Abstract
Spinorbit coupling (SOC), the intrinsic interaction between a particle spin and its motion, is responsible for various important phenomena, ranging from atomic fine structure to topological condensed matter physics. The recent experimental breakthrough on the realization of SOC for ultracold atoms provides a completely new platform for exploring spinorbit coupled superfluid physics. However, the SOC strength in the experiment is not tunable. In this report, we propose a scheme for tuning the SOC strength through a fast and coherent modulation of the laser intensities. We show that the manybody interaction between atoms, together with the tunable SOC, can drive a quantum phase transition (QPT) from spinbalanced to spinpolarized ground states in a harmonic trapped BoseEinstein condensate (BEC), which resembles the longsought Dicke QPT. We characterize the QPT using the periods of collective oscillations of the BEC, which show pronounced peaks and damping around the quantum critical point.
Introduction
SOC plays a major role in many important condensed matter phenomena and applications, including spin and anomalous Hall effects^{1}, topological insulators^{2}, spintronics^{3}, spin quantum computation, etc. In the past several decades, there has been tremendous efforts for developing new materials with strong SOC and new methods for tuning SOC with high accuracy for spinbased device applications^{4,5}. However, the SOC strength in typical solid state materials (e.g., ~10^{4} m/s in semiconductors) is generally much smaller than the Fermi velocity of electrons (~10^{6} m/s), and its tunability is also limited and inaccurate.
On the other hand, the recent experimental breakthrough on the realization of SOC for ultracold atoms^{6} provides a completely new platform for exploring SOC physics in both BEC^{7,8,9,10,11,12} and degenerate Fermi gases^{13,14,15,16}. In a degenerate Fermi gas, such SOC strength can be at the same order as (or even larger than) the Fermi velocity of atoms. Because of the strong SOC, spins are not conserved during their motion and new exotic superfluids may emerge. For instance, new ground state phases (e.g., stripes, phase separation, etc.) may be observed in spinorbit coupled BEC^{8,9,10,11,12} and new topological excitations (e.g., Weyl^{14} and Majorana^{13} fermions) may appear in spinorbit coupled Fermi gases. The observation and applications of these exciting phenomena require fully tunable SOC for cold atoms to characterize the effects of SOC in various phases. Unfortunately, the strength of the SOC in the experiment^{6} and other theoretical proposals^{17,18,19,20} is not tunable because the SOC strength is determined by the directions and wavelengths, not the intensities, of the applied lasers.
In this report, we propose a scheme for generating tunable SOC for cold atoms through a fast and coherent modulation of the Raman laser intensities^{21}, which can be easily implemented in experiments. Such tunable SOC for cold atoms provides a powerful tool for exploring new exotic Bose and Fermi superfluid phenomena. Here we focus on a quantum phase transition (QPT)^{22} in a harmonic trapped BEC induced by the manybody interaction between atoms and the tunable SOC strength. With the increasing SOC strength, there is a sharp transition for the ground state of the BEC from a spin balanced (i.e., equally mixed) phase to a spin fully polarized phase beyond a critical SOC strength (i.e., the quantum critical point). By mapping the spinorbit coupled interacting BEC to the wellknown quantum Dicke model^{23,24}, we obtain analytic expressions for the quantum critical point and the corresponding scaling behaviors for the QPT, which agree well with the numerical results obtained from the meanfield GrossPitaevskii (GP) equation for the BEC.
The realization of QPT in the Dicke model using the spinorbit coupled BEC opens the door for many significant applications in quantum optics, quantum information, and nuclear physics^{25,26,27}. Previously the Dicke model has been studied in several experimental systems^{28,29,30}, especially atoms confined in an optical cavity. However the coupling between atoms and optical cavity fields is very weak, and the experimental observation of the QPT in the Dicke model only occurred recently using the momentum eigenstates for a BEC confined in a cavity^{31}. Compared with the cavity scheme, the spinorbit coupled BEC utilizes the manybody interaction between atoms and has the advantage of essentially no dissipation, fully tunable parameters, very strong coupling, and the use of atom internal states, thus provides an excellent platform for exploring Dicke model related applications.
Finally, the QPT is characterized using collective oscillations of the BEC, such as the center of mass (COM) motion and the scissors mode, where the oscillation periods show pronounced peaks at the quantum critical point. Furthermore, the oscillations of the BEC have regular periodic patterns in both spin balanced and polarized phases, but show strong damping in the transition region.
Results
System and hamiltonian
The harmonic trapped BEC in consideration is similar as that in the recent benchmark experiment^{6}. For simplicity, we consider a twodimensional (2D) BEC in the xy plane with a strong confine ment (with a trapping frequency ω_{z}) along the z direction. Such 2D setup does not affect the essential physics because the z direction is not coupled with the SOC. Two hyperfine ground states ↑〉 ≡ F = 1, m_{F} = −1〉 and ↓〉 ≡ F = 1,m_{F} = 0〉 of ^{87}Rb atoms define the spins of atoms, which are coupled by two Raman lasers (with Rabi frequencies Ω_{1} and Ω_{2}) incident at a π/4 angle from the x axis, as illustrated in Figs. 1a and 1b.
The dynamics of the BEC are governed by the nonlinear GP equation under the dressed state basis , , where k_{1} and k_{2} are the wavevectors of the lasers. Φ = (Φ_{↑}, Φ_{↓})^{T} is the wavefunction on the dressed state basis and satisfies the normalization condition ∫ dxdy(Φ_{↑}^{2} + Φ_{↓}^{2}) = 1. The harmonic trapping potential , where ω_{y} is the trapping frequency in the y direction, and η = ω_{x}/ω_{y} is the ratio of the trapping frequencies. is the coupling term induced by the two Raman lasers with σ_{z} and σ_{x} as the Pauli matrices. The SOC strength , , and γ is the wavelength of the Raman lasers. The Raman coupling constant with Δ as the detuning from the excited state. The mean field nonlinear interaction term H_{I} = diag (g_{↑↑}Φ_{↑}^{2} + g_{↑↓}Φ_{↓}^{2}, g_{↑↓}Φ_{↑}^{2} + g_{↓↓}Φ_{↓}^{2}), where the interand intraspin interaction constants and , c_{0}and c_{2} describe the corresponding swave scattering lengths^{32}, N is the atom number, and .
Because the SOC strength γ is determined by the laser wavevector k_{L}, the SOC energy can be comparable to or even larger than other energy scales (e.g., the Raman coupling Ω) in the BEC. In a Fermi gas, γ can be larger than the Fermi velocity of atoms. Unfortunately, due to the same reason, γ cannot be easily adjusted in experiments, which significantly restricts the applications of the SOC in cold atoms. Note that although theoretically it may be possible to tune the SOC strength by varying the angle between two Raman beams, experimentally it is impractical because of many limitations of the experimental setup.
Tunable SOC for cold atoms
We propose a scheme for tuning the SOC strength γ through a fast and coherent modulation of the Raman coupling that can be easily realized in experiments by varying the Raman laser intensities. For , Ω changes sign at certain time, which can be achieved by applying a π phase shift on one Raman laser. Here the modulation frequency ω is chosen to be much larger than other energy scales in Eq. (1). In this case, the Hamiltonian in Eq. (1) can be transformed to a timeindependent one using a unitary transformation . After a straightforward calculation with the elimination of the fast timevarying part in the Hamiltonian^{33,34}, the nonlinear GP equation (1) becomes where the Raman coupling becomes with the effective SOC strength Here J_{0} is the zero order Bessel function. Clearly, γ_{eff} can be tuned from the maximum γ without the modulation to zero with a strong modulation. The mean field interaction term , α = g_{↑↑}, β = (g_{↓↓} − g_{↑↑})/2 and Γ is a 2 × 2 matrix whose elements are given by , , and .
Quantum phase transition
The tunable SOC, in combination with the manybody interaction between atoms, can drive a quantum phase transition between different quantum ground states in a harmonic trapped BEC. Here the ground state of the BEC is obtained numerically through an imaginary time evolution of the GP equation (2). A typical density profile of the ground state is shown in Fig. 1c, which has a ThomasFermi shape, similar as that in a regular BEC. However, the momentum distribution of the BEC has a peak around the single particle potential minimum located at (K_{x}, K_{y}) = (−K_{min}, 0) (see Fig. 1d), where and the degeneracy between ±K_{min} is spontaneously broken.
To characterize the ground state of the spinorbit coupled BEC, we calculate the spin polarization 〈σ_{z}〉 = ∫ dr(ψ_{↑}^{2} − ψ_{↓}^{2}), and . Here we choose the absolute value of 〈σ_{z}〉 because the two degenerate ground states at ±K_{min} have opposite 〈σ_{z}〉 due to the spinmomentum locking term p_{x}σ_{z} and they are spontaneously chosen in experiments. In Fig. 2a, we plot 〈σ_{z}〉 and 〈σ_{x}〉 with respect to γ_{eff}. For a small γ_{eff}, the spin up and down atoms have an equal population, thus 〈σ_{z}〉 = 0, 〈σ_{x}〉 = −1, i.e., the spin balanced phase. Beyond a critical point , the spin population imbalance increases dramatically and reaches the spin polarized phase 〈σ_{z}〉 = 1 (〈σ_{x}〉 = 0) within a small range of γ_{eff}. The spin balanced and spin polarized phases at small and large γ_{eff} can be understood from the single particle Hamiltonian , where the Raman coupling Ω_{0}σ_{x}/2 and SOC γ_{eff} p_{x}σ_{z} dominate at the small and large γ_{eff} respectively. More numerical results show that the critical transition point occurs at .
The QPT from spinbalanced to spin polarized phases can be understood by mapping the spinorbit coupled BEC to the quantum Dicke model. For an interacting BEC in a harmonic trap with a large atom number N (so that the mean field theory works), all atoms are forced to occupy the same manybody ground state (i.e., the state in Fig. 1c). Therefore the energy variation for the change of the spin (e.g., spin flip) of one atom need be determined by the coupling between the atom spin and the manybody ground state mode. This is very different from an noninteracting BEC where atoms do not affect each other, but the same as that for many atoms interacting with a single photon mode in an optical cavity^{23}. Treating the interacting manybody ground state as a single mode composed of different harmonic trap modes, we can map the Hamiltonian for the spinorbit coupled BEC to which is similar to the Dicke model for twolevel atoms coupled with a cavity field^{23}. S_{x,y,z} are the large spins for all atoms, S_{+} = S_{y} + iS_{z}, S_{−} = S_{y} − iS_{z}, a^{†}a is a harmonic trap mode, . In the mapping to the Dicke Hamiltonian (4), we neglect two minor effects of the interaction terms in Eq. (2): 1) a constant mean field background energy term that does not affect the dynamics; 2) a small term with κ ~ g_{↓↓} − g_{↑↑}. The second term can shift the Dicke phase transition point. However, for realistic experimental parameters for ^{87}Rb, κ is very small and the effects of can be neglected, as we confirm in the numerical simulation of the GP equation. Nevertheless, these minor effects cannot be captured by the noninteracting BEC. The QPT from spinbalanced to spinpolarized phases in the spinorbit coupled BEC is similar to that from normal to superradient phases in the Dicke model. The critical point for the QPT can be derived from the standard meanfield approximation^{24}, yielding the relation , which is exactly the same as that from numerically simulating the GP equation (2). Clearly, the QPT can also be driven by varying Ω_{0} for a fixed γ_{eff}. Just beyond the critical point , the Dicke model predicts that the scaling of the order parameters is , for , and 〈σ_{z}〉 = 0, 〈σ_{x}〉 = −1 for . Such scaling behaviors are confirmed in our numerical simulation of the GP equation (see Fig. 2a). The perfect match between numerical results from the GP equation and the predictions of the Dicke Hamiltonian shows the validity of the mapping to the Dicke model.
We emphasize that the manybody interaction between atoms in Eq. (2) plays a critical role in the QPT by forcing all atoms in a single spatial mode. For a noninteracting BEC, the atoms can occupy both ±K_{min} in the momentum space with an artificial ratio because these two states are energetically degenerate and there is no correlation between atoms. The resulting spatial distribution of the BEC is thus artificial and the above single spatial mode approximation in Eq. (4) does not apply. Our numerical simulation of the GP equation without interactions also shows 〈σ_{z}〉 = 0 or other random values in certain region of , which disagrees with the prediction of the Dicke model. This disagreement confirms that atoms in a noninteracting BEC do not response to the change of γ_{eff} collectively, although noninteracting and interacting BECs share the same transition for the energy spectrum at , which changes from one single minimum at K_{x} = 0 to two minima at ±K_{min}. While for interacting BECs with large atom numbers N = 4 × 10^{4} and 10^{6}, we obtain exactly the same results as that in Fig. 2a, which further confirm the validity of our mapping to the Dicke model in the large N limit.
Collective dynamics in BEC: the signature of QPT
It is wellknown that various physical quantities may change dramatically around the quantum critical point (i.e., critical phenomena), which provides additional experimental signatures of the QPT. We focus on two types of collective dynamics of the ground state of the BEC: the COM motion and the scissors mode induced by a sudden shift or rotation of the harmonic trapping potential, respectively. In a regular BEC without SOC, the COM motion is a standard method to calibrate the harmonic trapping frequency because the oscillation period depends only on the trapping frequency^{35} and is not affected by other parameters such as nonlinearity, shift direction and distance, etc.
We numerically integrate the GP equation (2) and calculate the COM 〈r(t)〉 = ∫dxdy(ψ_{↑}(t)^{2} + ψ_{↓}(t)^{2})r(t). The COM motion strongly depends on the direction of the shift of the harmonic trap. When is along the y direction, the period of the COM motion along the y direction is T_{0} = 2π/ω_{y} and not affected by γ_{eff}, while the COM motion in the x direction disappears (i.e., 〈x〉 = 0). Here the COM period T is obtained through the Fourier analysis of 〈r (t)〉. The physics is very different when is along the x direction, where 〈y (t)〉 = 0 as expected, but 〈x (t)〉 depends strongly on γ_{eff}, as shown in Fig. 2b. In Fig. 3, we also plot T as a function of γ_{eff} and Ω_{0}. Without SOC (γ_{eff} = 0), T = T_{0}, the period for a regular BEC, as expected. T increases with γ_{eff} in the spinbalanced phase, but decreases when spin starts to be polarized, leading to a sharp peak at the quantum critical point . The oscillation of 〈x (t)〉 in the spin balanced phase is completely dissipationless, while a strong damping occurs in a small range of γ_{eff} beyond (see the inset in Fig. 3). Far beyond , the oscillation becomes regular again with the period T = T_{0} because the ground state has only one component in this region. The peak and the damping of the oscillation around provide clear experimental signatures for the QPT. Moreover, T also depends on the magnitude D of the shift near the critical point : the larger D, the smaller T.
Another collective dynamics, the scissors mode^{36}, shows a similar feature as the COM motion. The scissors mode can be excited by a sudden rotation of the asymmetric trapping potential (i.e., η ≠ 1) by an angle θ, which induces an oscillation of the quantity 〈xy〉 = ∫ dxdy(ψ_{↑} (t)^{2} + ψ_{↓} (t)^{2}xy. Without SOC, the period of the scissors mode is ^{36}, as observed in experiments^{37}. In Fig. 4, We plot the oscillation period T with respect to γ_{eff} for three different Ω_{0}. We have confirmed that the same QPT occurs for 〈σ_{z}〉 and 〈σ_{x}〉 of the ground state in this asymmetric potential with the quantum critical point , as predicted by the Dicke model. Similar as the COM motion, we observe the peak and damping of the oscillation around . Far beyond , the oscillation period is T_{1}. Similar as the dependence of the COM motion on the shift distance D, the angle θ also influences the period of the scissors mode near : the smaller θ, the larger T.
Discussion
In summary, we show that the SOC strength in the recent breakthrough experiment for realizing SOC for cold atoms can be tuned through a fast and coherent modulation of the applied laser intensities. Such tunable SOC provides a powerful tool for exploring spinorbit coupled superfluid physics in future experiments. By varying the SOC strength, the manybody interaction between atoms can drive a QPT from spin balanced to spin polarized ground states in a harmonic trapped BEC, which realizes the longsought QPT from normal to superradient phases in the quantum Dicke model and may have important applications in quantum information and quantum optics.
Methods
We choose the physical parameters to be similar as those in the experiment^{6}: (ω_{y},ω_{z}) = 2π × (40, 400) Hz, η = 1, λ = 804.1 nm, c_{0} = 100.86a_{B}, c_{2} = −0.46a_{B}^{38} with the Bohr radius a_{B}, N = 1 × 10^{4}, ω = 2π × 4.5 kHz. For the numerical simulation, we need a dimensionless GP equation that is obtained by choosing the units of the energy, length and time as , , and 1/ω_{y} = 4 ms, respectively. The dimensionless parameters in the GP equation become , and .
Note added
After our manuscript was initially posted at arXiv (arXiv:1111.4778), our proposed peaks of the dipole oscillation periods (Figs. 2b and 3) were observed experimentally^{39}, and more detailed theoretical studies were also performed^{40}.
References
 1.
Xiao, D., Chang, M.C. & Niu, Q. Berry phase effects on electronic properties. Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 1959 (2010).
 2.
Hasan, M. & Kane, C. L. Topological insulators. Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 3045 (2010).
 3.
Žutić, I., Fabian, J. & Das Sarma, S. Spintronics: fundamentals and applications. Rev. Mod. Phys. 76, 323 (2004).
 4.
NadjPerge, S., Frolov, S. M., bibinfoauthorBakkers, E. P. A. M. & Kouwenhoven, L. P. Spinorbit qubit in a semiconductor nanowire. Nature 468, 1084 (2010).
 5.
Jespersen, T. S. et al. Gatedependent spinorbit coupling in multielectron carbon nanotubes. Nature Phys. 7, 348 (2011).
 6.
Lin, Y.J., JimenezGarcia, K. & Spielman, I. B. Spinorbitcoupled BoseEinstein condensates. Nature 471, 83 (2011).
 7.
Wu, C., MondragonShem, I. & Zhou, X.F. Unconventional BoseEinstein condensations from spinorbit coupling. Chin. Phys. Lett. 28, 097102 (2011).
 8.
Wang, C., Jian, C.M. & Zhai, H. Spinorbit coupled spinor BoseEinstein condensates. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 160403 (2010).
 9.
Ho, T.L. & Zhang, S. BoseEinstein condensates with spinorbit interaction. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 150403 (2011).
 10.
Zhang, Y., Mao, L. & Zhang, C. Meanfield dynamics of spinorbit coupled BoseEinstein condensates. Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 035302 (2012).
 11.
Hu, H., Ramachandhran, R., Pu, H. & Liu, X.J. Spinorbit coupled weakly interacting BoseEinstein condensates in harmonic traps. Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 010402 (2012).
 12.
Sinha, S., Nath, R. & Santos, L. Trapped twodimensional condensates with synthetic spinorbit coupling. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 270401 (2011).
 13.
Zhang, C., Tewari, S. Lutchyn, R. M. & Das Sarma, S. p_{x} + ip_{y} Superfluid from swave interactions of Fermionic cold atoms. Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 160401 (2008).
 14.
Gong, M., Tewari, S. & Zhang, C. BCSBEC crossover and topological phase transition in 3D spinorbit coupled degenerate Fermi gases. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 195303 (2011).
 15.
Hu, H., Jiang, L., Pu, H. & Liu, X.J. Probing anisotropic superfluidity in atomic Fermi gases with Rashba spinorbit coupling. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 195304 (2011).
 16.
Yu, Z.Q. & Zhai, H. Spinorbit coupled Fermi gases across a Feshbach resonance. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 195305 (2011).
 17.
Ruseckas, J., Juzeliūnas, G., Öhberg, P. & Fleischhauer, M. NonAbelian gauge potentials for ultracold atoms with degenerate dark states. Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 010404 (2005).
 18.
Zhang, C. Spinorbit coupling and perpendicular Zeeman field for fermionic cold atoms: observation of the intrinsic anomalous Hall effect. Phys. Rev. A 82, 021607(R) (2010).
 19.
Dalibard, J., Gerbier, F., Juzeliūnas, G. & Öhberg, P. Artificial gauge potentials for neutral atom. Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 1523 (2011).
 20.
Campbell, D. L., Juzeliūnas, G. & Spielman, I. B. Realistic Rashba and Dresselhaus spinorbit coupling for neutral atoms. Phys. Rev. A 84, 025602 (2011).
 21.
Grifoni, M. & Hänggi, P. Driven quantum tunneling. Phys. Rep. 304, 229 (1997).
 22.
Sachdev, S. Quantum Phase transtitions. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1999).
 23.
Dicke, R. H. Coherence in Spontaneous Radiation Processes. Phys. Rev. 93, 99 (1954).
 24.
Emary, C. & Brandes, T. Quantum chaos triggered by precursors of a quantum phase transition: the Dicke model. Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 044101 (2003).
 25.
Gross, M. & Haroche, S. Superradiance: an essay on the theory of collective spontaneous emission. Phys. Rep. 93, 301 (1982).
 26.
Klein, A. & Marshalek, E. R. Boson realizations of Lie algebras with applications to nuclear physics. Rev. Mod. Phys. 63, 375 (1991).
 27.
Hammerer, K., Sørensen, A. S. & Polzik, E. S. Quantum interface between light and atomic ensembles. Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 1041 (2010).
 28.
Schoelkopf, R. J. & Girvin, S. M. Wiring up quantum systems. Nature 451, 664 (2008).
 29.
Keller, M., Lange, B., Hayasaka, H., Lange, W. & Walther, H. Continuous generation of single photons with controlled waveform in an iontrap cavity system. Nature 431, 1075 (2004).
 30.
Garraway, B. M. The Dicke model in quantum optics: Dicke model revisited. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 369, 1137 (2011).
 31.
Baumann, K., Guerlin, C., Brennecke, F. & Esslinger, T. Dicke quantum phase transition with a superfluid gas in an optical cavity. Nature 464, 1301 (2010).
 32.
Ho, T.L. Spinor Bose condensates in optical traps. Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 742 (1998).
 33.
Eckardt, A., Weiss, C. & Holthaus, M. Superfluidinsulator transition in a periodically driven optical lattice. Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 260404 (2005).
 34.
Lignier, H. et al. Dynamical Control of MatterWave Tunneling in Periodic Potentials. Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 220403 (2007).
 35.
Stringari, S. Collective Excitations of a Trapped BoseCondensed Gas. Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2360 (1996).
 36.
GuéryOdelin, D. & Stringari, S. Scissors Mode and Superfluidity of a Trapped BoseEinstein Condensed Gas. Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 4452 (1999).
 37.
OMaragò, O. M. et al. Observation of the Scissors Mode and Evidence for Superfluidity of a Trapped BoseEinstein Condensed Gas. Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 2056 (2000).
 38.
Widera, A. et al. Precision measurement of spindependent interaction strengths for spin1 and spin2 ^{87}Rb atoms. New J. Phys. 8, 152 (2006).
 39.
Zhang, J.Y. et al. Collective Dipole Oscillations of a SpinOrbit Coupled BoseEinstein Condensate. Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 115301 (2012).
 40.
Li, Y., Martone, G. I. & Stringari, S. Sum rules, dipole oscillation and spin polarizability of a spinorbit coupled quantum gas. EuroPhys. Lett. 99, 56008 (2012).
Acknowledgements
We thank helpful discussion with Peter Engels, Li Mao and Chunlei Qu. This work is supported by DARPAYFA (N660011014025), ARO (W911NF1210334), and NSFPHY (1104546). Gang Chen is also supported by the 973 program under Grant No. 2012CB921603 and the NNSFC under Grant No. 11074154 and 61275211.
Author information
Affiliations
Department of Physics and Astronomy, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, 99164 USA
 Yongping Zhang
 , Gang Chen
 & Chuanwei Zhang
State Key Laboratory of Quantum Optics and Quantum Optics Devices, College of Physics and Electronic Engineering, Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, P. R. China
 Gang Chen
Department of Physics, The University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX, 75080 USA
 Chuanwei Zhang
Authors
Search for Yongping Zhang in:
Search for Gang Chen in:
Search for Chuanwei Zhang in:
Contributions
Y.Z., G.C. and C.Z. conceived the idea, Y.Z., G.C., C.Z. performed the calculation, Y.Z., G.C., C.Z. wrote the manuscript, C.Z. supervised the whole research project.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Chuanwei Zhang.
Rights and permissions
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons AttributionNonCommercialShareALike 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/byncsa/3.0/
To obtain permission to reuse content from this article visit RightsLink.
About this article
Further reading

Harmonic trap resonance enhanced synthetic atomic spinorbit coupling
Scientific Reports (2017)

Tunable atomic spinorbit coupling synthesized with a modulating gradient magnetic field
Scientific Reports (2016)

Properties of spin–orbitcoupled Bose–Einstein condensates
Frontiers of Physics (2016)

Quantum phases in circuit QED with a superconducting qubit array
Scientific Reports (2015)

Hydrodynamics of Normal Atomic Gases with Spinorbit Coupling
Scientific Reports (2015)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.