23
Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary gas (II) Frédéric Chevy Les Houches 2018 School on Ultracold Fermions

Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    2

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

Attractive fermions: the BEC-BCS crossover and the unitary

gas (II)

Frédéric ChevyLes Houches 2018 School on Ultracold Fermions

Page 2: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

The (3D) BEC-BCS crossover with cold atoms

1/kFa

BCS: weakly attractive BEC: strongly attractive

Page 3: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

Upper-branch vs lower branch physics

• For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇 = 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔 ⇒attractive for g<0, repulsive for g>0.

BUT The atomic BEC and the BEC of dimers do not live in the same branchof solutions.

-10 -5 0 5 10-2

0

2

4

6

8

Ener

gy [E

/ω]

a/aHO

T. Stöferle et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 030401 (2006)T. Bush et al., Found. Phys. 28, 549 (1998)

Toy model: 2 atoms in a harmonic potential

Page 4: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

Probing superfluidity

Page 5: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

Is the Fermi superfluid a superfluid? Classical tests or superfluidity in ultracold BECs• Inversion of the ellipticity in time of flight• Double structure of the momentum distribution• Vortices

Proves hydrodynamics

Page 6: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

Is the Fermi superfluid a superfluid? Classical tests or superfluidity in ultracold BECs• Inversion of the ellipticity in time of flight• Double structure of the momentum distribution• Vortices

Regal et al. PRL 2005

Proves hydrodynamics

Page 7: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

Is the Fermi superfluid a superfluid? Classical tests or superfluidity in ultracold BECs• Inversion of the ellipticity in time of flight• Double structure of the momentum distribution• Vortices

Regal et al. PRL 2005

Proves hydrodynamics

Page 8: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

Is the Fermi superfluid a superfluid? Classical tests or superfluidity in ultracold BECs• Inversion of the ellipticity in time of flight• Double structure of the momentum distribution• Vortices

Vortices at MITAt

omic

BEC

Mol

ecul

arBE

CBC

Ssu

perf

luid

Zwierlein et al. Nature 2005

Proves hydrodynamics

Page 9: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

The pair projection method

Idea: salvage the time of flight technique by sweeping the magnetic field to the BEC side of the resonance to project Cooper pairs onto molecules and observe the double structure (MIT, JILA 2004)

Trick: go fast enough to prevent rethermalization but not too fast to avoid breaking the pairs.

Regal et al. PRL 2004.

BCSBEC

Page 10: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

Thermodynamics of a stronglycorrelated Fermi gasZero-temperature equation of state

Page 11: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

Absorption imaging

« µ »z

n« P »

( ) ( , , )n z dxdyn x y z= ∫In a harmonic trap (T.L. Ho & Q. Zhou - Nature Physics (2010))

2 2

2

2 ( , )( ) zP m z Tn zm

π µ ωω⊥

−=

High accuracy (few percent): •Double integration increases S/N ratio•One shot yields a whole piece of the Equation of state

Page 12: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

Equation of State in the BEC-BCS crossoverGoal: calculate the equation of state of the gas as a function of 1/kFa

Dimensionally: 3 / )2

(15

Fb F

NEN EE k aξ+=

22 2

2/3

2

2

(3 )2

( )

F

b

FF

kE k nm

E ama

π=

= −

=

Θ

Asymptotic behavior:

1/kFa→0-(BCS Limit): weakly attractive Fermi gas, ξ → 1

1/kFa → 0+(BEC Limit): repulsive Bose-Einstein condensate of dimers, ξ → 0

Page 13: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

Asymptotic expansion

Lee-Yang expansion:

Lee-Huang-Yang expansion:

22

3 10 4(11 2ln 2)1 ( )5 9 21

...FF FE NE k a k a

π π = + + +

Lee & Yang Phys. Rev. 105, 1119 (1957) (repulsive fermions)Diener et al. Phys. Rev. A 77, 023626 (2008). (attractive fermions)

23mmmm

1281 ...2 2 15b

aN EE N n nam

ππ

+ + + =

Lee, Huang, Yang, Phys. Rev. 106, 1135 (1957)X. Leyronas & R. Combescot PRL 99, 170402 (2007) (Composite bosons)

Page 14: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

Lee-Huang-Yang corrections and few-body physics

mm 0.6a a= Petrov et al. PRL 93, 090404 (2004) (Schrödinger equation)Brodsky et al. PRA 73, 032724 (2006) (Diagrammatic)

( )2

3 3 3mmmm mm mm

128 81 4 3 3 ln( ) ...2 2 315b

aN E N n na n naE Bm

π ππ

+ + + − + =

How far can one describe the dimers as point-like bosons?

Non-universal term:depends on the internalstructure of the boson.

Higher order expansion (Wu 1957, Braaten et al. PRL 2002)

Page 15: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

The Unitary Fermi gas (|a|=∞)

3 (0)5

FNEE ξ= ~ Ideal Fermi gas. ξ(0) = « Bertsch parameter »

•BCS mean-field theory: ξ(0)<0.6•DFT (McNeil Forbes et al., PRL 2011): ξ(0)<0.38(1) •Current experimental estimate (ENS-MIT): 0.37(1)

At the surface of a neutron star:

0~ 10; / ~ 10Fk a a r

Page 16: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

Thermodynamics of a stronglycorrelated Fermi gasFinite-temperature equation of state

Page 17: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

BCS Theory

Nozières & Schmitt-Rink (ladderresummation)

Critical temperature of the Fermi gas

Shortcomings of the BCS theory:

Page 18: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

Thermometry of strongly correlatedgases?

For a weakly interacting system (~ideal gas): measure the wings of themomentum distribution by time of flight (~𝑒𝑒−𝑝𝑝2/2𝑚𝑚𝑘𝑘𝐵𝐵𝑇𝑇).

For a strongly interacting system: what is the dynamics of the expansion?Even if one « kills » interactions during ToF, what is the relationshipbetween momentum distribution and temperature ⇒ heavily model-dependent thermometry.

• ENS: use an auxiliary thermometer (weakly interacting Bose gasmixed to the fermions)

• MIT: measure density (Abel transform) and express T=f(pressure,compressibility) using thermodynamical identities

• Duke: entropy measurement to determine the microcanonicalequation of state

Three experimental solutions

Page 19: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

Measuring the equation of state of a Fermi gas: global thermodynamics

Measure the microcanonical equation of state E(S)

E T I V= + +

, measured by Time of FlightT I =+ Released energy

Measured from in-situ imagingV =

Measurement of the entropy

Finite a

S=?

Adiabatic rampof the magnetic field a=0 Ideal gas

thermometry T/TF

S=

Page 20: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

L. Luo, B. Clancy, J. Joseph, J. Kinast, and J. E. Thomas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 080402 (2007)

Page 21: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

Finite temperature equation of state of the homogeneous unitary Fermi gas.

P0(µ,T) : equation of state of the ideal Fermi gas.

Experiments:

MITENSTokyo

Theory

Bold Diagrammatic MC Auxilliary Field QMC

First order bold diagram

3rd order virial expansion

Page 22: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

Revealing the phase transition

MIT: Ku et al. Science (2012)ENS: Nascimbène et al. Nature (2012)

𝑇𝑇𝑐𝑐𝑇𝑇𝐹𝐹

≈ 0.15 « high»-Tc superconductivity

Page 23: Attractive fermions: the BEC- BCS crossover and the unitary ......Upper-branch vs lower branch physics • For a mean-field BEC: 𝜇𝜇= 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔⇒attractive for g

High temperature behaviour: virial expansion

Virial expansion for a dilute system: 𝑔𝑔𝜆𝜆𝑡𝑡𝑡3 = 2∑𝑛𝑛=1∞ 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝜁𝜁𝑘𝑘

𝜁𝜁 = 𝑒𝑒𝛽𝛽𝛽𝛽=fugacity (→0 in the dilute limit)bk=dimensionless parameters, related to the k-body problem. Pure numbers at the unitary limit.

Experiment (ENS) Theory

b2 NA 12− 2

25/2 (Ho & Mueller, 2004)

b3 -0.29(2) -0.291 (Liu et al., 2009)

b4 0.064(15) 0.03 (Rossi et al., 2018)0.05 (Yan & Blume, 2016)