Upload
raven
View
41
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Superfluid insulator transition in a moving condensate. Anatoli Polkovnikov, Boston University. Collaboration:. Ehud Altman -Weizmann Eugene Demler - Harvard Bertrand Halperin - Harvard Mikhail Lukin - Harvard. Plan of the talk. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Superfluid insulator transition in a Superfluid insulator transition in a moving condensatemoving condensate
Anatoli Polkovnikov,Anatoli Polkovnikov,Boston UniversityBoston University
Collaboration:Ehud AltmanEhud Altman -- WeizmannWeizmannEugene Demler Eugene Demler - - HarvardHarvardBertrand HalperinBertrand Halperin - - HarvardHarvardMikhail LukinMikhail Lukin - - HarvardHarvard
Plan of the talk
1. Bosons in optical lattices. Equilibrium phase diagram.
2. Superfluid-insulator transition in a moving condensate.
• Mean field phase diagram.
• Role of quantum fluctuations.
3. Conclusions and experimental implications.
Interacting bosons in optical lattices. Interacting bosons in optical lattices.
Highly tunable periodic potentials with no defects.Highly tunable periodic potentials with no defects.
Equilibrium system. Equilibrium system.
Interaction energy (two-body collisions):
int ( 1)2 j j
j
UE N N
Eint is minimized when Nj=N=const:
2 2 6 02 2U U
Interaction suppresses number fluctuations and leads to Interaction suppresses number fluctuations and leads to localization of atoms.localization of atoms.
Equilibrium system. Equilibrium system.
Kinetic (tunneling) energy:Kinetic (tunneling) energy:
† †tun j k k j
jk
E J a a a a
e jij ja N
Kinetic energy is minimized when the phase is Kinetic energy is minimized when the phase is uniform throughout the system.uniform throughout the system.
2 cos( )tun j kjk
E JN
Classically the ground state has a uniform density and Classically the ground state has a uniform density and a uniform phase.a uniform phase.
However, number and phase are conjugate variables.
They do not commute: , 1N i N
There is a competition between the interaction leading to There is a competition between the interaction leading to localization and tunneling leading to phase coherence.localization and tunneling leading to phase coherence.
Superfluid regime: Superfluid regime:
(M.P.A. Fisher, P. Weichman, G. Grinstein, D. Fisher, 1989)
Superfluid-insulator quantum phase transition.
Strong tunnelingStrong tunneling
cos const,
-
i j
i j
Weak tunnelingWeak tunnelingInsulating regime: Insulating regime:
cos 0,
-
i j
i j
Classical non-equlibrium phase transitionsClassical non-equlibrium phase transitionsSuperfluids can support non-dissipative current.
Exp: Fallani et. al., (Florence) cond-mat/0404045
Theory: Wu and Niu PRA (01); Smerzi et. al. PRL (02).
Theory: superfluid flow becomes unstable.
/ 2p
Based on the analysis of classical equations of motion (number and phase commute).
Damping of a superfluid current in 1DDamping of a superfluid current in 1D
C.D. Fertig et. al. cond-mat/0410491
max / 5 / 2p
See also : AP and D.-W. Wang, PRL 93, 070401 (2004).
Current damping below Current damping below classical instability.classical instability.
No sharp transition.No sharp transition.
What happens if we there are both quantum What happens if we there are both quantum fluctuations and superfluid flow?fluctuations and superfluid flow?
???
p
U/J
Stable
Unstable
SF MI
p
SF MI
U/J???
possible experimental sequence: ~lattice potential
Physical Argument
sI p SF current in free space
sinsI p SF current on a lattice
Strong tunneling regime (weak quantum fluctuations): s = const. Current has a maximum at p=/2.
This is precisely the momentum corresponding to the onset of the instability within the classical picture.
Wu and Niu PRA (01); Smerzi et. al. PRL (02). Not a coincidence!!!
s – superfluid density, p – condensate momentum.
Include quantum depletion.Include quantum depletion.
Equilibrium: ( / )s s J U
Current state:coseffJ J J p
( )s p
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
p*
I(p)
s(p)
sin(p)
Condensate momentum p/
( )sinsI p p
With quantum depletion the current state is unstable at
* / 2.p p
p
OK if N1:
2
2,
2 cos( )2j k
j k j j
UH JN
Quantum rotor model
2
1 12 2 sin sinjj j j j
dUJN
dt
Deep in the superfluid regime (JN U) use GP equations of motion:
j jpj 2
1 12 2 cos 2jj j j
dUJN p
dt
Unstable motion for Unstable motion for p>p>/2/2
SF in the vicinity of the insulating transition: U JN.
Structure of the ground state:
It is not possible to define a local phase and a local phase gradient. Classical picture and equations of motion are not valid.
After coarse graining we get both amplitude and phase fluctuations.
Need to coarse grain the system.
Time dependent Ginzburg-Landau:
( diverges at the transition)
Stability analysis around a current carrying solution:
~ 1c cp U U
22 2
p
U/J
Superfluid MI
~ 1cp
S. Sachdev, Quantum phase transitions; Altman and Auerbach (2002)
Use time-dependent Gutzwiller approximation to interpolate between these limits.
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
d=3d=2
d=1
unstable
stable
U/Uc
p/
Meanfield (Gutzwiller ansatzt) phase diagram
Is there current decay below the instability?Is there current decay below the instability?
Role of fluctuations
Below the mean field transition superfluid current can decay via quantum tunneling or thermal decay .
E
p
Phase slip
Related questions in superconductivity
Reduction of TC and the critical current in superconducting wires
Webb and Warburton, PRL (1968)
Theory (thermal phase slips) in 1D:
Langer and Ambegaokar, Phys. Rev. (1967)McCumber and Halperin, Phys Rev. B (1970)
Theory in 3D at small currents:
Langer and Fisher, Phys. Rev. Lett. (1967)
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
unstable
stable
U/Uc
p/
Current decay far from the insulating transition
Decay due to quantum fluctuations
The particle can escape via tunneling:
exp S
S is the tunneling action, or the classical action of a particle moving in the inverted potential
02
0
1 ( )2
dxS d V xm d
Asymptotical decay rate near the instability
02
2 3
0
1 ( ) 02 c
dxS d x bx p pm d
Rescale the variables:1, =
2mx x
b
5/ 2
5/ 202
12 cS S p p
bm
02
2 30 0
1 8 22 15
dxS d x xd
exp S
Many body system, 1D
5/ 2
exp 7.12
JN pU
7.1 – variational result
JNU
semiclassical parameter (plays the role of 1/)
Small N~1Large N~102-103
Higher dimensions.
Longitudinal stiffness is much smaller than the transverse.
Need to excite many chains in order to create a phase slip.
12
r p
|| cos ,J J p
J J
r
62
2
d
d dJNS C pU
Phase slip tunneling is more expensive in higher dimensions:
expd dS
Stability phase diagram3dS
Crossover1 3dS
Stable
1dS Unstable
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
unstable
stable
U/Uc
p/
Current decay in the vicinity of the superfluid-insulator transition
Use the same steps as before to obtain the asymptotics:
52
3 1 3 , expd
dd dd
CS p S
32
1 2
12
2
3
5.7 1 3
3.2 1 3
4.3
S p
S p
S
Discontinuous change of the decay rate across the meanfield transition. Phase diagram is well defined in 3D!
Large broadening in one and two dimensions.Large broadening in one and two dimensions.
See also AP and D.-W. Wang, PRL, 93, 070401 (2004)
Damping of a superfluid current in one dimension
C.D. Fertig et. al. cond-mat/0410491
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
d=3d=2
d=1
unstable
stable
U/Uc
p/
Effect of the parabolic trap
Expect that the motion becomes unstable first near the edges, where N=1
0 100 200 300 400 500
-0.2
-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.00 0.17 0.34 0.52 0.69 0.86
Cen
ter o
f Mas
s M
omen
tum
Time
N=1.5 N=3
U=0.01 tJ=1/4
Gutzwiller ansatz simulations (2D)
Exact simulations: 8 sites, 16 bosons
0 50 100 150 2000
2
4
6
8
p=/2
p=/4
p=0
n p
Time
SF MI
( ) 2 tanh 0.02 tanh 0.02(200 ) , J=1U t t t p
U/J
Semiclassical (Truncated Wigner) simulations of damping of dipolar motion in a harmonic trap
1 100.1
1
10
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
GP N=500
Dis
plac
emen
t (D
0)
Inverse Tunneling (1/J)
ln(D0/D
1)
Time
D0
D1
Dis
plac
emen
t D(t)
AP and D.-W. Wang, PRL 93, 070401 (2004).
Quantum fluctuations:Quantum fluctuations:
Smaller critical Smaller critical currentcurrent
Broad transitionBroad transition
Detecting equilibrium SF-IN transition boundary in 3D.
p
U/J
Superfluid MI
ExtrapolateAt nonzero current the SF-IN transition is irreversible: no restoration of current and partial restoration of phase coherence in a cyclic ramp.
Easy to detect nonequilibrium Easy to detect nonequilibrium irreversible transition!!irreversible transition!!
Summary
asymptotical behavior of the decay rate near the mean-field transition
p
U/J
Superfluid MI
Quantum fluctuations
Depletion of the condensate. Reduction of the critical current. All spatial dimensions.
mean field beyond mean field
Broadening of the mean field transition. Low dimensions
Smooth connection between the classical dynamical instability and the quantum superfluid-insulator transition.
Qualitative agreement Qualitative agreement with experiments and with experiments and numerical simulations.numerical simulations.
p
U/J
Superfluid MI
Time-dependent Gutzwiller approximation
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
2D
p=/5U=0.01tJz=1N=1
Pha
se c
oher
ence
(np)
U/J