0 & \gamma_{b} \end{bmatrix}, \ \ \ \ \ \lambda = \begin{bmatrix} \lambda_{a} & 0 \\ 0 & \lambda_{b} \end{bmatrix}$$

The perturbation Hamiltonian is $\hbar V$, and the unperturbed energies of the levels are $\hbar W_a$ and $\hbar W_b$. Furthermore, the two levels decay with damping constants $\gamma_a$ and $\gamma_b$, and are populated by pumping at rates $\lambda_a$ and $\lambda_b$.

Therefore, using the Fourier expansion of the electric field $E(z, t) = \sum\limits_n A_n(t) u_n(z)$, where $u_n(z) = \sin(k_n z)$ and $k_n = \dfrac{n \pi}{L}$, my notes claim that the electric dipole approximation for the perturbation becomes

$$V(t) = -A(t) \wp u(z) / \hbar$$

Note that we are now considering a single cavity mode, so we drop the subscript $n$.

[See this related question.]

We now write the time dependence of the electric field $A(t)$ in terms of the amplitude $E(t)$ and phase $\phi(t)$, which vary slowly in an optical period $2\pi/\nu$:

$$A(t) = E(t) \cos[\nu t + \phi(t)]$$

[See this related question.]

Now take

$$\delta(t) = E(t) e^{-i[\nu t + \phi(t)]}$$

to be the positive frequency part of the electric field.

[See this related question.]

So we can now write the off-diagonal terms in the density-matrix equation as

$$\dot{\rho}_{ab} = -(i\omega + \gamma)\rho_{ab} - i(\rho_{aa} - \rho_{bb})A(t) \wp u(z)/\hbar,$$

where $\gamma = \dfrac{1}{2} (\gamma_a + \gamma_b)$

[See this related question.]

The steady-state solution of this equation gives

$$\rho_{ab} = -\dfrac{1}{2} \dfrac{i(\rho_{aa} - \rho_{bb}) \delta(t) \wp u(z)}{\hbar[\gamma + i(\omega - \nu)]},$$

where it is assumed that the population inversion varies slowly compared with $\rho_{ab}$, and the "rotating-wave approximation" has been used.

How does one get the steady-state solution

$$\rho_{ab} = -\dfrac{1}{2} \dfrac{i(\rho_{aa} - \rho_{bb}) \delta(t) \wp u(z)}{\hbar[\gamma + i(\omega - \nu)]},$$

and how does the assumption that the population inversion varies slowly compared with $\rho_{ab}$, and the use of the "rotating-wave approximation," play a part in this?


EDIT

The furthest I can seem to go with this is as follows:

$$\begin{align} \dot{\rho}_{ab} = \dfrac{-\frac{1}{2} i (\rho_{aa} - \rho_{bb})(-i \nu) e^{-i \nu t} \wp u(z)}{\hbar [\gamma + i(\omega - \nu)]} = \dfrac{-(\rho_{aa} - \rho_{bb}) A(t) \wp u(z)}{\hbar [\gamma + i(\omega - \nu)]}, \end{align}$$

since $\cos(\nu t) = \dfrac{e^{i \nu t} + e^{-i \nu t}}{2} \ \Rightarrow 2\cos(\nu t) - e^{i \nu t} = e^{-i \nu t} = 2 A(t)$, since, for some reason, we seem to be assuming that $\delta(t) = E(t) e^{-i[\nu t + \phi(t)]} \approx e^{-i \nu t}$ and $A(t) = E(t) \cos[\nu t + \phi(t)] \approx \cos[\nu t]$, and, if I'm not mistaken, $e^{i \nu t}$ is the negative frequency part of the electric field, so we discard it (we only want the positive frequency part, as mentioned above).

The confusing thing is the presence of the $\rho_{ab}$ in

$$\dot{\rho}_{ab} = -(i\omega + \gamma)\rho_{ab} - i(\rho_{aa} - \rho_{bb})A(t) \wp u(z)/\hbar$$

I don't actually understand how this could be in $\dot{\rho}_{ab}$, since $\dot{\rho}_{ab}$ itself is obviously differentiated, meaning that $\rho_{ab}$ should have also been differentiated.

I'd appreciate an answer that takes the time to explain all of this, so that I can clearly understand what's going on here.

$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

1
+50
$\begingroup$

Here is my solution:

Start from the equation

$$\dot{\rho}_{ab} = -(i\omega + \gamma)\rho_{ab} - i(\rho_{aa} - \rho_{bb})A(t) \wp u(z) / \hbar.$$

The solution to this for $\rho_{ab}$ can be found by first assuming $\rho_{aa}$, $\rho_{bb}$ are constants, as this is the steady state. To keep things simple, lets set $\eta = i(\rho_{aa} - \rho_{bb}) \wp u(z) / \hbar$.

We then have a differential equation of the form

$$\dot{\rho}_{ab} + (i\omega + \gamma)\rho_{ab} = -A(t)\eta.$$

To solve this, you use the method of using an integration factor. Here we simply multiply through by $u(t) = e^{\int (i\omega + \gamma) \ dt}$ to get

$$\dot{\rho}_{ab} u(t) + \dot{u}(t)\rho_{ab} = -A(t) \eta u(t)$$

Notice that the LHS is the derivative $\frac{d(\rho_{ab}u(t))}{dt}$, so we now write

$$\frac{d(\rho_{ab}u(t))}{dt} = -A(t) \eta u(t).$$

We now integrate both sides wrt $t$ and then divide by $u(t)$. This gives

$$\rho_{ab} = \frac{- \eta \int A(t) u(t) \ dt}{u(t)}.$$

If we calculate $A(t) u(t)$, we find

$$A(t)u(t) = \frac{E(t)}{2}\left(\exp{[i(\omega + \nu)t + \gamma t + \phi(t) + c]} + \exp{[i(\omega - \nu)t + \gamma t -\phi(t) + c]}\right)$$

This is where we use the rotating wave approximation: $(\omega+\nu)$ will be a rapidly oscillating term, and we can say that this averages out over all reasonable timescales. This then gives the expression for $\rho_{ab}$:

$$\rho_{ab} = -\frac{\eta\int E(t)\exp{[i(\omega - \nu)t + \gamma t - \phi(t) + c]} \ dt}{2\exp{[i\omega t + \gamma t + c}]}$$

The next step is to do integration by parts on the numerator:

$$\int E(t)\exp{[i(\omega - \nu)t + \gamma t + \phi(t) + c]} \ dt = \frac{1}{{(i(\omega - \nu) + \gamma - \dot{\phi}(t))}}\left( E(t)\exp{[i(\omega - \nu)t + \gamma t - \phi(t) + c]} - \int\dot{E}(t)\exp{[i(\omega - \nu)t + \gamma t - \phi(t) + c]} \ dt \right)$$

Then we take advantage of the fact that $E(t)$ and $\phi(t)$ are slowly varying, so we set their derivatives $\dot{E}(t) = \dot{\phi}(t) = 0$. We can then write our expression for $\rho_{ab}$ as

$$\rho_{ab} = -\frac{\eta E(t)\exp{[i(\omega - \nu)t + \gamma t - \phi(t) + c]}}{2(i(\omega - \nu) + \gamma)\exp{[i\omega t + \gamma t + c]}} = -\frac{\eta E(t)\exp{[-i\nu t - \phi(t)]}}{2(i(\omega - \nu) + \gamma)}$$

Where $\delta(t) = E(t)\exp{[-i\nu t-\phi(t)]}$ and inserting $\eta$ back in:

$$\rho_{ab} = -\frac{i(\rho_{aa} - \rho_{bb})\wp u(z)\delta (t)}{2\hbar (i(\omega - \nu) + \gamma)}.$$

Note: You asked why $\dot{\rho}_{ab}$ depended on $\rho_{ab}$. This just means that the rate of change depends on it's value. Think of the rate of photons emitted from an upper state depends on the population of that upper state.

$\endgroup$
8
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the answer. When you integrated $$\frac{d(\rho_{ab}u(t))}{dt}=-A(t)\eta u(t)$$ with respect to $t$, what about the constant of integration on the LHS? $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 8, 2022 at 6:49
  • $\begingroup$ You just bundle the constants from both sides together on the RHS and call it a new constant. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 8, 2022 at 9:21
  • $\begingroup$ But then where is this new constant in $\rho_{ab} = \frac{-\eta \int A(t) u(t)dt}{u(t)}$? I don't see any new constant. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 8, 2022 at 9:36
  • $\begingroup$ It has a factor of $\exp{[-\gamma t]}$ next to it from $u(t)$ this means that in the steady state $t \rightarrow\infty$ which means it decays away. That means we don't care about the initial conditions because it's the steady state. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 8, 2022 at 11:52
  • $\begingroup$ I don't understand what you're saying. The point I'm making is that we should have $$\rho_{ab} u(t) + C = \int -A(t) \eta u(t) \ dt$$ So where exactly is $C$ in your work? If we move it to the RHS, then we get $$\rho_{ab} = \dfrac{- \eta \int A(t) u(t) \ dt - C}{u(t)}$$ $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 8, 2022 at 12:30
1
$\begingroup$

Apparently, it is assumed that the time dependence of $\rho_{ab}$ is mostly $\sim e^{-i\nu t}$, so $\dot{\rho_{ab}}\approx (-i\nu)\rho_{ab}$. One gets the factor $\frac{1}{2}$ from the expression for cosine as half sum of exponential functions. Only one exponential function being left in the expression is, I believe, the rotating wave approximation.

$\endgroup$
7
  • $\begingroup$ Please show the calculations you're referring to, so that I can see exactly what you mean. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 2, 2022 at 12:09
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @ThePointer : Sorry, something beyond what I wrote above would be spoon-feeding. With all due respect, I don't think I should do that. $\endgroup$
    – akhmeteli
    Commented Feb 2, 2022 at 12:21
  • $\begingroup$ Well, if it's unclear, then I'm not sure what more I can do on my end. For instance, I don't see how $(-i\nu)\rho_{ab} \approx \dot{\rho}_{ab} = -(i\omega + \gamma)\rho_{ab} - i(\rho_{aa} - \rho_{bb})A(t) \wp u(z)/\hbar$. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 2, 2022 at 13:41
  • $\begingroup$ Do you really need clues on how to derive $\dot{\rho_{ab}}\sim (-i\nu)\rho_{ab}$ from the postulated "time dependence of $\rho_{ab}$ is mostly $e^{-i\nu t}$" (a.k.a. "how does the assumption that the population inversion varies slowly compared with ρab, and the use of the "rotating-wave approximation," play a part in this?")? $\endgroup$
    – Lodinn
    Commented Feb 5, 2022 at 11:51
  • $\begingroup$ @Lodinn Uhh, is it supposed to be obvious? Perhaps it is clear to someone who already understands how this works, but I do not, which is the entire point of my post. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 7, 2022 at 18:56

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.