arxiv: v1 [cond-mat.quant-gas] 5 Apr 2012

Transcription

1 Controllin phase separation of a two-component Bose-Einstein condensate by confinement L. Wen, W. M. Liu, Yonyon Cai,, J. M. Zhan,, and Jianpin Hu,3, Institute of Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijin 00080, China Department of Mathematics, National University of Sinapore, Sinapore Department of Physics, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN arxiv:04.56v [cond-mat.quant-as] 5 Apr 0 We study the effect of kinetic enery on the phase separation and phase transition of a twocomponent Bose-Einstein condensate in the presence of external confinement. The commonly accepted condition for the phase separation, < where,, and are the intra- and inter- component interaction strenths respectively, is only valid when kinetic enery is neliible and external confinement is nonexistent. Takin a d-dimensional infinitely deep square well potential of width L as an example, a simple scalin analysis shows that reardless of the condition <, if d = d = 3), phase separation will be suppressed as L 0 L ) and if d =, the width L is irrelevant but aain phase separation can be partially, or even completely suppressed. Moreover, the miscibility-immiscibility transition is turned from a first-order one into a second-order one when kinetic enery is considered. All these results carry over to d-dimensional harmonic potentials, where the harmonic oscillator lenth ξ ho plays the role of L. Our findin provides a scenario of controllin the miscibility-immiscibility transition of a two-component condensate by chanin the confinement, instead of the conventional approach of chanin the values of the s. PACS numbers: Mn, Jp I. INTRODUCTION Phase separation is a ubiquitous phenomenon in nature [, ]. A most prominent example familiar to everyone is that oil and water do not mix. Besides that, the phenomenon of water in coexistence with its vapor can also be understood as a type of phase separation [3]. In eneral, two phases mix or not dependin on which confiuration minimizes the enery or free enery of the whole system. With the realization of Bose-Einstein condensation in ultracold atomic ases, another example of phase separation is offered by two-component Bose- Einstein condensates BECs) [4 8]. In such a system, phase mixin or separation means the two condensates overlap or not spatially, which correspond to different interaction eneries. A widely accepted condition for phase separation, which is based on the consideration of minimizin the interaction enery [9, 0], is iven by >. ) Here and are the intra-component interaction strenthsofcomponentsand, respectively,while is the interaction strenth between them []. This condition is intuitively reasonable since if the inter-component interaction is too stron, the two components would like to et separated from each other. Experimentally, controlled miscibility-immiscibility transition of a twocomponent BEC based on the idea of adjustin the values of the s usin Feshbach resonance and so as to et ) satisfied or not has been demonstrated recently [, 3]. matcaiy@nus.edu.s jmzhan@iphy.ac.cn hu4@purdue.edu Now the point is that thouh the condition above is very appealin in its simplicity and usefulness, it has reat limitations. In its derivation, the condensates are assumed to be uniform and the kinetic enery associated with the boundary/interface layers is nelected. The problem is then reduced to minimizin the total interaction enery, or more specifically, to weihin the intercomponent interaction aainst the intra-component interaction. This approximation is leitimate if the widths of the boundary/interface layers are much smaller than the extension of the condensates, or in other words, if the boundary/interface layers are well defined. However, this condition is not necessarily satisfied in all circumstances. Actually, some simple scalin analysis may tell us when it will fail. Consider a condensate trapped in a d-dimensional container of size L. The characteristic averae) density of the condensate is on the order of L d. Accordin to the mean-field Gross- Pitaevskii) theory, the healin lenth of the condensate, which determines the widths of the boundary/interface layers, will be on the order of L d/ [9, 0]. Thus we see that in one and three dimensional cases, it makes sense to say boundary/interface layers only in the limits of L and L 0, respectively. In the opposite limits, the boundary/interface layers overtake the condensates themselves in size, which sinals that the kinetic enery will dominate the interaction enery and should no loner be nelected. The two dimensional case is more subtle in that the widths of the boundary/interface layers scale in the same way with the sizes of the condensates, which at least means that the kinetic enery should not be nelected a priori. The analysis above indicates that the kinetic enery is likely to play a vital role in determinin the confiuration of a two-component BEC. Moreover, we note that

2 the kinetic enery acts aainst the inter-component interaction. The latter is responsible for phase separation while the former tries to expand the condensates and thus favors phase mixin. Therefore, it is expected that phase separation can be suppressed by the kinetic enery in some circumstances even if the condition ) is satisfied [5]. Notably, accordin to the arument above, the sinificance of the kinetic enery can be controlled by chanin the size of the container. That is, the phase mixin-demixin transition can be controlled by a eometrical method, instead of the mechanical method of chanin the values of the s, which is based on ) and is demonstrated in Refs. [, 3]. II. A TWO-COMPONENT BEC IN AN INFINITELY DEEP SQUARE WELL POTENTIAL The considerations above have led us to investiate the scenario of suppressin phase separation in a twocomponent BEC by kinetic enery. We will start from the simplest and most eneric case of a two-component BEC in a d-dimensional infinitely deep square well potential of width L). The Dirichlet boundary condition implies that the condensate wave functions must be nonuniform and the kinetic enery is at least on the order of L. On the contrary, inside the well, the potential enery is zero. Therefore, we have a pure competition between the kinetic enery and the inter-component interaction enery, if the intra-component interactions are set zero [note that in this case, condition ) is satisfied]. In this simplest model, in all dimensions d =,, 3), we do observe that phase separation can be completely suppressed by the kinetic enery in some reime. Of course, different dimensions have different features. But all these effects and features carry over to the more realistic case of d-dimensional harmonic potentials. In the mean-field theory and at zero-temperature, the enery functional of a two-component BEC in a d- dimensional infinitely deep square well potential Ω = [ L/,+L/] d is of the form E[ψ,ψ ] = Ω { d r + α=, α,β=, N α m α ψ α αβ N α N β ψ α ψ β }. ) Here the two condensate wave functions are normalized to unity Ω d r ψ, =, and ψ, = 0 on the boundary. Note that throuhout this paper we are only concerned with the round confiuration of the system, therefore all the wave functions can be taken to be real and positive. The parameters,, and = are the effective intra- and inter-component interaction strenths. Finally, N, and m, are the atom numbers and atom masses of the two species, respectively. Now we should notethatforanarbitrarysetofparameters,intheround confiuration, almost definitely, the two wave functions do overlap but do not coincide with each other this can be easily understood in terms of the Gross-Pitaevskii equations for ψ, ). In this case, it is far from trivial to distinuish phase separation and phase mixin. A method proposedin [4] isto considerthe centersofmass of the two condensates: r mα = d r ψ α r, α =,. 3) Ω This idea is motivated by the observation that in some reime, both the two condensates are symmetric with respecttotheoriinwhileinotherreime, bothofthemare asymmetric with respect to the oriin, and more importantly, they are shifted in opposite directions [4]. Apparently, the former case is with r m = r m = 0 and it is appropriate to call it phase-mixed while the latter case is with r m 0 r m and it is appropriateto call it phaseseparated. Therefore, the offset between the two centers of mass r m r m can serve as an order parameter for the miscibility-immiscibility transition of the system. Thouh this order parameter works well for a eneral case, we will not use it much in this paper. Actually, instead of studyin a eneral case, we shall focus on the symmetric enery functional case, i.e., the case when m = m = m, N = N = N, and =. The reason is that this special case not only captures all the essential physics, but also has an extra merit. That is, now it is possible to have ψ = ψ, which corresponds to a completely mixed confiuration. Therefore, in this special case, an appropriate order parameter is the overlap between the two condensate wave functions or more precisely,, if phase separation is concerned): = d rψ ψ, 4) Ω which takesvaluesbetween 0 and. If, it would be fair to say the system shows phase separation. Otherwise, if is close to, or more precisely if, it would be fair to say the system shows phase mixin. In the intermediate case, the system is partially phase-separated and partially phase-mixed. Now make the transform ψ, r) = L d/ φ, x) with r = L x. Then d x φ, = and φ, = 0 on the boundary of, where = [ /,+/] d. In terms of the rescaled wave functions φ,, = d xφ φ, and the enery functional ), under the assumption above, can be rewritten as E[φ,φ ] = N ml + { d x φ + φ β φ 4 +β φ 4 +β φ φ )} 5), with the reduced dimensionless parametersβ ij defined as β ij = Nm ij Ld, i,j =,. 6)

3 3 0.4 a) D D 3D β b) Small L D D 3D Lare FIG.. Color online)a)theoverlap factor asafunctionof thereducedparameter β [see Eq.6)]indifferentdimensions infinitely deep square well potential case, = = 0). Note that for all values of d, there exists a critical value β c 0, below which attains its maximal possible value. b) a schematic plot of versus the width of the square well in different dimensions. Note the counter-intuitive fact that in the three dimensional case d = 3), the stroner we squeeze the system the smaller L is), the stroner phase separation is the smaller is). These parameters are measures of the importance of the interactions. In the curl bracket, the coefficients of the kinetic terms are constant, yet the coefficients of the interaction terms the β s) scale with L as L d. This fact has some important consequences. If d =, there are twodifferentlimits. Inthe limit ofl looseconfinement), the kinetic terms are dominated by the interaction terms and thus the round state can be determined by simply minimizin the interaction enery. In this limit, the textbook analysis is valid and we have phase separation if condition) is satisfied or phase mixin otherwise. In the opposite limit of L 0 tiht confinement), the kinetic terms will dominate and the two rescaled wave functions can be well approximated by the round state ofthesquarewellpotential, i.e., φ, x) cosπx). In this limit, phase separation will be suppressed whatever the values of the s are, even if ) is fulfilled. The three dimensional case is the inverse of the one dimensional case. In the limit of L 0, the kinetic terms are neliible and the criterion of phase separation ) is valid. In the other limit of L, the kinetic terms dominate and phase separation is suppressed reardless of the condition ). The two dimensional case is another story. The parameter L simply drops out in the curl bracket. It is no use to adjust the width of the well to enhance the importance of the kinetic enery or the interaction enery relatively. The kinetic and interaction eneries should be treated on an equal footin, which means the analysis leadin to criterion ) may be invalid. We have checked all these predictions numerically. Note that on the problem of phase separation, the intracomponent interactions are on the same side as the kinetic enery they both try to delocalize the condensates. Therefore, to hihliht the effect of kinetic enery, we shall set = = 0 β = β = 0), so that the kinetic enery is the only element actin aainst phase separation. As we shall see below, this special case also admits a simple analytical analysis. We havesolvedthe roundstate ofthe system in alldimensions for a iven value of β [6]. The overlap factor is plotted versus β in Fi. a. We observe that in all dimensions, there exists a critical value of β denoted as β), c below which the two condensates wave functions are equal = ). That is, for β β c, phase separation is completely suppressed. Above the critical value, phase separation develops < ) as β increases, but is still reatly suppressed for a wide rane of value of β. It should be stressed that thouh in Fi. a the curves of β are qualitatively similar to each another for all values of d the plateau of = is always located in the direction of β 0), the curves of L will be quite different. The reason is that β L d. Fiure b is a schematic plot of versus L in all the three cases. It shows that as a function of L is monotonically decreasin, constant, and monotonically increasin in one, two, and three dimensions, respectively. This means that to suppress phase separation, in one dimension we should tihten the confinement, in three dimensions we should loosen the confinement, while in two dimensions it is useless to chane the confinement. Overall, Fi. confirms the initial conjecture that kinetic enery can suppress phase separation. As a hindsiht, we can actually understand why phase separation can be suppressed in the limits of L 0 in onedimensionandl in threedimensions. Consider two different confiurations. The first one is a phaseseparated one the two condensates occupy the left and riht halves of the container separately. The second one is a phase-mixed one the two condensates both occupy the whole space available and thus overlap sinificantly. Compared with the first confiuration, the second one costs more inter-component interaction enery which is on the order of L d, but saves more kinetic enery which is on the order of L. The second confiuration phasemixed)ismoreeconomicalineneryinthe limit ofl 0 and L, in the casesof d = and d = 3, respectively. The case of d = is more subtle and which confiuration wins depends on parameters other than L. A remarkable fact revealed in Fi. but not so obvious in our aruments is that in the symmetric case with β = β = 0, = for β β, c which is on the order of unity. This is a stroner fact than as β 0 as we arued. Actually, the eneral observation is that for β = β > 0, = for β smaller than its critical value β, c which is larer than β. This fact has rich meanins. On the one hand, it demonstrates that the kinetic enery is very effective phase separation can be completely suppressed by it even if β > β = β, i.e., when ) is satisfied. On the other hand, it stronly indicates that as β crosses the critical value, the system underoes a second order phase transition which can fit in the Landau formalism. The picture is that the exchane symmetry φ φ of the enery functional 5) is preserved for β < β c, but is spontaneously broken

4 4 as β surpasses β c. We have been able to prove the first point riorously on the mathematical level see Appendix A). However, it is also desirable to develop a physical understandin of the two points. This can be achieved by studyin a two-component BEC in a double-well potential see Appendix B) or usin a variational approach [7]. We note that in the limit of β 0, φ, both convere to the non-deenerate) round state of a sinle particle in the [ /,+/] d infinitely deep square well. As β is turned on, the two wave functions are deformed and excited states mix in. Because the eneries of the excited states row up quadratically, we cutoff at the first excited level and take the followin ansatz for the two condensate wave functions φ = c 0 ϕ 0 +c ϕ, φ = c 0 ϕ 0 c ϕ. 7) Hereϕ 0 istheroundstate,whileϕ isoneofthepossibly deenerate first excited states. The coefficients c 0, are real and satisfy the normalization condition c 0 +c =. Obviously, complete phase mixin would correspond to c = 0 while partial phase separation to c 0. Our numerical simulations indicate that this is also supported by the variational approach itself, see Appendix C) in the two dimensional case, when phase separation occurs, the two condensates are shifted either alon x or y direction; in the three dimensional case, when phase separation occurs, the two condensates are shifted either alon x or y or z direction. This fact motivates us to choose ϕ in the followin form d = : ϕ = w x); 8a) d = : ϕ = w 0 x)w y) or w x)w 0 y); 8b) d = 3 : ϕ = w 0 x)w 0 y)w z) or w 0 x)w y)w 0 z) or w x)w 0 y)w 0 z), 8c) where w 0 x) = cosπx) and w x) = sinπx) are the round and first excited states of a sinle particle in the one dimensional [ /, +/] infinitely deep square well potential. Substitutin Eqs. 7) and 8) into 5), we et the reduced enery functional Ẽ = E/N /ml ) as d = : Ẽc ) = 3π 5β )c +5β c 4 +const; d = : Ẽc ) = 3π 5 ) β c + 5 β c 4 +const; d = 3 : Ẽc ) = 3π 45 ) 4 β c β c 4 +const. These are nothin but the Landau s expression of the free enery in a second-order phase transition, with c playin the role of the order parameter here. We immediately determine the critical values of β by puttin the coefficients of c to zero. Specifically, β c = 3π 5, π 4π 5, and 5 for d =, d =, and d = 3, respectively. These values aree with those extracted from Fi. very well. The relative errors are within %, 9%, and 9%, respectively. The deviation increases with d because in hiher dimensions, the deeneracy of the excited states increases and the two-mode approximation in 7) becomes less accurate. In the expressions of Ẽ, we can actually see how the kinetic enery suppresses phase separation. The term 3π c comes from the kinetic enery difference of the two modes ϕ,. Without this term, the critical value β c would be zero instead of bein finite. For a eneral case without the exchane symmetry φ φ, the appropriate order parameter is no loner but r m r m. However, the second order transition picture still holds. Specifically, r m = 0 = r m for β smaller than some critical value β c which is larer than β β. Overall, this asymmetric case is more involved than the symmetric case above because there are more parameters. Hopefully, a systematic study will be presented in a follow-up work. III. A TWO-COMPONENT BEC IN A HARMONIC POTENTIAL So far, we have focused on the ideal case of infinitely deep square wells. Experimentally, it is harmonic potentials that are most readily realized. Therefore, it is necessary to see whether analoous results hold for harmonic potentials. One concern is that the extra potential enery may blur the picture. However, after some similar rescalin, we shall see that all the results persist. The enery functional of a two-component BEC in a d-dimensional isotropic harmonic potential is E N = { d r ψ α + R m mω d r ψ α d + N α=, α=, ψ 4 + ψ 4 + ψ ψ )} 0). Here aain we have assumed equal mass and equal number for the two species. The two condensate wave functions are normalized to unity, i.e., d r ψ, =. Now make the transform ψ, r) = ξ d/ ho φ, x) with r = ξ ho x, where ξ ho = /mω d is the characteristic lenth of the harmonic potential. We have then d x φ, =. In terms of φ,, the enery functional can be rewritten as E N ω d = { d x R d α=, φ α + x α=, φ α + β φ 4 +β φ 4 +β φ φ )}.) Here the reduced interaction strenths are defined as β ij = Nm ijξ d ho ω d )/ d, i,j =,. ) We now have a similar situation as before. The importance of the interactions can be chaned by chanin the value of ξ ho, which plays the role of L in our

5 β β a) c) D 3D β b) d) D Small D D ω d 3D Lare FIG.. Color online) a)-c) The overlap factor as a function of the reduced parameter β [see Eq. )] in different dimensions isotropic harmonic potential case, = = /.05). Note that for all value of d, there exists a critical value β c 0, below which attains its maximal possible value. d) a schematic plot of versus the characteristic frequency ω d of the harmonic potential in different dimensions. previous example. The interactions will be neliible if d = and ξ ho 0 or if d = 3 and ξ ho. In this case, the rescaled wave functions φ, will be close to the round state of the harmonic oscillator, i.e., φ, π d/ exp x /), and phase separation is suppressed reardless of the values of the s. The interactions will become sinificant if d = and ξ ho or d = 3 and ξ ho 0. In this case, the kinetic enery can be nelected and we enter the Thomas-Fermi reime. In this reime, the criterion ) will be a faithful one for phase separation. We have verified these predictions numerically. In Fi., we have shown the overlap factor d xφ φ versus the reduced inter-component interaction strenth β in all dimensions with = = /.05). Aain, we see that phase separation is completely suppressed for β below some critical value β c. Let us now consider the possibility of experimentally observin the immiscibility-miscibility transition by adjustin the confinement, e.., the frequency ω d. In cold atom experiments, the harmonic potential is often of the form V r) = m[ω x +y )+ω zz ]. To et a three dimensional isotropic potential, we set ω = ω z. An effectively one two) dimensional potential can be obtained in the limit of ω ω z ω ω z ). For these three different eometries of the potential, the interaction strenths the s) relate to the s-wave scatterin lenths the a s) as ij = 4π a ij m, ω d = ω z = ω, d = 3; z a ij m / ij = π 3/ ω / ij = a ij ω, ω d = ω z ω, d =. 3a), ω d = ω ω z, d =; 3b) 3c) Usin Eqs. ) and 3), we can study the possibility of tunin β across the critical value β c. We study each case individually the mass m is taken to be that of 3 Na): i) d = 3. Suppose N = 0 4, a = 40 a B. The critical valueofω d isπ 560Hz, whichcanbecoveredincurrent experiments. ii) d =. Suppose N = 0 4, a = 40 a B, and the transversefrequencyω = π.6hz. Thecriticalvalue of the lonitudinal frequency ω z is π 40 Hz, which is realizable in current experiments []. iii) d =. Suppose N = 0 3, a = 40 a B, and the transverse frequency ω = π 30 Hz. The critical valueofthelonitudinalfrequencyω z isπ 9Hz, which is realizable in current experiments. Here the number of atoms is one or two orders smaller than its typical value in experiments. This explains why the criterion ) is a reliable one in the experiments in [, 3]. They work in a reime where the kinetic enery is indeed neliible. However, with the advance of imain techniques, hopefully future experiments can work with a relatively small number of atoms and observe the miscibility-immiscibility transition by chanin the confinement. IV. CONCLUSIONS To conclude, we have demonstrated that kinetic enery can play a vital role in determinin the confiurationof a two-component BEC. It renders the empirical condition of phase separation < insufficient and it also modifies the picture of phase separation. To be specific, phase separation can be completely suppressed even if this condition is fulfilled. Moreover, the phase mixin to phase separation transition is now known to be a secondorder, continuous transition instead of a first-order, discontinuous one as in the usual view. From the experimental point of view, our results may provide a new scenario of controllin the transition of phase mixin-demixin of a two-component BEC. Instead of adjustin the interaction strenths, one can just chane the confinement, the characteristic size of the container. V. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We are rateful to Weizhu Bao, L. You, and C. H. Lee for helpful discussions. This work is supported by NSF of China under Grant No , the Ministry of Science and Technoloy of China 973 proram

6 6 0CV8400) and NSFC Y. Cai acknowledes support from the Academic Research Fund of Ministry of Education of Sinapore rant R Appendix A: Riorous justification Here, we consider the enery functional as { E[φ,φ ] = d x φ + φ A) + β φ 4 +β φ 4 +β φ φ )}, where = [, ]d d =,,3), β = β = β. Let φ be the unique positive round state of the enery functional E s [φ] E[φ,φ], and µ be the correspondin chemical potential. The functions φ, are normalized to unity by the usual L -norm. Let φ,φ ) be the positive round state of A). For β β, E[ ρ, ρ ] ρ φ, ρ φ ) is strictly convex in ρ,ρ ) [8, 9], and the positive round state is unique, i.e., φ = φ = φ, =. We are oin to prove that there exists a critical value β c > β such that when β < β c, there holds φ = φ = φ, i.e., =. From now on, we concentrate on the case of β β and assume that β = β +β, 0 β. Simple calculation shows that E[φ,φ ] E[φ,φ ] = d x { φ α φ ) α=, +β +β ) φ φ α φ + β β φ α φ ) } + φ α φ ) φ +β +β ) φ φ φ α φ ) + β φ + φ φ ). Makin use of the Euler-Larane equation of φ, µ φ = φ +β +β ) φ φ, A) denotin e α = φ α φ α =,), and noticin e α φ = e α, we obtain E[φ,φ ] E[φ,φ ] = d x { e α α=, +β +β ) φ e α β φ α φ ) } +µ φ e α + β φ + φ φ ). Now, the operator L = + β + β ) φ admits eienvalues as µ < µ µ, and the eienfunction φ corresponds to µ, w k H 0 with w k = corresponds to µ k k ). The reason φ is the round state comes from the positivity of φ and the uniqueness of the positive round state of L. Expand e α as e α = c α φ + k= cα k w k, then c α ) + k= cα k = e α, c α = e α φ = e α and we can derive that { } d x e α +β +β ) φ e α +µ φ e α = µ c α ) + µ k c α k µ e α k= µ µ ) e α c α ) ) = µ µ ) e α eα /4). Now, firstly, we need a lower bound for µ µ, the socalled fundamental ap, which has been solved recently by A. Ben and C. Julie [0]. Usin equation A), applyin elliptic theory with convex domain, it is easy to verify that φ H ) and hence belons to C 0,γ ) 0 < γ < ) by Sobolev embeddin. Approximatin by convex domain Ω ε with smooth boundary) and applyin Schauder estimates, we shall have φ C,γ Ω ε ) and there exists some c > 0 such that φ +c x is convex as Hessian matrix of φ is bounded by Schauder estimates). Hence, we can apply the results in Ref. [0] to et D ε is the diameter of Ω ε ) µ ε µ ε 3π Dε, A3) where µ ε and µε are the first and second eienvalues, respectively, of L in H0 Ω ε). By Min-max principles, lettin ε 0, we have µ ε µ and µ ε µ. Hence we find µ µ 3π D, A4) where D is the diameter of [or if we assume is a convex domain with smooth boundaries, A4) follows directly]. Secondly, we have e α d x φ α + φ ) =. Thirdly, we would like to derive L bounds of φ and φ α. The Euler-Larane equation for φ α reads as µ αφ α = φ α +β φ α φ α +β φ α φ α, A5) with α α. For the nonlinear eienvalues, we have the estimates µ α E[φ,φ ] E s[φ ], µ E s [φ ] and E s [φ ]canbeboundedbychoosinanytestfunctionlike the round state of ), which ives E s [φ ] C+β) C depends on ). If β, considerin the point x 0 where φ attains its maximum, then φ x 0 ) 0 and from A), we have µ φ x 0 ) β +β ) φ x 0 ) φ x 0 ), which ives φ µ β+β C. Similarly, we can obtain the L bound for φ α usin the Euler-Larane

7 7 equation and φ α µ α β 4 C. Thus, φ +φ α C. Combinin the three observations above, we et E[φ,φ ] E[φ,φ ] α=, { 3π D β C } e α, which implies that for 0 β min{ π,}, there 4D C must hold e α = 0, i.e., =. For β [0,], the approach above is not ood. In this case, we see that µ α 4 C and µ C. Usin Sobolev inequality, in one dimension d = ), we can find that φ α φ α φ α µ α C. A6) Similarly, φ C. For two and three dimensions d =,3), recallin A) and A5), we can obtain from elliptic theory and Sobolev inequalities that there exist constants C,C > 0 only dependin on such that φ α C φ α H C µ α φ α β φ α φ α β φ α φ α, and φ C µ φ β + β ) φ φ. In two and three dimensions, usin Sobolev inequality, we have φ α 6 C 3 φ α C 3 µ α C 3 depends on ). Cauchy inequality leads to φ α C µ α +β φ α 3 6 +β φ α 6 φ α 6 ), and thus φ α C 4 C 4 depends on ). Similarly, φ C 5 C 5 depends on ). Eventually, we have in all dimensions d =,, 3), there exists a constant C Ω0 dependin only on such that φ α+φ C Ω0. Similar to the case with β, we have E[φ,φ ] E[φ,φ ] α=, { 3π D β C Ω0 } e α, which leads to the conclusion that when β < 3π min{, D C Ω0 }, φ α = φ, i.e., =. In summary, for all β 0, if we choose β c = β +min{, 3π π D C Ω0, } > β, 4D C then for all 0 β < β, c we shall have =. Appendix B: Phase separation as a spontaneous symmetry breakin Consider a two-component BEC in a symmetric double-well potential. Under the two-mode approximation, the mean-field enery functional is E = J a ψ a ψ a +ψ a ψ a) J b ψ b ψ b +ψ b ψ b) + U a ψ a 4 + ψ a 4 )+ U b ψ b 4 + ψ b 4 ) +V ψ a ψ b + ψ a ψ b ). B) Here J a and J b are the hoppin amplitudes of the two types of atoms, and U a and U b are the intracomponent onsite interaction strenths, while V is the inter-component one. The complex numbers ψ a and ψ b ψ a and ψ b ) are the amplitudes of the two condensate wave functions on the left riht) trap. They are constrainedby the total atomnumbers, i.e., ψ a + ψ a = N a and ψ b + ψ b = N b. For the sake of simplicity, in the followin we shall assume J a = J b = J 0, U a = U b = U 0, and N a = N b = N. As far as the round state is concerned, it is leitimate to assume the ψ s real and positive. Therefore, we can write ψ a = N a, ψ b = N b and similarly for other ψ s. First assume tunnelin is turned off, i.e. J = 0. Let N a = N +δ a and N b = N δ b. The enery B) is Eδ a,δ b ) = Uδ a +δ b ) Vδ aδ b +const. B) It is readily determined that if U > V, the round state is of δ a = δ b = 0. The two condensates are both distributed evenly between the two wells, which is a completely mixed confiuration. If U < V [the counterpart of ) in the present context], the round state is of δ a,δ b ) = ±N/,N/), which corresponds to complete phase separation the two condensates occupy the two wells separately. Therefore, without tunnelin, the miscibility-immiscibility transition is a first-order phase transition with the critical point bein V c = U. Now turn on the tunnelin. For the sake of simplicity, suppose δ a = δ b = δ. The enery as a function of the order parameter δ is N ) E = 4J δ +U V)δ +const = [ 4J N ] +U V) δ + 4J N 3δ4 +oδ 4 )+const. B3) Here we have the familiar Landau formalism for second order phase transitions. The coefficient of the quartic term is positive but the sin of the quadratic term chanes from positive to neative as V surpasses the criticalvaluev c = U+J/N. Correspondin,δ = 0isturned from a minimum to a maximum point and phase separation develops. Here we note that the tunnelin, the kinetic term in the present context, has two consequences. First, the first-order transition is turned into a secondorder one. Second, the transition point is up shifted from U to U+J/N. This is reasonablesince phase separation costs kinetic enery. What presented in Fis. and are parallel to these results but in continuum multi-mode) cases. Appendix C: Justification of the form of ϕ in Eq. 8) In this Appendix, we show why amon all the deenerate) first excited states, the one in Eq. 8) is selected. For d =, the ansatz more eneral than Eq. 7) is φ = c 0 ϕ 0 +c x ϕ x +c y ϕ y, φ = c 0 ϕ 0 c x ϕ x c y ϕ y, Ca) Cb)

8 8 with ϕ x = w x)w 0 y), ϕ y = w 0 x)w y), and c 0, c x, c y bein some real variables under the constraint c 0 + c x +c y =. Substitutin Eq. C) into Eq. 5), we et the reduced enery functional Ẽ = E/N /ml ) as a function of c x,y as Ẽ[c x,c y ] = π β + 3π 5 ) β c x +c y ) + 5 β c x +c y) + 3 β c x c y. C) We see that for β β c = 5 π, the minimum is at c x = c y = 0. For β > β c, the minimum is no loner at the oriin. However, for a fixed value of c x + c y, Ẽ is minimized when the last term in Eq. C) vanishes or when c x = 0 or c y = 0. That is why the particular ansatz in Eqs. 7) and 8) is appropriate and enouh. We note that due to the symmetry of the trap, the reduced enery functional is invariant under the transform c x,c y ) ±c x,±c y ) and c x,c y ) c y,c x ). This symmetry is broken when phase separation occurs. Similar analysis applies for d = 3. In this case, the ansatz more eneral than Eq. 7) is φ = c 0 ϕ 0 +c x ϕ x +c y ϕ y +c z ϕ z, φ = c 0 ϕ 0 c x ϕ x c y ϕ y c z ϕ z, C3a) C3b) with ϕ x = w x)w 0 y)w 0 z), ϕ y = w 0 x)w y)w 0 z), ϕ z = w 0 x)w 0 y)w z), and c 0, c x, c y, c z bein some real variables under the constraint c 0 +c x +c y +c z =. Substitutin Eq. C3) into Eq. 5), we et the reduced enery functional Ẽ as a function of c x,y,z as Ẽ = 3π β β 3π 45 c x +c y +c z) ) 4 β c x +c y +c z) β c x c y +c y c z +c z c x). C4) We see that for β β c = 4 5 π, the minimum is at c x = c y = c z = 0. For β > β c, the minimum is no loner at the oriin. However, for a fixed value of c x+c y+c z, Ẽ isminimizedwhenthelasttermineq.c4) vanishes or when two of the three c s are zero. Aain, we see that the particular ansatz in Eqs. 7) and 8) is appropriate and enouh. [] P. K. Khabibullaev and A. A. Saidov, Phase Separation in Soft Matter Physics Spriner, Berlin, 003). [] E. Daotto, Nanoscale Phase Separation and Colossal Maneto-resistance Spriner, Berlin, 003). [3] K. Huan, Statistical Mechanics John Wiley & Sons, New York, 963). [4] C. J. Myatt, E. A. Burt, R. W. Ghrist, E. A. Cornell, and C. E. Wieman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, ). [5] D. M. Stamper-Kurn, M. R. Andrews, A. P. Chikkatur, S. Inouye, H.-J. Miesner, J. Stener, and W. Ketterle, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, ). [6] D. S. Hall, M. R. Matthews, J R. Ensher, C. E. Wieman, and E. A. Cornell, Phys. Rev. Lett. 8, ). [7] G. Moduno, G. Ferrari, G. Roati, R. J. Brecha, A. Simoni, and M. Inuscio, Science 94, 30 00). [8] M. Mudrich, S. Kraft, K. Siner, R. Grimm, A. Mosk, and M. Weidemüller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, ). [9] C. J. Pethick and H. Smith, Bose-Einstein Condensation in Dilute Gases Cambride University Press, Cambride, Enland, 00). [0] L. Pitaevskii, S. Strinari, Bose-Einstein Condensation Oxford University Press, New York, 003). [] To avoid the possibility of collapse of the BEC under attractive interaction, throuhout this paper all the s are assumed to be non-neative. [] S. B. Papp, J. M. Pino, and C. E. Wieman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 0, ). [3] G. Thalhammer, G. Barontini, L. D. Sarlo, J. Catani, F. Minardi, and M. Inuscio, Phys. Rev. Lett. 00, ). [4] I. M. Merhasin, B. A. Malomed, and R. Driben, J. Phys. B 38, ). [5] Note that the scenario here is like that in [4], where the Rabi couplin between the two components favors phase mixin and thus can suppress phase separation. [6] W. Bao and Q. Du, SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 5, ). [7] R. Navarro, R. Carretero-González, and P. G. Kevrekidis, Phys. Rev. A 80, ). [8] E. H. Lieb, R. Seiriner, and J. Ynvason, Phy. Rev. A 6, ). [9] W. Bao and Y. Cai, East Asia Journal on Applied Mathematics, 49 0). [0] A. Ben and C. Julie, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 4, 899 0).