arxiv:physics/ v1 [physics.atom-ph] 19 Dec 2003

Transcription

1 Using Atomic Diffraction of Na from Material Gratings to Measure Atom-Surface Interactions John D. Perreault, Alexaner D. Cronin University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 87 arxiv:physics/v [physics.atom-ph] 9 Dec T. A. Savas Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambrige, Massachusetts 9 Date: May 9, 7) In atom optics a material structure is commonly regare as an amplitue mask for atom waves. However, atomic iffraction patterns forme using material gratings inicate that material structures also operate as phase masks. In this stuy a well collimate beam of soium atoms is use to illuminate a silicon nitrie grating with a perio of nm. During passage through the grating slots atoms acquire a phase shift ue to the van er Waals interaction with the grating walls. As a result the relative intensities of the matter-wave iffraction peaks eviate from those expecte for a purely absorbing grating. Thus a complex transmission function is require to explain the observe iffraction envelopes. An optics perspective to the theory of atomic iffraction from material gratings is put forth in the hopes of proviing a more intuitive picture concerning the influence of the vw potential. The van er Waals coefficient C =.7±.8 mev nm is etermine by fitting a moifie Fresnel optical theory to the experimental ata. This value of C is consistent with a van er Waals interaction between atomic soium an a silicon nitrie surface. PACS numbers:.7.dg, 9..+q Keywors: atom optics It is known that correlations of electromagnetic vacuum fiel fluctuations over short istances can result in an attractive potential between atoms. For the case of an atom an a surface the potential takes the form V r) = C r, ) where r is the atom-surface istance an C is a coefficient which escribes the strength of the van er Waals vw) interaction []. Equation is often calle the nonretare vw potential an is vali over istances shorter than the principle transition wavelength of the atoms involve. The significance of this interaction is becoming more prevalent as mechanical structures are being built on the nanometer scale. The vw potential also plays an important part in chemistry, atomic force microscopy, an can be use to test quantum electroynamic theory. Early experiments concerning the vw interaction were base on the eflection of atomic beams from surfaces. It was emonstrate that the eflection of groun state alkali [] an Ryberg [] atom beams from a gol surface is compatible with Eq.. Later measurements base on the Stark shift interpretation of the vw potential [] were sufficiently accurate to istinguish between the retare V r an non-retare V r forms. More recently atom optics techniques have been employe to measure the magnitue of the vw coefficient C. Various groun state [] an excite noble gas [6] atom beams have been iffracte using nanofabricate transmission gratings in orer to measure C. The influence of the vw potential has also been observe for large molecules in a Talbot-Lau interferometer mm mm mm FIG. : A iagram of the experimental setup use. constructe with three gol gratings [7]. In this article we present atomic iffraction of a thermal soium atom beam an show that the ata cannot be escribe by a purely absorbing grating. A iagram of the experimental apparatus is shown in Fig.. The supersonic beam of soium atoms passes through a. mm iameter skimmer an is collimate by two µm slits separate by m. By changing the carrier gas the atom velocity can be ajuste from.6 to km/s with σ v v.. The collimate atom beam is use to illuminate a silicon nitrie grating [8] with a perio of = nm, thickness t = ± nm, open with w =. ±. nm, an grating bar wege angle α =.±.7 egrees. All of the grating parameters are measure inepenently using scanning electron microscope images. The iffraction pattern is measure by ionizing the soium atoms with a hot Re wire an then counting the ions with a channel electron multiplier.

2 An optical escription is helpful in gaining an intuitive picture of how the vw interaction moifies the atomic iffraction pattern. To this en one shoul recall that the Schroeinger equation for a wave function ψ can be written as i [ ] t ψr, t) = m + V r) ψr, t), ) where m is mass, is Planck s constant, an V is the potential [9]. One can take the Fourier transform of Eq. with respect to time an use the fact that t iω in the frequency omain to obtain [ + V r) ω ) k o ] ψr, ω) =, ) where the ispersion relation ω = k o m has been utilize. Equation is usually referre to as the time inepenent Schroeinger equation. It is quite illuminating to recall that the Helmholtz equation [] for the electric fiel E is given by + n ko ) Er, ω) =, ) where n is inex of refraction. By inspection one can see that Eqs. an are formally equivalent where the quantities n an V ω) / play analogous roles. Due to this fact many wave propagation methos evelope in optics can be applie irectly to matter wave propagation, being minful of the fact that in optics ω = ck o. While Eq. can be formally solve using a Green s function approach, approximate solutions use in physical optics can lea to a better unerstaning of how the vw interaction affects atomic iffraction patterns. The Fresnel an Fraunhofer approximations are commonly use in optics an represent a useful tool when face with propagating the wave function ψ from the grating to the etector plane. The Fresnel or paraxial approximation is vali as long as the propagation istance z satisfies the inequality z x ξ. ) This is certainly satisfie for our experiment since the iffraction angles are less than raians an the orers are resolve. The Fraunhofer or far-fiel approximation goes beyon the Fresnel approximation by requiring that z k o ξ max = π λ B ξ max, 6) where λ B is the e Brolglie wavelength of the atoms an ξ max is the relevant extent in the aperture plane []. For the case of propagation from a uniformly illuminate grating of perio to the etector plane, ξ max an Eq. 6 takes the form z π λ B. For our experimental setup = nm an λ B m, so the inequality z m π m is met. However, our atom beam iameter is on the orer of m an so ξ max m implying that the inequality in Eq. 6 is not met. In light of the previous iscussion it seems most appropriate to use the Fresnel approximation to moel our experiment. Accoring to the Fresnel approximation the wave function in the etector plane ψx) is relate to that just after the grating ψξ) by a scale spatial Fourier transform { } ψx) F e i koξ zo ψξ), 7) f ξ = x λ B zo where F{} enotes a Fourier transform an f ξ is the Fourier conjugate variable to ξ []. The quaratic phase factor in Eq. 7 accounts for the fact that the phase fronts have a parabolic shape before the far-fiel is reache. The wave function just after the grating ψξ) is given by [ )] ξ ψξ) = Tξ) comb Uξ), 8) ) where comb ξ is an array of elta functions with spacing, the operator enotes a convolution, an Uξ) is complex function escribing the atom beam amplitue in the plane of the grating. The transmission function of a single grating winow Tξ) in Eq. 8 is efine as ) ξ Tξ) e iφξ) rect, 9) w where rectarg) = when arg an zero otherwise. The phase φξ) accounts for the vw interaction an its origin will be iscusse later. This escription of ψξ) an Tξ) in terms of the functions comb) an rect) is stanar Fourier optics notation an convenient ue to its moular nature []. Equation 8 can then be substitute into Eq. 7 to obtain ψx) A j U x j λ ) Bz o, ) j= where the summation inex correspons to the j th iffraction orer, the iffraction amplitue A j is efine as { ξ A j F {Tξ)} fξ = j = F e iφξ) rect, w)} f ξ = j ) an the beam profile in the etector plane is given by { } Ux) = F e i koξ zo Uξ). ) f ξ = x λ B zo

3 From Eq. we can preict the atom intensity Ix) ψx), ) in the etector plane which can also be interprete as the probability law for atoms. A istribution of atom velocities can be incorporate by a weighte incoherent sum of the intensity pattern for each atom velocity I x; v) Ix) = v Pv)I x; v); v = h mλ B, ) ) Pv) v mv u) exp, ) k B T where the Pv) is the probability istribution function of velocities for a supersonic source, u is the average flow velocity, k B is Boltzmann s constant, an T is the longituinal temperature of the beam in the moving frame of the atoms []. One can see from Eq. that the iffraction pattern consists of replications of the beam shape Ux) shifte by integer multiples of λ Bz o with relative intensities etermine by the moulus square of Eq.. An important feature to notice in Eq. is that a iffraction orer in the etector plane correspons to a spatial frequency in the grating plane through the relation f ξ = j. This highlights the connection between the spatially epenent phase φξ) in Eq. 9 an the magnitue of the iffraction orers in Eq.. The earlier assertion that φξ) in Eq. 9 somehow incorporates the vw interaction into the optical propagation theory can be unerstoo by recalling from Eq. that the inex of refraction n an quantity ω) V / play similar roles in optics an atom optics, respectively. In optics one calculates a phase shift φ inuce by a glass plate by multiplying the wavenumber in the material nk o by the thickness of the plate L i.e. φ = nk o L). Just as in the optics case one can calculate the phase shift φξ) accumulate by the wave function passing through the grating winows ) ifferential ) wavenumber φξ) = = t in potential k o V ξ, z) ω thickness ) / z, 6) where t is the thickness of the grating an V ξ, z) is the potential the atoms experience between the grating bars ue to the vw interaction. Thus the vw interaction is analogous to a glass plate with a spatially epenent inex of refraction, a kin of iverging lens that fills each grating winow. The result in Eq. 6 is consistent with the wave function phase accoring to the WKB approximation [9]. In arriving at Eq. 6 iffraction ue to abrupt changes in the potential V ξ, z) has been ignore while the wave function propagates through the grating winows. This is a vali approximation ue to the fact that λ B [ ] V ξ) w, ξ ω in the region of the potential that correspons to the iffraction orers of interest. The relationship between spatial regions of the potential V ξ, z) an a given iffraction orer will be iscusse in subsequent paragraphs. It is also important to note that Eq. 6 assumes that the potential V ξ, z) exists only between the grating bars i.e. V ξ, z) = for z < t or z > ) an neglects the fact that the bars are not semi-infinite planes. Theoretical work one by Spurch et al. [] suggests that the vw potential corresponing to our nm grating bar with is very similar to that of a semi-infinite plane in the ξ irection. Since the phase φξ) from Eq. 6 only epens on the integral of the potential in the z irection one woul also expect that ege effects in V ξ, z) ue to the finite grating thickness t are a small correction. If the particle energy ω is much greater than the potential V ξ, z) then Eq. 6 can be further simplifie by Taylor expaning the quantity V ω) / an keeping the leaing orer term in V ω φξ) = tk o V ξ, z)z; ω V ξ, z), 7) v t through the use of the ispersion relation ω = k o m an p = mv = k o. Equation 7 is often calle the Eikonal approximation. The term tk o in Eq. 7 is inepenent of ξ an of no consequence in Eq. so it can be neglecte. One can see from Eq. 7 that if V ξ, z) then Eq. reuces to the sinc iffraction envelope expecte from a purely absorbing grating. Furthermore, it is now clear from Eqs. an 7 that the relative heights of the iffraction orers are altere in a way that epens on V ξ, z) as well as the atom beam velocity v. As a simple moel one can represent the potenial in Eq. 7 as the sum of the potential ue to the two interior walls of the grating winow φξ) = t v [g α)v ξ) g + α)v + ξ)], 8) where the function g ± α) incorporates the influence of the wege angle α ± ttan α ξ± g ± α) w ) ), ± t tan α ξ± w ) 9) an V ± ξ) C ξ ± w ) is implie by Eq.. Equations 8 an 9 are arrive at by carrying out the integration in Eq. 7 while assuming that the open grating with w varies in the propagation irection z as

4 Ix) [kcounts/s] v = 66 m/s terms in Eq. 6 will become important when ξ j ξ c an C ξc w ) ω. If Eq. 8 is inserte into Eq. with the previously mentione limits one can solve for the iffraction orer j c at which the approximation in Eq. 7 breaks own Ix) [kcounts/s] Ix) [kcounts/s] Ix) [kcounts/s].... v = 9 m/s v = 9 m/s. v = 7 m/s FIG. : Observe iffraction patterns of four ifferent atom velocities. The numbers next to the peaks inicate the iffraction orer. Molecular Na peaks are also visible between zeroth an first orers for slower velocities. wz) = w +z tanα. Since the principle transition wavelength of Na 9 nm) is much larger than w i.e. the maximum atom-surface istance of nm) the nonretare form of the vw potential is appropriate. It is not immeiately obvious how the phase representation in Eq. 7 will affect the far-fiel iffraction pattern or if the Eikonal approximation is appropriate in light of Eq. 8 i.e. V ± ξ) as ξ w ). In orer to aress this it is helpful to introuce the concept of an instantaneous spatial frequency [] f ξ ξ j ) φ ξ = j ξ=ξj, ) where ξ j is the grating winow location corresponing to the iffraction orer j as in Eq.. For the limiting case of α the geometry factor g ± α) the higher orer j c k ot C ω ξ c w ) = k ot ω C ). ) ) For the present experiment kot an ω C 7 which implies that j c 7. Thus the approximation in Eq. 7 is appropriate since we typically concerne with only the first ten iffraction orers. In fact, the paraxial approximation will become invali before Eq. 7 becomes invali ue to the fact the iffraction orer spacing is typically λ Bz o. mm. It is also interesting to note that using Eqs. 8 an one can solve for the position ξ j in the grating winow ξ j w ) tc ; j, ) j v corresponing to a particular iffraction orer j. If j = in Eq. then ξ. nm an since ξ j j the shape of the iffraction amplitue in Eq. epens on a small region of the potential near an an atom-surface istance of nm. The experimental ata for iffraction patterns of four ifferent atom beam velocities are isplaye in Fig.. One can see from Fig. that the secon orer iffraction peak is almost completely suppresse for the faster atoms whereas it is quite pronounce for the slower atoms. This velocity epenence is a clear inication that a complex transmission functions such as Eq. 9 i.e. C ) is require to explain the ata. A least-squares fit to Eqs. an is use to etermine iffraction envelope A j an the average velocity. It is clear from Fig. that the iffraction orers overlap to some extent, hence the tails of the beam shape are important when etermining A j. The broa tails of the beam shape were not aequately escribe by a Gaussian so an empirical shape using a fixe collimating geometry was erive from the measure raw beam profile an use for Ux). The iffraction amplitues A j etermine from Fig. for the various velocities are isplaye in Fig.. The vw coefficient C is etermine by a least-squares fit to this reuce ata with the moulus square of Eq.. All of the grating parameters are etermine inepenently, therefore C is the only free parameter. Data from each velocity is fit simultaneously with the same C. It is clear that a purely absorbing grating i.e. C = ) is inconsistent with all of the observe A j especially at lower velocities for which the phase φξ) is much larger. Uncertainty in the etermination of the grating parameter w an the exact shape of the potential in Eq. 7

5 Relative Intensity Diffraction Orer v = 66 m/s v = 9 m/s v = 9 m/s v = 7 m/s vw theory C = FIG. : Diffraction orer intensities an best fit iffraction amplitue A j. Notice how the theory for a purely absorbing grating fails to escribe the ata. may be responsible for the slight eviation from theory evient in Fig.. A stuy of the systematic errors in our experiment an analysis suggest that w is largest source of uncertainty when calculating C. One can numerically calculate the function C w), which is the best fit C as a function of w, whose linear epenence aroun the physical value of w is foun to be C w w=. nm =. mev nm. The error in C is arrive at by taking the prouct of this slope an the. nm uncertainty in w. After carrying out the previously escribe analysis we obtain a value for the vw coefficient C =.7 ±.8 mev nm. The uncertainty etermine this way is consierably larger than the statistical uncertainty in C from the least-squares fitting proceure. The uncertainty ue to w is also larger than the systematic corrections ue to the atom beam profile or uncertainties ue to imperfect knowlege of the grating parameters:, t, an α. TABLE I: Measure an calculate values of C Metho C [ mev nm ] This experiment.7 ±.8 Na an perfect conuctor [] 7.6 Na an perfect conuctor [6, 7, 8] 6.9 Na an Na surface. Na an SiN x surface. Na an SiN x with a -nm Na layer.8 inicates a one-oscillator moel for atomic polarizability. inicates C evaluate nm from the first surface. To compare our experimental measurement with theoretical preictions of the van er Waal potential strength, we evaluate five ifferent theoretical cases for soium atoms an various surfaces in Table I. The Lifshitz formula [7] for C is C = π ωαiω) ǫiω) ǫiω) +, ) where αiω) is the ynamic polarizability of the atom an ǫiw) is the permittivity of the surface material, both of which are a function of complex frequency. A single Lorentz oscillator moel for an atom i.e. neglecting all but the valence electron) with no amping gives an expression for polarizability [8] αiω) = α) + ω ω ). ) For soium atoms α) =. Å [9] an ω = πc/9 nm). Combining this with a perfect conuctor i.e. ǫ = ) in Eq. gives C = 6.9 mev nm. This value agrees well with the non-retare limit calculate in reference [6] for soium atoms with a single valence electron. For more accurately moele soium atoms an a perfect conuctor, Derevianko et al. [] calculate C = 7.6 mev nm an reporte a range of values spanning.8 mev nm base on ifferent many-boy calculation methos which all inclue the effect of core electrons. It is noteworthy that 6% of this recommene value is ue to the core electrons []. For a metal surface, the Drue moel escribes ǫiω) in terms of the plasma frequency an amping: ǫiω) = + ω p ωω + γ). ) For soium metal, ω p =.8 ev an γ = mev, resulting in C =. mev nm for a soium atom an a bulk soium surface. Presumably this calculation also uner-estimates C because the core electrons are neglecte. However, the calculation error is probably smaller than that of a perfect conuctor because the core electron excitations are at frequencies comparable to ω p. For an insulating surface of silicon nitrie, which is the iffraction grating material, Bruhl et al [6] use a moel with ǫiω) = ω + + g )ω ω + g )ω 6) where ω E s = ev an g =.88 is the material response function at zero frequency. Using Eqs.,, an 6 gives a value of C =. mev nm. A multilayere surface makes a vw potential that no longer epens exactly on r, even in the non-retare limit. We use Equation. from reference [] to calculate V r) for thin films of soium on a slab of silicon nitrie. Because our experiment is sensitive to atom-surface istances in the region nm, we report

6 6 the nominal value of C from these calculations using C = V nm) nm). Evaluate this way, isolate thin films make a smaller C as r increases. Films on a substrate make C vary from the value associate with the bulk film material to the value associate with the bulk substrate material as r increases. In conclusion an optics perspective to the theory of atomic iffraction from a material grating has been put forth. The results in Eqs., 7 an 8 have been erive using Fourier optics techniques an appear to be consistent with the iffraction theory presente in []. Diffraction ata for a soium atom beam at four ifferent velocities show clear evience of atom-surface interactions with the silicon nitrie grating. A complex transmission function such as that in Eq. 9 is require to explain the ata. The measure value of C =.7 ±.8 mev nm is limite in precision by uncertainty of the grating parameter w. Base on the results in Table I for a single Lorentz oscillator the new measurement of C presente in this article is consistent with a vw interaction between atomic soium an a silicon nitrie surface. Our measurement is inconsistent with a perfectly conucting surface an also a silicon nitrie surface coate with more than one nm of bulk soium. This implies that atomic iffraction from a material grating may provie the means to test the theory of vw interactions with a multi-layere surface [] by using coate gratings. The authors woul like to thank Hermann Uys for technical assistance. [] P. W. Milonni, The Quantum Vacuum Acaemic Press, 99). [] A. Shih an V. A. Parsegian, Phys. Rev. A, 8 97). [] A. Anerson, S. Haroche, E. A. Hins, J. W., an D. Meschee, Phys. Rev. A 7, 9 988). [] C. I. Sukenik, M. G. Boshier, D. Cho, V. Sanoghar, an E. A. Hins, Phys. Rev. Lett. 7, 6 99). [] R. E. Grisenti, W. Schollkopf, J. P. Toennies, G. C. Hegerfelt, an T. Kohler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 8, 7 999). [6] R. Bruhl, P. Fouquet, R. E. Grisenti, J. P. Toennies, G. C. Hegerfelt, T. Kohler, M. Stoll, an D. Walter, Europhys. Lett. 9, 7 ). [7] B. Brezger, L. Hackermuller, S. Uttenthaler, J. Petschinka, M. Arnt, an A. Zeilinger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, ). [8] T. A. Savas, M. L. Schattenburg, J. M. Carter, an H. I. Smith, J. Vac. Sci. Tech. B, ). [9] D. J. Griffiths, Introuction to Quantum Mechanics Prentice Hall, 99). [] J. D. Jackson, Classical Electroynamics John Wiley & Sons, 999). [] J. W. Gooman, Introuction to Fourier Optics McGraw-Hill, 996). [] F. B. Dunning an R. G. Hulet, es., Atomic, Molecular, an Optical Physics: Atoms an Molecules Acaemic Press, 996). [] F. Zhou an L. Spruch, Phys. Rev. A, 97 99). [] R. W. Boy, Nonlinear Optics Acaemic Press, 99). [] A. Derevianko, W. Johnson, M. Safranova, an J. Baab, Phys. Ref. Lett. 8, ). [6] M. Marinescu, A. Dalgarno, an J. Baab, Phys. Rev. A, 997). [7] Lifshitz, JETP 7 96). [8] P. Meystre an S. Sargent, Elements of quantum optics 998). [9] C. Ekstrom, J. Schmiemayer, M. Chapman, T. Hammon, an D. E. Pritchar, Phys. Rev. A, 88 99). [] R. E. Grisenti, W. Schollkopf, J. P. Toennies, J. R. Manson, T. A. Savas, an H. I. Smith, Phys. Rev. A 6, 68 ).