At the historic Shelter Island Conference on the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics in 1947, Willis Lamb reported an unexpected feature in the fine structure of atomic hydrogen: a separation of the 2S1/2 and 2P1/2 states1. The observation of this separation, now known as the Lamb shift, marked an important event in the evolution of modern physics, inspiring others to develop the theory of quantum electrodynamics2,3,4,5. Quantum electrodynamics also describes antimatter, but it has only recently become possible to synthesize and trap atomic antimatter to probe its structure. Mirroring the historical development of quantum atomic physics in the twentieth century, modern measurements on anti-atoms represent a unique approach for testing quantum electrodynamics and the foundational symmetries of the standard model. Here we report measurements of the fine structure in the n = 2 states of antihydrogen, the antimatter counterpart of the hydrogen atom. Using optical excitation of the 1S–2P Lyman-α transitions in antihydrogen6, we determine their frequencies in a magnetic field of 1 tesla to a precision of 16 parts per billion. Assuming the standard Zeeman and hyperfine interactions, we infer the zero-field fine-structure splitting (2P1/2–2P3/2) in antihydrogen. The resulting value is consistent with the predictions of quantum electrodynamics to a precision of 2 per cent. Using our previously measured value of the 1S–2S transition frequency6,7, we find that the classic Lamb shift in antihydrogen (2S1/2–2P1/2 splitting at zero field) is consistent with theory at a level of 11 per cent. Our observations represent an important step towards precision measurements of the fine structure and the Lamb shift in the antihydrogen spectrum as tests of the charge–parity–time symmetry8 and towards the determination of other fundamental quantities, such as the antiproton charge radius9,10, in this antimatter system.
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $3.90 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are available from J.S.H. on reasonable request.
Lamb, W. E., Jr & Retherford, R. C. Fine structure of the hydrogen atom by a microwave method. Phys. Rev. 72, 241–243 (1947).
Tomonaga, S. On a relativistically invariant formulation of the quantum theory of wave fields. Prog. Theor. Phys. 1, 27–42 (1946).
Schwinger, J. On quantum-electrodynamics and the magnetic moment of the electron. Phys. Rev. 73, 416–417 (1948).
Feynman, R. P. Space–time approach to quantum electrodynamics. Phys. Rev. 76, 769–789 (1949).
Schweber, S. S. QED and the Men who Made it: Dyson, Feynman, Schwinger, and Tomonaga (Princeton Univ. Press, 1994).
Ahmadi, M. et al. Observation of the 1S–2P Lyman-α transition in antihydrogen. Nature 561, 211–215 (2018).
Ahmadi, M. et al. Characterization of the 1S–2S transition in antihydrogen. Nature 557, 71–75 (2018).
Kostelecký, V. A. & Vargas, A. J. Lorentz and CPT tests with hydrogen, antihydrogen, and related systems. Phys. Rev. D 92, 056002 (2015).
Crivelli, P., Cooke, D. & Heiss, M. W. Antiproton charge radius. Phys. Rev. D 94, 052008 (2016).
Eriksson, S. Precision measurements on trapped antihydrogen in the ALPHA experiment. Philos. Trans. Royal Soc. A 376 20170268 (2018).
Dirac, P. A. M. The quantum theory of the electron. Proc. R. Soc. A 117, 610–624 (1928).
Kinoshita, T. Quantum Electrodynamics (World Scientific, 1990).
Karshenboim, S. G. Precision physics of simple atoms: QED tests, nuclear structure and fundamental constants. Phys. Rep. 422, 1–63 (2005).
Brodsky, S. J. & Parsons, R. G. Precise theory of the Zeeman spectrum for atomic hydrogen and deuterium and the Lamb shift. Phys. Rev. 163, 134–146 (1967).
Ahmadi, M. et al. Antihydrogen accumulation for fundamental symmetry tests. Nat. Commun. 8, 681 (2017).
Capra, A. & ALPHA Collaboration. Lifetime of magnetically trapped antihydrogen in ALPHA. Hyperfine Interact. 240, 9 (2019).
Ahmadi, M. et al. Observation of the hyperfine spectrum of antihydrogen. Nature 548, 66–69 (2017); erratum 553, 530 (2018).
Michan, J. M., Polovy, G., Madison, K. W., Fujiwara, M. C. & Momose, T. Narrowband solid state VUV coherent source for laser cooling of antihydrogen. Hyperfine Interact. 235, 29–36 (2015).
Andresen, G. B. et al. Trapped antihydrogen. Nature 468, 673–676 (2010).
Andresen, G. B. et al. Confinement of antihydrogen for 1,000 seconds. Nat. Phys. 7, 558–564 (2011).
Ahmadi, M. et al. Observation of the 1S–2S transition in trapped antihydrogen. Nature 541, 506–510 (2017).
Ahmadi, M. et al. Enhanced control and reproducibility of non-neutral plasmas. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 025001 (2018).
Maury, S. The antiproton decelerator: AD. Hyperfine Interact. 109, 43–52 (1997).
Murphy, T. J. & Surko, C. M. Positron trapping in an electrostatic well by inelastic collisions with nitrogen molecules. Phys. Rev. A 46, 5696–5705 (1992).
Surko, C. M., Greaves, R. G. & Charlton, M. Stored positrons for antihydrogen production. Hyperfine Interact. 109, 181–188 (1997).
Luiten, O. J. et al. Lyman-α spectroscopy of magnetically trapped atomic hydrogen. Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 544–547 (1993).
Eikema, K. S. E., Walz, J. & Hänsch, T. W. Continuous coherent Lyman-α excitation of atomic hydrogen. Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5679–5682 (2001).
Gabrielse, G. et al. Lyman-α source for laser cooling antihydrogen. Opt. Lett. 43, 2905–2908 (2018).
Stracka, S. Real-time detection of antihydrogen annihilations and applications to spectroscopy. EPJ Web Conf. 71, 00126 (2014).
Donnan, P. H., Fujiwara, M. C. & Robicheaux, F. A proposal for laser cooling antihydrogen atoms. J. Phys. B 46, 025302 (2013).
Pohl, R. et al. The size of the proton. Nature 466, 213–216 (2010).
Beyer, A. et al. The Rydberg constant and proton size from atomic hydrogen. Science 358, 79–85 (2017).
Fleurbaey, H. et al. New measurement of the transition frequency of hydrogen: contribution to the proton charge radius puzzle. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 183001 (2018).
The ALPHA Collaboration & Charman, A. E. Description and first application of a new technique to measure the gravitational mass of antihydrogen. Nat. Commun. 4, 1785 (2013).
Amole, C. et al. In situ electromagnetic field diagnostics with an electron plasma in a Penning–Malmberg trap. New J. Phys. 16, 013037 (2014).
Rasmussen, C. Ø., Madsen, N. & Robicheaux, F. Aspects of 1S–2S spectroscopy of trapped antihydrogen atoms. J. Phys. B 50, 184002 (2017); corrigendum 51 099501 (2018).
Melezhik, V. S. & Schmelcher, P. Quantum energy flow in atomic ions moving in magnetic fields. Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 1870–1873 (2000).
Kramida, A. E. A critical compilation of experimental data on spectral lines and energy levels of hydrogen, deuterium, and tritium. At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 96, 586–644 (2010); erratum 126, 295–298 (2019).
Mohr, P. J., Newell, D. B. & Taylor, B. N. CODATA recommended values of the fundamental physical constants: 2014. Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 035009 (2016).
Parthey, C. G. et al. Improved measurement of the hydrogen 1S–2S transition frequency. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 203001 (2011).
Lundeen, S. R. & Pipkin, F. M. Measurement of the Lamb shift in hydrogen n = 2. Phys. Rev. Lett. 46, 232–235 (1981).
Hagley, E. W. & Pipkin, F. M. Separated oscillatory field measurement of hydrogen 2S1/2–2P3/2 fine structure interval. Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 1172–1175 (1994).
This work was supported by: the European Research Council through its Advanced Grant programme (J.S.H.); CNPq, FAPERJ, RENAFAE (Brazil); NSERC, ALPHA-g/CRUCS CFI, NRC/TRIUMF, EHPDS/EHDRS (Canada); FNU (Nice Centre), Carlsberg Foundation (Denmark); ISF (Israel); STFC, EPSRC, the Royal Society and the Leverhulme Trust (UK); DOE, NSF (USA); and VR (Sweden). We are grateful for the efforts of the CERN AD team, without which these experiments could not have taken place. We thank P. Djuricanin (University of British Columbia) for extensive help with the laser system and calibrations. We thank J. Tonoli and the CERN staff, as well as T. Mittertreiner and the UBC staff, for extensive, time-critical help with machining and electrical works. We thank the staff of the Superconducting Magnet Division at Brookhaven National Laboratory for collaboration and for the fabrication of the trapping magnets. We thank C. Marshall (TRIUMF) for work on the ALPHA-2 cryostat. We thank F. Besenbacher (Aarhus) for timely support in procuring the ALPHA-2 external solenoid. We thank T. Miller (Ohio) for advice on the initial development of the pulsed laser system. We thank A. Kostelecky and G. Drake for discussions on the theoretical aspects of this work.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Extended data figures and tables
a–d, For each series, the experimental data (filled black circles with error bars) are plotted with fits of various models (red lines) discussed in Methods. The experimental data are normalized to the total number of the detected antihydrogen atoms and a laser power of 5 nW. Also shown are the results of standard simulations (open blue squares with error bars), similarly normalized to the total number of simulated atoms, illustrating the degree of agreement between the data and the simulations, without any tuning parameters. Some discrepancies in the amplitudes can be observed, which may point to errors in our laser power estimates. We note that because our frequency-fitting procedure allows variations in the relative amplitudes, the fits are largely insensitive to the amplitude differences (Methods). Error bars represent 1σ.
About this article
Cite this article
The ALPHA Collaboration. Investigation of the fine structure of antihydrogen. Nature 578, 375–380 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2006-5