The Capri Spring School on Transport in Nanostructures 2020 - … · CAPRI, 2014 CPT, Marseille...

Non-interacting picture Charge fractionalization Interferometry at ν = 2

Interactions and charge fractionalization in anelectronic Hong-Ou-Mandel interferometer

C. Wahl, J. Rech, T. Jonckheere and T. Martin

CAPRI, 2014

CPT, Marseille

C. Wahl et al., PRL 112, 046802 (’14)

1 / 31Interactions and charge fractionalization in an electronic Hong-Ou-Mandel interferometer

Electronic Quantum Optics

Photons → Electrons

Light beam → Chiral edge QHE

Beam splitter → QPC

Coherent Light source →Single Electron Source

Single Electron Sources

Energy| (t)|2

(t) ~1

t + iW

V(t) = h

eπ t2 + W2

Lorentzian voltage pulses

[Dubois et al., Nature (’13)] 17

Fig1Flying electrons on surface acoustic waves

[Hermelin et al., Nature 477, 435 (’11)][McNeil et al., Nature 477, 439 (’11)]

��

� ��

��

�Charge pumps, quantum turnstiles

[Giblin et al., Nature Comm. 3, 930 (’12)]

Mesoscopic capacitor

[Fève et al., Science 316, 1169 (’07)]

opens the way to all sorts of interference experiments!

Energy| (t)|2

(t) ~1

t + iW

V(t) = h

eπ t2 + W2

[Dubois et al., Nature (’13)]

��

� ��

��

Energy| (t)|2

(t) ~1

t + iW

V(t) = h

eπ t2 + W2

��

� ��

��

Energy| (t)|2

(t) ~1

t + iW

V(t) = h

eπ t2 + W2

��

� ��

��

Energy| (t)|2

(t) ~1

t + iW

V(t) = h

eπ t2 + W2

��

� ��

��

Energy| (t)|2

(t) ~1

t + iW

V(t) = h

eπ t2 + W2

��

� ��

��

The LPA mesoscopic capacitor

D∆ Quantum dot

Level spacing: ∆

Level width: D∆tuned by Vg

Time-dependent excitation voltage Vexc(t)

Ù 1 e + 1 h

Injected exponantial wave-packet

Vexc(t)

,〈I (t)〉

[Fève et al., Science 316, 1169 (’07); Mahé et al., PRB 82,201309 (’10)]

Quantum dot

Level spacing: ∆

Ù 1 e + 1 h

Vexc(t)

,〈I (t)〉

Quantum dot

Level spacing: ∆

Ù 1 e + 1 h

Vexc(t)

,〈I (t)〉

D∆ Quantum dot

Level spacing: ∆

Ù 1 e + 1 h

Vexc(t)

,〈I (t)〉

D∆ Quantum dot

Level spacing: ∆

Ù 1 e + 1 hInjected exponantial wave-packet

Vexc(t)

,〈I (t)〉

D∆ Quantum dot

Level spacing: ∆

Vexc(t)

,〈I (t)〉

D∆ Quantum dot

Level spacing: ∆

Vexc(t)

,〈I (t)〉

D∆ Quantum dot

Level spacing: ∆

Vexc(t)

,〈I (t)〉

D∆ Quantum dot

Level spacing: ∆

Vexc(t)

,〈I (t)〉

D∆ Quantum dot

Level spacing: ∆

Vexc(t)

,〈I (t)〉

D∆ Quantum dot

Level spacing: ∆

Time-dependent excitation voltage Vexc(t) Ù 1 e + 1 h

Vexc(t)

,〈I (t)〉

D∆ Quantum dot

Level spacing: ∆

Time-dependent excitation voltage Vexc(t) Ù 1 e + 1 hInjected exponantial wave-packet

Vexc(t)

,〈I (t)〉

HOM interferometry

Electrons

anti-bunchingeffect of interactions ?

Photons

bunching

HOM interferometry

Electrons

Photons

bunching

HOM interferometry

Electrons

Photons

bunching

HOM interferometry

Electrons

anti-bunching

effect of interactions ?

Photons

bunching

HOM interferometry

Electrons

ν = 2

anti-bunching

effect of interactions ?

Photons

bunching

HOM interferometry

Electrons

ν = 2

Photons

bunching

Table of Contents

1 Non-interacting picture

2 Charge fractionalization

3 Interferometry at ν = 2

Table of Contents

HOM experiment with photons

Interference experimentnon-linear crystal generatesphoton pairs

[Hong, Ou and Mandel, PRL 59, 2044 (’87)]

Coincidence rateHOM dip is observed at 0time delay

signatures of incoming wavepackets

HOM experiment with photons

Interference experimentnon-linear crystal generatesphoton pairs

[Hong, Ou and Mandel, PRL 59, 2044 (’87)]

Coincidence rateHOM dip is observed at 0time delay

signatures of incoming wavepackets

HOM with electrons

Setup2 single electron sources

counter-propagatingchannels coupled at QPC

I outR

I outL

Zero-frequency cross-correlations

SoutRL =

∫dtdt ′

[〈I out

R (x, t)I outL (x ′, t ′)〉 − 〈I out

R (x, t)〉〈I outL (x ′, t ′)〉

HOM with electrons

I outR

I outL

SoutRL =

∫dtdt ′

[〈I out

R (x, t)〉〈I outL (x ′, t ′)〉

HOM with electrons

Differences with photonsfermionic statistics: Fermisea, holes, ...

thermal effects

Coulomb interaction

SoutRL =

∫dtdt ′

[〈I out

R (x, t)〉〈I outL (x ′, t ′)〉

Filling factor ν = 1[Jonckheere et al., Phys. Rev. B 86, 125425 (’12)]

−120 −100 −80 −60 −40 −20 0 20 40 60 80 100 1200

D = 0.2D = 0.5D = 0.8

Collision of identical wave-packetsLarge δT2SHBT < 0 → Hanbury-Brown andTwiss

δT = 0SHOM(0) = 0 → Pauli dip

-100 -50 0 50 100

SHOM H∆t L

2 SHBT

D1 = 0.2D2 = 0.5

D1 = 0.1D2 = 0.8

Different packets → asymmetry0 100 200 300 400

SHOM H∆t L

2 SHBT

ε = 0

ε = ∆/2

Electron-hole collision → peak

−120 −100 −80 −60 −40 −20 0 20 40 60 80 100 1200

D = 0.2D = 0.5D = 0.8

-100 -50 0 50 100

SHOM H∆t L

2 SHBT

D1 = 0.2D2 = 0.5

D1 = 0.1D2 = 0.8

SHOM H∆t L

2 SHBT

ε = 0

ε = ∆/2

−120 −100 −80 −60 −40 −20 0 20 40 60 80 100 1200

D = 0.2D = 0.5D = 0.8

-100 -50 0 50 100

SHOM H∆t L

2 SHBT

D1 = 0.2D2 = 0.5

D1 = 0.1D2 = 0.8

Different packets → asymmetry

0 100 200 300 400

SHOM H∆t L

2 SHBT

ε = 0

ε = ∆/2

−120 −100 −80 −60 −40 −20 0 20 40 60 80 100 1200

D = 0.2D = 0.5D = 0.8

-100 -50 0 50 100

SHOM H∆t L

2 SHBT

D1 = 0.2D2 = 0.5

D1 = 0.1D2 = 0.8

SHOM H∆t L

2 SHBT

ε = 0

ε = ∆/2

HOM with electrons: experimental results

Experimental setup[Bocquillon et al., Science 339, 1054 (’13)]

✬ ✩��

��

!"#$%&'(

)&*+!,-./&$!"#$%&'0

Results12

Time delay ⌧ [ps]

Correlations�q

��

Random par**oning

Pauli dip

FIG. 3: Excess noise ∆q between both sources switched on and both sources switched off as a function

of the delay τ . The noise values are normalized by the value on the plateau observed for long delays. The

blurry blue line represents the sum of the partition noise of both sources. The blue trace is an exponential

fit by ∆q = 1− γe−|t−τ0|/τe . The red trace is obtained using Floquet scattering theory.

Pauli dipSHOM(0) 6= 0

Decoherence at ν = 2!!

✬ ✩��

��

!"#$%&'(

)&*+!,-./&$!"#$%&'0

Results12

Time delay ⌧ [ps]

Correlation

��

Random par**oning

Pauli dip

✬ ✩��

��

!"#$%&'(

)&*+!,-./&$!"#$%&'0

Results12

Time delay ⌧ [ps]

Correlation

��

Random par**oning

Pauli dip

Beyond ν = 1: interactions!

between counter-propagatingchannels, near the QPC

strong interactions within achannel: Fractional QHE

between co-propagating channelsat filling ν = 2

interactin

g region

(work in progress)

(this talk)

injection

propagation

tunneling

ν = 2

prepared state |φ〉

bosonized H(+ diagonalization)

scattering matrix

Bosonization Keldysh

(to be published)

(this talk)

injection

propagation

tunneling

ν = 2

scattering matrix

Beyond ν = 1: interactions!between counter-propagatingchannels, near the QPC

(this talk)

→ known to be present in the experimental setup!

injection

propagation

tunneling

ν = 2

scattering matrix

(this talk)

injection

propagation

tunneling

ν = 2

scattering matrix

(this talk)

injection

propagation

tunneling

ν = 2

scattering matrix

(this talk)

injection

propagation

tunneling

ν = 2

scattering matrix

Table of Contents

Injecting a single electron

|φR〉 =∫

dxϕR(x)ψ†1,R(x − L, 0)|0〉

∫dxϕ(x)ψ†(x)

prepared state |φR〉

Exponential packetϕR(x) =

√2Γeiε0xeΓxθ(−x)

wide in energy spaceγ = ε0/Γ = 1ε0 = 175mK

energy-resolvedγ = 8ε0 = 0.7K

|φR〉 =∫

dxϕR(x)ψ†1,R(x − L, 0)|0〉

∫dxϕ(x)ψ†(x)

|φR〉 =∫

dxϕR(x)ψ†1,R(x − L, 0)|0〉

∫dxϕ(x)ψ†(x)

|φR〉 =∫

dxϕR(x)ψ†1,R(x − L, 0)|0〉

|φR〉 =∫

dxϕR(x)ψ†1,R(x − L, 0)|0〉

−1 −0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 20

ε0 = 0.175K

|ϕ̂L

(ε)|2

−1 0 1 2 3 4 5

x(µm)

|φR〉 =∫

dxϕR(x)ψ†1,R(x − L, 0)|0〉

−1 −0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 20

ε0 = 0.7K

|ϕ̂L

(ε)|2

−1 0 1 2 3 4 5

x(µm)

Bosonization frameworkFinite temperature: Θ = 0.1K

one outer and one inner (j = 1, 2) channels per edge (r = R,L):

Bosonization identity:

ψj,r(x, t) = Ur√2πa

eiφj,r (x,t)

Ur : Klein factora: short-distance cutoffφj,r : chiral bosonic field

J. von Delft and H. Schoeller, Annalen Phys., 1998

Bosonization frameworkFinite temperature: Θ = 0.1Kone outer and one inner (j = 1, 2) channels per edge (r = R,L):

eiφj,r (x,t)

eiφj,r (x,t)Ur : Klein factor

a: short-distance cutoffφj,r : chiral bosonic field

eiφj,r (x,t)Ur : Klein factora: short-distance cutoff

φj,r : chiral bosonic field

eiφj,r (x,t)Ur : Klein factora: short-distance cutoffφj,r : chiral bosonic field

Hamiltonian

Propagation along the edges:

Hkin = ~π

∑r=R,L

∫dx v1 (∂xφ1,r)2 + v2 (∂xφ2,r)2

Intra-channel interaction:

Hintra = ~π

∑j=1,2

∫dx(∂xφj,r)2

Inter-channel interaction:

Hinter = 2~π

∫dx(∂xφ1,r)(∂xφ2,r)

parameters0 ≤ u ≤ UU & vF

Hamiltonian

Hkin = ~π

∑r=R,L

∫dx v1 (∂xφ1,r)2 + v2 (∂xφ2,r)2

Hintra = ~π

∑j=1,2

∫dx(∂xφj,r)2

Hinter = 2~π

Hamiltonian

Hkin = ~π

∑r=R,L

∫dx v1 (∂xφ1,r)2 + v2 (∂xφ2,r)2

Hintra = ~π

∑j=1,2

∫dx(∂xφj,r)2

Hinter = 2~π

Hamiltonian

Hkin = ~π

∑r=R,L

∫dx v1 (∂xφ1,r)2 + v2 (∂xφ2,r)2

Hintra = ~π

∑j=1,2

∫dx(∂xφj,r)2

Hinter = 2~π

Mixing angle θ

H = ~π

∑r=R,L

(vj + U )(∂xφj,r)2 + 2u(∂xφ1,r)(∂xφ2,r)

Diagonalization Ù Mixing angle θ: tan(2θ) = 2u/(v1 − v2)Eigenmodes φ+,r and φ−,r

Eigenvelocities v±

No coupling: θ = 0φ+,r = φ1,rφ−,r = φ2,rv+ = v1 + Uv− = v2 + U

Strong coupling: θ = π/4φ+,r =

√2/2(φ1,r + φ2,r)

φ−,r =√2/2(φ1,r − φ2,r)

v1 = v2 = vFv± = vF + U ± u

Mixing angle θ

H = ~π

∑r=R,L

(vj + U )(∂xφj,r)2 + 2u(∂xφ1,r)(∂xφ2,r)

Diagonalization Ù Mixing angle θ: tan(2θ) = 2u/(v1 − v2)

Eigenmodes φ+,r and φ−,r

Eigenvelocities v±

√2/2(φ1,r + φ2,r)

φ−,r =√2/2(φ1,r − φ2,r)

v1 = v2 = vFv± = vF + U ± u

Mixing angle θ

H = ~π

∑r=R,L

(vj + U )(∂xφj,r)2 + 2u(∂xφ1,r)(∂xφ2,r)

Eigenvelocities v±

φ+,r = sin θφ1,r + cos θφ2,r

φ−,r = cos θφ1,r − sin θφ2,r

√2/2(φ1,r + φ2,r)

φ−,r =√2/2(φ1,r − φ2,r)

v1 = v2 = vFv± = vF + U ± u

Mixing angle θ

H = ~π

∑r=R,L

(vj + U )(∂xφj,r)2 + 2u(∂xφ1,r)(∂xφ2,r)

Eigenvelocities v±

v± = v1 + v2 + 2U2 ±

√(v1 − v2)2

4 + u2

√2/2(φ1,r + φ2,r)

φ−,r =√2/2(φ1,r − φ2,r)

v1 = v2 = vFv± = vF + U ± u

Mixing angle θ

H = ~π

∑r=R,L

[v+(∂xφ+,r)2 + v−(∂xφ−,r)2

Eigenvelocities v±

√2/2(φ1,r + φ2,r)

φ−,r =√2/2(φ1,r − φ2,r)

v1 = v2 = vFv± = vF + U ± u

Mixing angle θ

H = ~π

∑r=R,L

[v+(∂xφ+,r)2 + v−(∂xφ−,r)2

Eigenvelocities v±

√2/2(φ1,r + φ2,r)

φ−,r =√2/2(φ1,r − φ2,r)

v1 = v2 = vFv± = vF + U ± u

Mixing angle θ

H = ~π

∑r=R,L

[v+(∂xφ+,r)2 + v−(∂xφ−,r)2

Eigenvelocities v±

√2/2(φ1,r + φ2,r)

φ−,r =√2/2(φ1,r − φ2,r)

v1 = v2 = vFv± = vF + U ± u

Charge fractionalization

qs,L(x, t) = e/π〈∂xφs,L(x, t)〉φL

Outer injection

10 15 20−0.200.2q1,L

x(µm)

fast charged mode: ⊕ ⊕slow neutral mode: ⊕

E. Berg et al., PRL 102 (2009) P. Degiovanni et al., PRB 81 (2010)

Outer injection

10 15 20−0.200.2q1,L

x(µm)

Outer injection

+ −q2,L

10 15 20−0.200.2

+ + q1,L

x(µm)

Outer injection

+ −q2,L

10 15 20−0.200.2

+ + q1,L

x(µm)

fast charged mode: ⊕ ⊕

slow neutral mode: ⊕

Outer injection

+ −q2,L

10 15 20−0.200.2

+ + q1,L

x(µm)

Table of Contents

HBT setup

setup 1

coupling at QPC: channels 1

setup 2

channels 2

S =∫

dtdt ′〈Is(t)Is(t ′)〉 − 〈Is(t)〉〈Is(t ′)〉averages performed on |φL〉

⊗ |φR〉

H. Lee and L. Levitov, arXiv:cond-mat/9312013 (1993)

G. Burkard and D. Loss, PRL 91 (2003)Ol’khovskaya et al., PRL 101 (2008)

HBT setup

setup 1

I2 + −q2,L

10 15 20−0.200.2

+ + q1,L

x(µm)

setup 2

channels 2

S =∫

⊗ |φR〉

HBT setup

setup 1

I2 + −q2,L

10 15 20−0.200.2

+ + q1,L

x(µm)

setup 2

I2 + −q2,L

10 15 20−0.200.2

+ + q1,L

x(µm)

channels 2

S =∫

⊗ |φR〉

HBT setup

setup 1

I2 + −q2,L

10 15 20−0.200.2

+ + q1,L

x(µm)

setup 2

I2 + −q2,L

10 15 20−0.200.2

+ + q1,L

x(µm)

channels 2

SHBT =∫

⊗ |φR〉

HOM setup

setup 1

I2 + −q2,L

10 15 20−0.200.2

+ + q1,L

x(µm)

setup 2

I2 + −q2,L

10 15 20−0.200.2

+ + q1,L

x(µm)

channels 2

SHOM =∫

dtdt ′〈Is(t)Is(t ′)〉 − 〈Is(t)〉〈Is(t ′)〉averages performed on |φL〉 ⊗ |φR〉G. Burkard and D. Loss, PRL 91 (2003)Ol’khovskaya et al., PRL 101 (2008)

Performing the calculation

Quantity of interestSHBT and SHOM

Operators involvedIs,r(x, t)

I outs,r (x, t)

I outs,r (0, t)

ψs,rout

(0, t)

ψs,rin

(0, t)

φins,r(0, t)

φin±,r(0, t)

Linear dispersion

Electric current

Scattering matrix

Bosonization

Diagonalization

ψs,rin

(0, t) = Ur√2πa expiφin

s,r (0,t)

I outs,r (x, t)

I outs,r (0, t)

ψs,rout

(0, t)

ψs,rin

(0, t)

φins,r(0, t)

φin±,r(0, t)

Linear dispersion

Electric current

Scattering matrix

Bosonization

Diagonalization

∫dt I out

s,r (x, t) =∫

dt I outs,r (0, t)

ψs,rin

s,r (0,t)

I outs,r (x, t)

I outs,r (0, t)

ψs,rout

(0, t)

ψs,rin

(0, t)

φins,r(0, t)

φin±,r(0, t)

Linear dispersion

Electric current

Scattering matrix

Bosonization

Diagonalization

I outs,r (0, t) = −ev : ψ†s,r

out(0, t)ψs,r

out(0, t) :

ψs,rin

s,r (0,t)

I outs,r (x, t)

I outs,r (0, t)

ψs,rout

(0, t)

ψs,rin

(0, t)

φins,r(0, t)

φin±,r(0, t)

Linear dispersion

Electric current

Scattering matrix

Bosonization

Diagonalization

(ψs,R(0, t)ψs,L(0, t)

=(√T i

i√R√T

)(ψs,R(0, t)ψs,L(0, t)

ψs,rin

s,r (0,t)

I outs,r (x, t)

I outs,r (0, t)

ψs,rout

(0, t)

ψs,rin

(0, t)

φins,r(0, t)

φin±,r(0, t)

Linear dispersion

Electric current

Scattering matrix

Bosonization

Diagonalization

ψs,rin

s,r (0,t)

I outs,r (x, t)

I outs,r (0, t)

ψs,rout

(0, t)

ψs,rin

(0, t)

φins,r(0, t)

φin±,r(0, t)

Linear dispersion

Electric current

Scattering matrix

Bosonization

Diagonalization

ψs,rin

s,r (0,t)

Operators involvedIs,r(x, t) → φin

±,r(0, t)

I outs,r (x, t)

I outs,r (0, t)

ψs,rout

(0, t)

ψs,rin

(0, t)

φins,r(0, t)

φin±,r(0, t)

Linear dispersion

Electric current

Scattering matrix

Bosonization

Diagonalization

ψs,rin

s,r (0,t)

HBT Result

SHBT = − 2e2RT(2πa)3N Re

{∫dyLdzL ϕL(yL)ϕ∗L(zL)g(0, zL − yL)∫

dt dτ Re[g(τ, 0)2

] [ hs(t; yL + L, zL + L)hs(t + τ ; yL + L, zL + L) − 1

g(t, x) =

sinh(i πaβv+

(ia+v+t−xβv+/π

) sinh(i πaβv−

(ia+v−t−xβv−/π

hs(t; x, y) =

ia−v+t+xβv+/π

(ia+v+t−yβv+/π

12sinh

(ia−v−t+xβv−/π

(ia+v−t−yβv−/π

32−s

HBT Result

dt dτ Re[g(τ, 0)2

N = 〈φL|φL〉

g(t, x) =

sinh(i πaβv+

(ia+v+t−xβv+/π

) sinh(i πaβv−

hs(t; x, y) =

ia−v+t+xβv+/π

(ia+v+t−yβv+/π

12sinh

32−s

HBT Result

dt dτ Re[g(τ, 0)2

g(t, x) =

sinh(i πaβv+

(ia+v+t−xβv+/π

) sinh(i πaβv−

hs(t; x, y) =

ia−v+t+xβv+/π

(ia+v+t−yβv+/π

12sinh

32−s

HOM Result

SHOM(δT ) = − 2e2RT(2πa)4N Re

{∫dyLdzL ϕL(yL)ϕ∗L(zL)g(0, zL − yL)

dyRdzR ϕR(yR)ϕ∗R(zR)g(0, yR − zR)∫

dτ Re[g(τ, 0)2

]×∫

dt[ hs(t; yL + L, zL + L)

hs(t + τ ; yL + L, zL + L)hs(t + τ − δT ; L − yR,L − zR)

hs(t − δT ; L − yR,L − zR) − 1]}

HOM Result

dτ Re[g(τ, 0)2

]×∫

hs(t − δT ; L − yR,L − zR) − 1]}

N = 〈φL|φL〉〈φR|φR〉

HOM Result

dτ Re[g(τ, 0)2

]×∫

hs(t − δT ; L − yR,L − zR) − 1]}

Numerics: quasi Monte Carlo algorithm

T. Hahn, Comput. Phys. Commun., 2005

Interferometry

Setup 1 Setup 2

δT = 0Pauli dip Pauli dip

δT = +2Lu/(1− u2)SHBT + asymmetric dip SHBT + asymmetric peak

δT = −2Lu/(1− u2)SHBT + asymmetric dip SHBT + asymmetric peak

Interferometry

Setup 1 Setup 2

δT = 0

Pauli dip Pauli dip

Interferometry

Setup 1 Setup 2

δT = 0Pauli dip

Pauli dip

Interferometry

Setup 1 Setup 2

Interferometry

Setup 1 Setup 2

δT = +2Lu/(1− u2)

SHBT + asymmetric dip SHBT + asymmetric peak

Interferometry

Setup 1 Setup 2

δT = +2Lu/(1− u2)SHBT + asymmetric dip

SHBT + asymmetric peak

Interferometry

Setup 1 Setup 2

Interferometry

Setup 1 Setup 2

Wide Packets: Setup 1

Wide packets in energyε0 = 175mK γ = 1

−0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.60

12|SHBT|

δT (ns)

)|(e2RT

L = 5µmL = 2.5µm

setup 1

SHOM(0) 6= 0

velocity mismatch:asymmetry +loss of contrast

−0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.60

12|SHBT|

δT (ns)

)|(e2RT

L = 5µmL = 2.5µm

setup 1

SHOM(0) 6= 0

-100 -50 0 50 100

SHOM H∆t L

2 SHBT

SHOM(0) 6= 0

−0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.60

12|SHBT|

δT (ns)

)|(e2RT

L = 5µmL = 2.5µm

setup 1

SHOM(0) 6= 0

−0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.60

12|SHBT|

δT (ns)

)|(e2RT

L = 5µmL = 2.5µm

setup 2

SHOM(0) 6= 0unchanged

side peaks:constructiveinterference

−0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.60

12|SHBT|

δT (ns)

)|(e2RT

L = 5µmL = 2.5µm

setup 2

−0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.60

12|SHBT|

δT (ns)

)|(e2RT

L = 5µmL = 2.5µm

setup 2

Thin packets: Setups 1 and 2

Energy resolved packetsε0 = 0.7K γ = 8

−0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.60

1.52|SHBT|

δT (ns)

)|(e2RT

L = 5µmL = 2.5µm

setup 1

dramatic loss ofcontrast!!agreement withexperiment

no peaks

−0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.60

1.52|SHBT|

δT (ns)

)|(e2RT

L = 5µmL = 2.5µm

setup 1

no peaks

−0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.60

1.52|SHBT|

δT (ns)

)|(e2RT

L = 5µmL = 2.5µm

setup 2

no peaks

Electron-hole collision

Wide packets in energyε0 = ±175mK γ = 1

−0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.60

2|SHBT|

δT (ns)

)|(e2RT

ε0 = 175mKγ = 1

L = 5µme-h setup1

⊕/→ constructive

⊕/⊕ or /→ destructive

⊕/ interferenceweaker

−0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.60

2|SHBT|

δT (ns)

)|(e2RT

ε0 = 175mKγ = 1

L = 5µme-h setup1

−0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.60

2|SHBT|

δT (ns)

)|(e2RT

ε0 = 175mKγ = 1

L = 5µme-h setup1

e-h setup 2

−0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.60

2|SHBT|

δT (ns)

)|(e2RT

ε0 = 175mKγ = 1

L = 5µme-h setup1

e-h setup 2

−0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.60

2|SHBT|

δT (ns)

)|(e2RT

ε0 = 175mKγ = 1

L = 5µme-h setup1

e-h setup 2

Energy width dependency

−L L

escape timeτe = α/Γα = 3.85psK

parametersε0 = 0.7Kv+ = 2v−L = 2.45µm

Very good agreement!!

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

τe(ps)

theorie

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

τe(ps)

theorie

experiment

Conclusion

Interactions account for the observed loss of contrast!

The contrast depends on the energy resolution and theinjection energy of the packet.

Fast and slow excitations interference → lateral dips/peaks

Conclusion

Thank you for yourattention!!!

The Capri Spring School on Transport in Nanostructures 2020 - … · CAPRI, 2014 CPT, Marseille...

Documents

Transcript of The Capri Spring School on Transport in Nanostructures 2020 - … · CAPRI, 2014 CPT, Marseille...

CPT Guide 5th 2012

Dark Energy and CPT Test with CMB Polarization

Hot Topics from BABARhepweb.ucsd.edu/~vsharma/ppt/Ringberg06/Talks06/... · •T, CP, and CPT studies in B mixing with dileptons (improved precision and new measurements) syamc dera

Efecto de la administración de triglicéridos - ddd.uab.cat · 6.2.3.3.Hormonas en plasma: insulina, leptina y adiponectina. ... Características de las CPT mitocondriales. 13 3.

1. Write the structures of the following compounds. 12TH... · contact for coaching mathematics for 11th 12th nda diploma ssc cat sat cpt contact for admission guidance b.tech bba

ΠΥΡΚΑΓΙΑΣ - Cpt. Petros Exadaktilos€¦ · ΘΕΡΜΟΤΗΤΑ 3. ΚΑΥΣΙΜΗ ΥΛΗ . 5 Αυτά λοιπόν τα τρία είναι οι προϋποθέσεις ,

Structural characterization of self-assembled chain like Fe ......One of the big challenge of studying the core-shell iron nanostructures is to know the nature of oxide shell, i.e.,

Chiral behavior of pion properties from lattice QCD · Chiral behavior of pion properties from lattice QCD Alfonso Sastre CPT, Marseille Budapest-Marseille-Wuppertal collaboration

Co‑assembly of Peptide Amphiphiles and Lipids into … · 2020. 6. 1. · 1 / 17 Co-Assembly of Peptide Amphiphiles and Lipids into Supramolecular Nanostructures Driven by Anion-π

CPT Guide 5th 2012.pdf

Design of β-lactoglobulin micro- and nanostructures by ...repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt/bitstream/1822/61782/1/... · Protein interaction Aggregation ABSTRACT β-lactoglobulin ( -Lg)

Physical properties of Sn and Cr doped -Ga2 3 nanostructures · Manuel Alonso Orts, Emilio Nogales and Bianchi Méndez Facultad de Ciencias Físicas, Universidad Complutense de Madrid,

The Power of First- Principles Simulation · • Modelling of solids, liquids, surfaces, nanostructures • Ingredients: atomic nuclei and electrons • Quantum-mechanical description

GUIDE TO CONE PENETRATION TESTING - Novo …novotechsoftware.com/downloads/PDF/en/Ref/CPT-Guide-4ed-July2010.pdfGuide to Cone Penetration Testing for ... Equivalent SPT N60 Profiles

Economics and the and the Clinical Physicist · 2006-08-15 · 3 Task Descriptors Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) 1st Edition - 1966 Major Revisions: 1970, 1973, 1977 CPT 5 Project:

Supporting Information nanostructures for Riboflavin ... · C.Sumathi, P. Muthukumaran, P.Thivya, J.Wilson, G.Ravi Fig. S1 CV Profiles (A) α – Fe 2 O 3 (B) C-MoS 2 (C) PEDOT (D)

High specific surface area α-Fe2O3 nanostructures as high …ugcdskpdf.unipune.ac.in/Journal/uploads/CH/CH11-120034-A-3.pdf · of an amorphous phase. The BET measurement reveals

Synthesis of Micron-sized Hexagonal and Flower- like ...Abstract: Micron sized hexagon- and ﬂower-like nanostructures of lead oxide (α-PbO 2) have been synthe-sized by very simple

Adjuvante und neoadjuvante Therapie des · PDF fileaxel.kleespies@med.uni-muenchen.de. Inzidenz 7.711 5.766 9. Stelle (2,9 %) 7. ... CapRI Virginia Mason Protokoll 2003 (Interferon-α2αα22α2

Tests of Lorentz and CPT Violation with Neutrino …...Scientific American (Sept. 2004) 13 Test of Lorentz violation is to find the coupling of these background fields and ordinary