- Eric Varoquaux- Superdluid helium interferometry: an introduction
- Nuclear_Physics_SS18_Sheet2.pdf
- the War for Meaning
- 1d Absorbtion
- Spectroscopy SWNT
- Ch2Theory
- solar cell
- Black Phosphorus
- 41 - Interaction of Radiation with Matter.pdf
- Lecture Outline
- Unit 1
- DK2015_CH02
- GUIDELINES FOR A SPACE PROPULSION DEVICE BASED ON HEIM'S QUANTUM THEORY
- Shadow People - Or Opening Up a Can of Worms
- MatkoEPICS (Experimental Physics and Industrial Control System) - ”Driver” for Kenwood power supplysvich Sebastian Projektarbeit
- Photon Interaction With Matter (1)
- Chapter 27 CP
- Dental Radiology Text Problem
- Dissertation Kudera
- God and Quantum Mechanics (PDF): Is the Material World Truly Real? Is the Entire Universe Just a “Simulation” in a Supercomputer?
- Atma che
- GCE Rev Spec Physics 09
- Development of Copper-doped TiO2 Photocatalyst for Hydrogen Production under Visible Light
- Angels and Demons Review
- The Bohr Atom
- Electroluminescence Spectra in Weakly Coupled Single-molecule Junctions
- NUS PHYSICS sample 31.pdf
- Highly Efficient GaAs Solar Cells by Limiting Light Emission Angle
- David L. Bergman and Charles W. Lucas, Jr.- Physical Models of Matter
- Talent+100+HSC+Reference+Handbook
- The Innovators: How a Group of Hackers, Geniuses, and Geeks Created the Digital Revolution
- Dispatches from Pluto: Lost and Found in the Mississippi Delta
- Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future
- Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind
- The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America
- Yes Please
- The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money & Power
- A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story
- This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate
- Grand Pursuit: The Story of Economic Genius
- The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer
- John Adams
- Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America
- Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore
- Smart People Should Build Things: How to Restore Our Culture of Achievement, Build a Path for Entrepreneurs, and Create New Jobs in America
- The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers
- The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century
- Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln
- The New Confessions of an Economic Hit Man
- Bad Feminist: Essays
- How To Win Friends and Influence People
- Steve Jobs
- Angela's Ashes: A Memoir
- The Incarnations: A Novel
- You Too Can Have a Body Like Mine: A Novel
- Leaving Berlin: A Novel
- The Silver Linings Playbook: A Novel
- The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)
- Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close: A Novel
- The Light Between Oceans: A Novel
- We Are Not Ourselves: A Novel
- The First Bad Man: A Novel
- The Rosie Project: A Novel
- The Blazing World: A Novel
- The Flamethrowers: A Novel
- Brooklyn: A Novel
- A Man Called Ove: A Novel
- Bel Canto
- The Master
- Life of Pi
- The Love Affairs of Nathaniel P.: A Novel
- A Prayer for Owen Meany: A Novel
- The Cider House Rules
- The Perks of Being a Wallflower
- The Bonfire of the Vanities: A Novel
- Lovers at the Chameleon Club, Paris 1932: A Novel
- Interpreter of Maladies
- Beautiful Ruins: A Novel
- The Kitchen House: A Novel
- The Art of Racing in the Rain: A Novel
- Wolf Hall: A Novel
- The Wallcreeper
- Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk: A Novel

**of Exciton-Polariton Condensates
**

Tim Byrnes,

1,2

Tomoyuki Horikiri,

3

Natsuko Ishida,

1,4

and Yoshihisa Yamamoto

1,3

1

National Institute of Informatics, 2-1-2 Hitotsubashi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101-8430, Japan

2

Institute of Industrial Science, University of Tokyo, 4-6-1 Komaba, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 153-8505, Japan

3

E. L. Ginzton Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, USA

4

Department of Information and Communication Engineering, The University of Tokyo,

7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan

(Received 13 May 2010; published 26 October 2010)

The crossover between low and high density regimes of exciton-polariton condensates is examined

using a BCS wave-function approach. Our approach is an extension of the BEC-BCS crossover theory for

excitons, but includes a cavity photon ﬁeld. The approach can describe both the low density limit, where

the system can be described as a Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC) of exciton-polaritons, and the high

density limit, where the system enters a photon-dominated regime. In contrast to the exciton BEC-BCS

crossover where the system approaches an electron-hole plasma, the polariton high density limit has

strongly correlated electron-hole pairs. At intermediate densities, there is a regime with BCS-like

properties, with a peak at nonzero momentum of the singlet pair function. We calculate the expected

photoluminescence and give several experimental signatures of the crossover.

DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.186402 PACS numbers: 71.36.+c, 67.10.Àj, 74.78.Na

In recent years there is an increasing consensus that a

Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC) of exciton polaritons has

been realized experimentally [1,2]. For exciton BECs, it is

well known that the system crosses over into a BCS state

of weakly correlated electrons and holes at high density

[3,4]. Such a crossover was realized with fermionic atoms

by varying the attractive interaction between using

Feshbach resonances [5], providing an experimental dem-

onstration of the crossover. A natural question is, then,

does a BEC-BCS crossover also occur for exciton-

polaritons? Littlewood and co-workers have examined

this question and have predicted that with increasing

density the system transitions from a BEC state to a

photon BEC state [6–9]. In an intermediate density regime

under suitable conditions they predict a BCS-like regime

[7]. The model that they deal with is a model of non-

interacting excitons coupled to a common photonic cavity.

In this model, the excitons do not contain an internal

electron-hole structure and are treated as spins localized

on lattice sites. Our purpose here is to include the electron

and hole components as well as their Coulomb interaction.

By doing so we ﬁnd that several new effects are present

which have implications on experimentally observable

quantities.

The Hamiltonian we consider is

H ¼ H

kin

þH

Coul

þH

ph

Àµn,

H

kin

¼

k

_

@

2

k

2

2m

e

e

y

k

e

k

þ

@

2

k

2

2m

h

h

y

k

h

k

_

,

H

Coul

¼

1

2

k,k

0

,q

VðqÞ½e

y

kþq

e

y

k

0

Àq

e

k

0 e

k

þh

y

kþq

h

y

k

0

Àq

h

k

0 h

k

À2e

y

kþq

h

y

k

0

Àq

h

k

0 e

k

,

H

ph

¼

k

½e

y

k

h

y

Àk

o þo

y

h

Àk

e

k

þwo

y

o, (1)

where e

k

and h

k

are the fermion annihilation operators for

electrons and holes with momentum k, VðqÞ ¼

e

2

2eq

is the

Coulomb interaction, m

e

and m

h

are the electron and hole

effective masses, e is the electron charge, e is the permit-

tivity, o is the cavity photon annihilation operator, w is the

cavity photon energy, is the coupling strength of the

cavity photon to the electrons and holes, and n ¼ o

y

o þ

k

½e

y

k

e

k

þh

y

k

h

k

is the total number of particles per unit

area. We introduce a chemical potential µ into the

Hamiltonian in order to ﬁx the density.

We use a BCS wave-function ansatz of the form

jÈi ¼ exp½¬o

y

À¬

2

,2

k

½u

k

þ¡

k

e

y

k

h

y

Àk

j0i, (2)

where u

2

k

þ¡

2

k

¼ 1 in analogy to the BCS wave function

used for excitons [3,4]. An additional coherent state pho-

tonic term is included of the same form as in Ref. [6]. The

photon density is n

ph

¼ ¬

2

and the electron-hole density is

n

eh

¼

k

¡

2

k

, giving a total particle density n ¼ n

ph

þn

eh

.

The BCS wave function (2) is equivalent to the solution

of the Hamiltonian (1) by mean ﬁeld theory [10]. Following

the mean ﬁeld derivation, we assume a pairing Hamiltonian

in Eq. (1) and restrict k

0

¼ Àk in the attractive Coulomb

interaction. In the repulsive Coulomb terms we assume a

PRL 105, 186402 (2010)

P HYS I CAL RE VI E W L E T T E RS

week ending

29 OCTOBER 2010

0031-9007,10,105(18),186402(4) 186402-1 Ó 2010 The American Physical Society

Hartree Fock approximation, and restrict q ¼ k

0

Àk.

Hartree terms (corresponding to q ¼ 0), are not present

due to the assumption of charge neutrality [4]. Expanding

the operators e

y

k

e

k

, h

y

k

h

k

, e

y

k

h

y

Àk

, and o around their mean

values and keeping only linear terms gives

H¼E

0

þDðoþo

y

Þ þðwÀµÞo

y

oþ

k

(

k

ðe

y

k

e

k

þh

y

k

h

k

Þ

À

k

ðÁ

k

À¬Þðe

y

k

h

y

Àk

þh

Àk

e

k

Þ (3)

where (

k

¼

@

2

k

2

2m

ÀµÀX

k

, X

k

¼

k

0 Vðk Àk

0

Þhe

y

k

0

e

k

0 i,

Á

k

¼

k

0 Vðk Àk

0

Þhe

y

k

0

h

y

Àk

0

i, D ¼

k

he

y

k

h

y

Àk

i, E

0

¼

k

½X

k

he

y

k

e

k

i þÁ

k

he

y

k

h

y

Àk

i À2D¬ and we have taken

all expectation values as real, 2,m ¼ 1,m

e

þ1,m

h

,

¬ ¼ hoi, and he

y

k

e

k

i ¼ hh

y

Àk

h

Àk

i due to charge neutrality.

The photonic part may be diagonalized by introducing the

operator B

y

¼ o

y

Àc, and demanding that the off-

diagonal terms vanish. This gives the condition

¬ ¼ À

D

wÀµ

. (4)

The remaining part of the Hamiltonian may be diagonal-

ized by a transformation e

k

¼ u

k

¡

k0

þ¡

k

¡

y

k1

, h

y

k

¼

À¡

k

¡

k0

þu

k

¡

y

k1

. Demanding that the off-diagonal terms

disappear, we obtain the Hamiltonian

H ¼ e

0

þðwÀµÞB

y

B þ

k

E

k

ð¡

y

k0

¡

k0

þ¡

y

k1

¡

k1

Þ, (5)

where e

0

¼

k

½(

k

ÀE

k

þÁ

k

he

y

k

h

y

Àk

i þX

k

he

y

k

e

k

i þ

2

D

2

,ðwÀµÞ. The parameters u

k

and ¡

k

satisfy the

standard BCS algebra [10]

he

y

k

e

k

i ¼ ¡

2

k

¼

1

2

_

1 À

(

k

E

k

_

, (6)

he

y

k

h

y

Àk

i ¼ u

k

¡

k

¼

Á

k

À¬

2E

k

, (7)

E

k

¼

ﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ

(

2

k

þðÁ

k

À¬Þ

2

_

. (8)

The gap energy E

min

k

is deﬁned to be the value of E

k

minimized over all momenta k. In our numerical results,

we use units such that the momentum is measured in units

of 1,o

B

, and densities are measured in units of 1,o

2

B

, where

the Bohr radius is o

B

¼ 4re@

2

,me

2

. The energy is mea-

sured in units E

0

¼ e

2

,4reo

B

(SI units used throughout).

In the low density limit with no photon ﬁeld, the exciton

energy is E,E

0

¼ À1. Zero detuning therefore corresponds

to a photon energy of w,E

0

¼ À1 (the photon energy is

negative since we measure energies relative to the band

gap energy). Equations (6)–(8) with (4) are solved self-

consistently to obtain our results.

In Fig. 1(a) the occupation probability ¡

2

k

of electron-hole

pairs is shown. In the low density limit (µ % À1.4), the

distribution coincides with the exciton wave function ¡

k

/

1,ð1 þk

2

Þ

2

[4]. Furthermore, the density of electron-hole

pairs and photons is nearly equal in this limit [Fig. 1(b)].

Figure 1(c) shows the energy per electron-hole pair, which

approaches an energy of E,E

0

% À1.4. The lowering of the

energy is due to the strong coupling and anticrossing of

the exciton and photon to form a lower polariton. Finally,

the gap energy shown in Fig. 1(d) is equal to the energy of a

polariton E

min

k

% 1.4. The gap energy in this case is the

energy required to turn a polariton into a free electron-hole

pair. We thus conclude that exciton-polaritons are correctly

reproduced in the low density limit.

As the density is increased, Fig. 1(a) reveals that the

momentum distribution spreads out to higher momentum

states. This is precisely the opposite behavior to what is

expected in the excitonic BEC-BCS crossover. In a standard

BCS state, the instability towards forming a Cooper pair is

weakened with increasing density, because the electron-hole

attraction becomes increasingly screened by the surrounding

electrons and holes. This results in a ¡

k

distribution that

approaches a Fermi step for high density, for the excitonic

case. In the case of exciton-polaritons, the electron-hole

attraction in fact becomes enhanced with increasing density.

This is evidenced by the gap energy which increases with

density in Fig. 1(d), instead of decreasing in the exciton case.

What is the origin for this enhanced attraction?

Figure 1(b) reveals that at high density the photon number

greatly exceeds that of the electron-hole number. This can

be explained due to a difference in the particle statistics of

the two excitations. Photons are true bosonic particles,

hence any number of them can be excited with an energy

cost w. Meanwhile, electron-hole pairs are fermions, and

suffer a phase space ﬁlling effect. In order to excite more

fermionic particles, electrons and holes of increasingly

higher momenta and energy must be occupied in order

to increase the particle number. Thus it is favorable to excite

photons rather than electron-hole pairs to minimize the total

energy, explaining the large imbalance in these numbers.

Given that at high density there is inevitably a large

number of photons, we may return to the original

Hamiltonian (1) to see the consequences. In the high

density limit we may replace the photon operator by a

a

0 1 2 3 4 5

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

v

2

µ=-1.4

µ=-1.2

µ=-1.05

µ=-1.001

k

b

1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1

1.4

1.3

1.2

1.1

1

c d

1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

E

k m

i

n

10

10

0

10

2

10

4

-2

n

n

n

ph

n

eh

n

e

h

E

/

n

k

1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.

FIG. 1 (color online). (a) The occupation probability ¡

2

k

of

electron-hole pairs of momentum k for a cavity photon energy of

w ¼ À1 and photon coupling ¼ 0.1. The dotted line shows

the 1s exciton wave function for comparison. The (b) electron-

hole pair, photon, and total particle density, (c) energy per

electron-hole pair, (d) gap energy versus chemical potential.

PRL 105, 186402 (2010)

P HYS I CAL RE VI E W L E T T E RS

week ending

29 OCTOBER 2010

186402-2

classical c number, which we consider to be very large

o % ¬ ) 1. Discarding all terms that do not contain this

factor, we have

H % ¬

k

½e

y

k

h

y

Àk

þh

Àk

e

k

þ¬

2

w. (9)

The solution of this Hamiltonian is the BCS wave function

(2) with u

k

¼ À¡

k

¼ 1,

ﬃﬃﬃ

2

p

, agreeing with the numerical

analysis that the average occupation number approaches

1,2 for all k. The BCS gap in this limit corresponds to a

single excitation of the Hamiltonian, which has an energy

E

min

k

% 2¬. (10)

Thus with increasing density the BCS gap continues to

increase in agreement with Fig. 1(d).

Now we ask to what extent the polariton system pos-

sesses BCS features, rather than merely a crossover be-

tween a polariton BECstate to a photon-dominated regime.

The criterion given in Ref. [7] is based on a comparison of

the energy scales of the BCS gap energy E

min

k

with the

temperature required for condensation to occur k

B

T

BEC

¼

r@

2

n,m

pol

, where m

pol

is the polariton mass. In this deﬁ-

nition, the state can be described as ‘‘BCS-like’’ if the

energy to disassociate a polariton is lower than the thermal

excitation energy to prevent a BEC from occurring. In our

units, this gives k

B

T

BEC

,E

0

% 22 000no

2

B

, where we used

m

pol

% 10

À5

m

0

and o

B

¼ 10 nm, and m

0

is the free elec-

tron mass. In terms of Fig. 1(d), this criterion is always

much higher than the gap energy E

min

k

, for densities ex-

ceeding n % 6.5 Â10

7

cm

À2

. Experimentally, such den-

sities have already been achieved, giving the result that all

current polariton BECs are all in the ‘‘BCS-like’’ regime,

according to this criterion.

There is, however, another sense that the polaritons

can be classiﬁed as BCS-like. For an excitonic BCS state,

the singlet pair function ÉðkÞ ¼ u

k

¡

k

is peaked near

the vicinity of the Fermi momentum and has a width of

the order of the inverse of the BCS coherence [11].

Figure 2(a) shows the singlet pair function for our polariton

system, which is peaked at nonzero momentum for large

densities. The location of this peak has a nonzero momen-

tum above a critical density [Fig. 2(c)]. Such behavior is

also seen in the excitonic BEC-BCS crossover. The differ-

ence here is that instead of the singlet pair function becom-

ing sharper with increasing density, here the pair wave

function becomes broader. Using blue-detuned (more ex-

citonic) polaritons ÉðkÞ more resembles the excitonic BCS

state [Fig. 2(b)]. An alternative deﬁnition of a polariton

BCS phase may be signaled by the presence of the peak of

the singlet pair function at nonzero momentum.

We now turn to the photoluminescence (PL) character-

istics of the transition between low and high density.

Examining the high density limit ﬁrst, using a similar

approximation to (9), we use the Hamiltonian

H ¼

k

½a

þ

k

o þa

À

k

o

y

þwo

y

o þ

e

g

2

k

a

z

k

, (11)

where a

þ

k

¼ e

y

k

h

y

Àk

, e

k

¼ @

2

k

2

,m, a

z

k

¼ e

y

k

e

k

¼ h

y

Àk

h

Àk

,

and we have explicitly included the semiconductor band

gap energy e

g

required to create an electron-hole pair. The

PL spectrum is calculated using [12]

IðeÞ ¼

1

r

Re

_

1

0

hA

y

ðrÞAð0Þie

À|er,@

Jr, (12)

where A is the operator that couples the system to the

external PL ﬁeld. In the case of polaritons, the PL is

generally observed by leakage of the photon ﬁeld through

the microcavity, hence A ¼ o. It is also possible to observe

the PL via a secondary means, from the coupling to the

exciton ﬁeld A ¼ a

À

k

. This type of coupling is that mea-

sured for pure excitons and should also be present in

principle for polaritons. Experimentally the excitonic PL

is emitted homogeneously in all directions, whereas the

photonic PL is emitted perpendicularly to the sample sur-

face. Evaluating the time correlation function (12) for both

types of couplings under a mean ﬁeld approximation, we

ﬁnd a spectrum as shown in Fig. 3(a). For the exciton

coupling, the PL spectrum is identical to the familiar

Mollow’s triplet spectrum found in resonant ﬂuorescence

[12], in agreement with Fig. 2 of Ref. [7]. For the photon

coupling only the central peak is present. The reason

for this difference is illustrated by the single spin version

of (11), which has eigenstates for high density jÆ, Ni ¼

ðj ", N À1i Æj #, NiÞ,

ﬃﬃﬃ

2

p

, where N is the number of

photons. For large N, the photon operator does not

cause transitions between the Æ eigenstates: ojÆ, Ni %

ﬃﬃﬃﬃ

N

p

jÆ, N À1i. In contrast, the exciton coupling does

cause a transition a

À

jÆ, Ni % ðjþ, N À1i ÀjÀ,

N À1iÞ,

ﬃﬃﬃ

2

p

, giving the side peaks.

In the low density limit, either type of coupling gives the

same PL spectrum, giving the familiar emission centered at

the lower polariton energy. For the photon coupling case, in

both the low and high density limits, the action of applying

the operator A ¼ o does not cause transitions to excited

a

c

b

d

-2

10

-1

10

0

10

1

10

2

10

0 1 2 3 4 5

k

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Ψ

0 1 2 3 4 5

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Ψ

k

-1.5 -1 -0.5 0

µ

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

k

m

a

x

-2

µ= -1.40

µ= -1.36

µ= -1.16

µ= -1.08

µ= -0.10

µ= -0.56

µ=-0.90

µ= -1.07

ω=-E

0

ω=0

n

V

n

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

V

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

FIG. 2 (color online). The singlet pair function ÉðkÞ ¼ u

k

¡

k

for various chemical potentials as shown for (a) zero detuning

w ¼ ÀE

0

(b) blue detuning w ¼ 0. (c) The singlet pair function

peak momenta for detunings shown. (d) The particle-particle

interaction energy V and condensate interaction energy Vn as a

function of the density.

PRL 105, 186402 (2010)

P HYS I CAL RE VI E W L E T T E RS

week ending

29 OCTOBER 2010

186402-3

states. Assuming this is true for all intermediate densities,

we use the results of our ground state BCS wave function to

obtain the PL emission parameters. From the results of the

self-consistent equations (6)–(8), we may write down an

effective Hamiltonian for the BCS theory H

eff

¼ µl

y

l þ

1

2

o

2

B

A

Vl

y

l

y

ll, where l is a bosonic operator for the effec-

tive theory, µ ¼

JE

Jn

and V ¼

1

o

2

B

J

2

E

Jn

2

, where A is the sample

area and E is an energy density. The peak energy of the PL

is the energy of adding a single particle to the system,

which is by deﬁnition equal to the chemical potential µ. To

determine the linewidth of the spectrum, we use the

method presented in Ref. [13] to incorporate the effect of

self-interaction on the PL. The self-interaction energy V is

shown in Fig. 2(d). At low densities, the self-interaction

energy is in agreement with the polariton-polariton inter-

action V % 6E

0

jXj

4

[14], where X ¼ 1,

ﬃﬃﬃ

2

p

is the polariton

Hopﬁeld coefﬁcient at zero detuning. The condensate self-

interaction energy nV reaches a maximum at intermediate

density, which we attribute to the fact that at high density

the particles are more likely to be present in a photonic

state, which have no interactions with other particles.

Inputting the condensate interaction energy into the theory

of Ref. [13] gives the PL spectrum Fig. 3(b). The PL

spectrum gradually shifts from the lower polariton energy

to the cavity photon energy, with a asymmetric linewidth

with an exponential tail towards high energy. The linewidth

narrows again in the high density limit, due to the de-

creased interactions.

In the excitonic PL, the side peaks of the Mollow’s

triplet should disappear at intermediate densities, when

the saturation effect of the excitons becomes negligible.

The central peak of the excitonic PL should exhibit a

similar behavior to that shown in Fig. 3(b). We note that

only the zero center of mass momentum PL is considered

in our analysis and we leave calculations of dispersion

characteristics as future work.

We have analyzed the crossover between low and high

density limits of exciton-polariton condensates using a BCS

wave-function approach. Contrary to the exciton case, the

electron-hole pairs have a reduced separation in the high

density limit due to the dominant cavity photon ﬁeld.

Intuitively we picture this state as a strong cavity photon

ﬁeld continuously creating and destroying electron-hole

pairs at localized positions in the quantum well, resulting

in a half occupancy of ¡

2

k

. In the intermediate density regime,

the system has BCS-like properties in the sense that the pair-

breaking energy is less than the energy required for destroy-

ing the condensate, and a peak in the singlet pair function

develops. The photonic PL shifts from the lower polariton

energy towards the cavity photon energy with a broadening

of the linewidth due to the increased interactions. In the high

density limit the excitonic PL should exhibit a Mollow’s

triplet type structure, originating from the saturation of the

electron-hole occupancy. Inclusion of nonequilibrium effects

resulting from a coupling to an external bath is left as future

work. We expect that inclusion of this effect will reduce the

energy gap due to pair-breaking dephasing processes [15].

The densities required for observing the crossover should be

observable in current experimental systems.

This work is supported by the Special Coordination

Funds for Promoting Science and Technology, the FIRST

program for JSPS, Navy/SPAWAR Grant No. N66001-09-

1-2024, MEXT, and NICT.

Note added in proof.—Recently, we became aware that

the strong binding of electrons and holes due to the photon

ﬁeld was also independently found in Ref. [16].

[1] J. Kasprzak et al., Nature (London) 443, 409 (2006).

[2] H. Deng et al., Science 298, 199 (2002).

[3] L. V. Keldysh and A. N. Kozlov, Sov. Phys. JETP 27, 521

(1968).

[4] C. Comte and P. Nozie`res, J. Phys. (Paris) 43, 1069 (1982).

[5] C. A. Regal and D. S. Jin, Adv. At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 54, 1

(2006).

[6] P. R. Eastham and P. B. Littlewood, Phys. Rev. B 64,

235101 (2001).

[7] J. Keeling, P. R. Eastham, M. H. Szymanska, and P. B.

Littlewood, Phys. Rev. B 72, 115320 (2005).

[8] J. Keeling, P. R. Eastham, M. H. Szymanska, and P. B.

Littlewood, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 226403 (2004).

[9] J. Keeling, F. M. Marchetti, M. H. Szymanska, and P. B.

Littlewood, Semicond. Sci. Technol. 22, R1 (2007).

[10] M. Tinkham, Introduction to Superconductivity (McGraw-

Hill, New York, 1996).

[11] J. R. Waldram, Superconductivity of Metals and Cuprates

(IOP Publishing, Bristol and Philadelphia, 1996).

[12] M. Scully and M. Zubairy, Quantum Optics (Cambridge

University Press, Cambridge, U.K., 1997).

[13] D. Porras and C. Tejedor, Phys. Rev. B 67, 161310(R)

(2003).

[14] C. Ciuti, V. Savona, C. Piermarocchi, A. Quattropani, and

P. Schwendimann, Phys. Rev. B 58, 7926 (1998).

[15] M. H. Szymanska and P. B. Littlewood, Solid State

Commun. 124, 103 (2002).

[16] K. Kamide and T. Ogawa, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 056401

(2010).

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

PL intensity

ω ω +2Ωλ ω −2Ωλ

Ι

max

Ι /3

max

2γ

3γ/2

γ

photonic PL

excitonic PL

a

1.5

1.4

1.3

1.2

1.1

1

0.9

E

10

-2

10

-1

10

0

10

1

10

2

b

n

FIG. 3 (color online). (a) The PL intensity of the BCS model in

the high density limit for the photonic PL and excitonic PL. A

reservoir coupling ¡ is assumed for both cases, giving the

linewidths as shown. (b) The photonic PL for the BCS model

at all densities. Zero detuning is assumed in all cases.

PRL 105, 186402 (2010)

P HYS I CAL RE VI E W L E T T E RS

week ending

29 OCTOBER 2010

186402-4

1 0 0 1 µ=-1.4 1. and total particle density.4 a 0.05 µ=-1. k Àk The photonic part may be diagonalized by introducing the operator By ¼ ay À c.3 0. Expanding the operators ey ek . In the low density limit with no photon ﬁeld. Hartree terms (corresponding to q ¼ 0).2 1. 0. In Fig. The gap energy in this case is the k energy required to turn a polariton into a free electron-hole pair.2 0. As the density is increased. (7) hey hy i ¼ uk vk ¼ k k Àk 2Ek qﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ Ek ¼ 2 þ ðÁk À Þ2 : (8) k The gap energy Emin is deﬁned to be the value of Ek k minimized over all momenta k. The energy is measured in units E0 ¼ e2 =4aB (SI units used throughout). we obtain the Hamiltonian X H ¼ 0 þ ð! À ÞBy B þ Ek ð y k0 þ y k1 Þ. the electron-hole attraction in fact becomes enhanced with increasing density.4 1. In order to excite more fermionic particles. We thus conclude that exciton-polaritons are correctly reproduced in the low density limit. E0 ¼ k Àk k Àk P y y y k ½Xk hek ek i þ Ák hek hÀk i À 2D and we have taken all expectation values as real.8 0. This is evidenced by the gap energy which increases with density in Fig. and demanding that the offdiagonal terms vanish.4 0.PRL 105.2 1. energy is due to the strong coupling and anticrossing of the exciton and photon to form a lower polariton. ey hy .2 µ=-1. (6) k k 2 Ek Á À .1 1 15 10 5 0 1. and densities are measured in units of 1=a2 . and a around their mean k k k Àk values and keeping only linear terms gives X H ¼ E0 þDðaþay Þþð!ÀÞay a þ k ðey ek þhy hk Þ k k X À ðÁk ÀÞðey hy þhÀk ek Þ k Àk k @2 k2 2m k b n n ph 1. 2=m ¼ 1=me þ 1=mh . This results in a vk distribution that approaches a Fermi step for high density. the exciton energy is E=E0 ¼ À1. Finally. (5) k0 k1 k P y y where 0 ¼ k ½k À Ek þ Ák hek hÀk i þ Xk hey ek i þ k 2 D2 =ð! À Þ.5 0. (c) energy per electron-hole pair. and restrict q ¼ k0 À k. 186402 (2010) PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS 0.3 1. explaining the large imbalance in these numbers. Xk ¼ k0 Vðk À k0 Þhey0 ek0 i. the distribution coincides with the exciton wave function vk / 1=ð1 þ k2 Þ2 [4].4 1. In the high density limit we may replace the photon operator by a 186402-2 n eh n .3 1. The parameters uk and vk satisfy the standard BCS algebra [10] 1 hey ek i ¼ v2 ¼ 1 À k . In the low density limit ( % À1:4). photon. electron-hole pairs are fermions. and suffer a phase space ﬁlling effect. which approaches an energy of E=E0 % À1:4. 1(d) is equal to the energy of a polariton Emin % 1:4. hy ¼ k1 k Àvk k0 þ uk y . Photons are true bosonic particles. 1(a) the occupation probability v2 of electron-hole k pairs is shown. the density of electron-hole pairs and photons is nearly equal in this limit [Fig. This gives the condition D : (4) ¼À !À The remaining part of the Hamiltonian may be diagonalized by a transformation ek ¼ uk k0 þ vk y .6 0. This can be explained due to a difference in the particle statistics of the two excitations. The (b) electronhole pair. hence any number of them can be excited with an energy cost !. Furthermore. 1 (color online).1 1 1. This is precisely the opposite behavior to what is expected in the excitonic BEC-BCS crossover. Thus it is favorable to excite photons rather than electron-hole pairs to minimize the total energy. 1(a) reveals that the momentum distribution spreads out to higher momentum states. Demanding that the off-diagonal terms k1 disappear. Figure 1(c) shows the energy per electron-hole pair. the gap energy shown in Fig. the instability towards forming a Cooper pair is weakened with increasing density. In the case of exciton-polaritons.1 1 P where k ¼ À À Xk . are not present due to the assumption of charge neutrality [4].1 c d E/n (3) 1.2 10-2 2 k 3 4 5 25 20 min Ek 2 week ending 29 OCTOBER 2010 Hartree Fock approximation. Meanwhile. (a) The occupation probability v2 of k electron-hole pairs of momentum k for a cavity photon energy of ! ¼ À1 and photon coupling ¼ 0:1. Equations (6)–(8) with (4) are solved selfconsistently to obtain our results. Zero detuning therefore corresponds to a photon energy of !=E0 ¼ À1 (the photon energy is negative since we measure energies relative to the band gap energy). The dotted line shows the 1s exciton wave function for comparison. and hey ek i ¼ hhy hÀk i due to charge neutrality. instead of decreasing in the exciton case. ¼ hai. for the excitonic case. because the electron-hole attraction becomes increasingly screened by the surrounding electrons and holes. electrons and holes of increasingly higher momenta and energy must be occupied in order to increase the particle number. Given that at high density there is inevitably a large number of photons.2 1.4 0. hy hk .3 1.4 1. In a standard BCS state. 1(b)]. What is the origin for this enhanced attraction? Figure 1(b) reveals that at high density the photon number greatly exceeds that of the electron-hole number.001 104 10 µ=-1. where B the Bohr radius is aB ¼ 4@2 =me2 . k P P Ák ¼ k0 Vðk À k0 Þhey0 hy 0 i.0 0.3 1. Fig. 1(d). we use units such that the momentum is measured in units of 1=aB . we may return to the original Hamiltonian (1) to see the consequences.6 vk 2 100 1 1. In our numerical results. (d) gap energy versus chemical potential.2 n eh 1. The lowering of the FIG. D ¼ k hey hy i.

02 Vn The solution of this Hamiltonian is the BCS wave function pﬃﬃﬃ (2) with uk ¼ Àvk ¼ 1= 2. N À 1i.90 b µ = -0. Now we ask to what extent the polariton system possesses BCS features.2 0.6 0.56 µ =-0. (11) k k 2 k k k c ω=0 d k max 1 0. z ¼ ey ek ¼ hy hÀk . In contrast.1 0 µ = -1. the photon operator does not cause pﬃﬃﬃﬃ transitions between the Æ eigenstates: ajÆ. NiÞ= 2.08 week ending 29 OCTOBER 2010 classical c number.PRL 105. using a similar approximation to (9). here the pair wave function becomes broader.5 0 -2 -1. the action of applying the operator A ¼ a does not cause transitions to excited 186402-3 . 2(c)]. For the photon coupling case. the PL spectrum is identical to the familiar Mollow’s triplet spectrum found in resonant ﬂuorescence [12]. Using blue-detuned (more excitonic) polaritons ÉðkÞ more resembles the excitonic BCS state [Fig.5 0. For the exciton coupling. Ni ¼ pﬃﬃﬃ ðj ".5 µ = -1. In terms of Fig.3 0. [7]. Experimentally the excitonic PL is emitted homogeneously in all directions.4 0. We now turn to the photoluminescence (PL) characteristics of the transition between low and high density.36 µ = -1. Discarding all terms that do not contain this factor. In the case of polaritons.04 0. There is. the PL is generally observed by leakage of the photon ﬁeld through the microcavity. For large N. 1(d).5 0 10 -2 10 -1 10 n 0 10 1 10 2 0. 2 of Ref. which has eigenstates for high density jÆ. whereas the photonic PL is emitted perpendicularly to the sample surface. It is also possible to observe the PL via a secondary means. which we consider to be very large a % ) 1. [7] is based on a comparison of the energy scales of the BCS gap energy Emin with the k temperature required for condensation to occur kB TBEC ¼ @2 n=mpol . (12) IðÞ ¼ Re 0 where A is the operator that couples the system to the external PL ﬁeld. in both the low and high density limits. giving the familiar emission centered at the lower polariton energy. we ﬁnd a spectrum as shown in Fig.5 -1 V ω=-E 0 µ -0. either type of coupling gives the same PL spectrum. The singlet pair function ÉðkÞ ¼ uk vk for various chemical potentials as shown for (a) zero detuning ! ¼ ÀE0 (b) blue detuning ! ¼ 0. (c) The singlet pair function peak momenta for detunings shown. The PL spectrum is calculated using [12] Z1 1 hAy ðÞAð0ÞieÀi=@ d. where we used B mpol % 10À5 m0 and aB ¼ 10 nm. we use the Hamiltonian X g X z H ¼ ½þ a þ À ay þ !ay a þ . the state can be described as ‘‘BCS-like’’ if the energy to disassociate a polariton is lower than the thermal excitation energy to prevent a BEC from occurring. which is peaked at nonzero momentum for large densities. we have X H % ½ey hy þ hÀk ek þ 2 !: (9) k Àk k a Ψ 0. the singlet pair function ÉðkÞ ¼ uk vk is peaked near the vicinity of the Fermi momentum and has a width of the order of the inverse of the BCS coherence [11]. 2 (color online).8 0. For the photon coupling only the central peak is present. 1(d). where mpol is the polariton mass. this gives kB TBEC =E0 % 22 000na2 . for densities exk ceeding n % 6:5 Â 107 cmÀ2 . This type of coupling is that meak sured for pure excitons and should also be present in principle for polaritons. giving the result that all current polariton BECs are all in the ‘‘BCS-like’’ regime. In this deﬁnition. 186402 (2010) PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS 0. Experimentally. such densities have already been achieved. hence A ¼ a. The difference here is that instead of the singlet pair function becoming sharper with increasing density. p N À 1iÞ= 2.2 0 0 1 2 k 3 4 5 0. For an excitonic BCS state. Ni % ðjþ. Figure 2(a) shows the singlet pair function for our polariton system. in agreement with Fig. An alternative deﬁnition of a polariton BCS phase may be signaled by the presence of the peak of the singlet pair function at nonzero momentum. Such behavior is also seen in the excitonic BEC-BCS crossover. Evaluating the time correlation function (12) for both types of couplings under a mean ﬁeld approximation. N À 1i Æ j #.3 0. another sense that the polaritons can be classiﬁed as BCS-like. however.16 µ = -1. the exciton coupling does cause a ﬃﬃﬃ transition À jÆ. k ¼ @2 k2 =m.4 0. k k Àk k Àk k and we have explicitly included the semiconductor band gap energy g required to create an electron-hole pair. according to this criterion. The location of this peak has a nonzero momentum above a critical density [Fig. The BCS gap in this limit corresponds to a single excitation of the Hamiltonian. N À 1i À jÀ. rather than merely a crossover between a polariton BEC state to a photon-dominated regime. and m0 is the free electron mass. In the low density limit. this criterion is always much higher than the gap energy Emin . agreeing with the numerical analysis that the average occupation number approaches 1=2 for all k. where N is the number of photons.07 µ = -0. Ni % N jÆ. The reason for this difference is illustrated by the single spin version of (11).40 µ = -1.5 0. from the coupling to the exciton ﬁeld A ¼ À . where þ ¼ ey hy . 2(b)].4 0.06 0.2 0. Examining the high density limit ﬁrst. The criterion given in Ref.2 1 0.1 0 0 2 1.00 FIG. In our units. which has an energy Emin % 2: k (10) Thus with increasing density the BCS gap continues to increase in agreement with Fig. giving the side peaks. (d) The particle-particle interaction energy V and condensate interaction energy Vn as a function of the density. 3(a).10 Ψ 1 2 k 3 4 5 1.

From the results of the self-consistent equations (6)–(8). B 72.3 1. V. A. Szymanska. Rev. which have no interactions with other particles. In the excitonic PL. H. B. which we attribute to the fact that at high density the particles are more likely to be present in a photonic state. Sov. Littlewood. and P.4 0. E [1] J. Deng et al. Szymanska and P. 3(b). Regal and D. M.4 1. [10] M. B 64. H. 1996). H. Phys. B. The condensate selfinteraction energy nV reaches a maximum at intermediate density. The densities required for observing the crossover should be observable in current experimental systems. [12] M. [2] H. Introduction to Superconductivity (McGrawHill. Jin. Phys. Kamide and T. where A is the sample dn dn2 B 2 1 aB 2 A area and E is an energy density. [16] K. 7926 (1998). we use the method presented in Ref. Bristol and Philadelphia.5 10-2 10-1 100 n 101 102 week ending 29 OCTOBER 2010 b Ιmax a excitonic PL γ photonic PL 2γ 3γ/2 Ι max /3 ω −2Ωλ ω ω +2Ωλ FIG. [13] to incorporate the effect of self-interaction on the PL. where X ¼ 1= 2 is the polariton Hopﬁeld coefﬁcient at zero detuning. Zero detuning is assumed in all cases. and P. 54. ` [4] C. the electron-hole pairs have a reduced separation in the high density limit due to the dominant cavity photon ﬁeld. ¼ dE and V ¼ a12 d E . Waldram. 124..1 1. H. In the high density limit the excitonic PL should exhibit a Mollow’s triplet type structure. [8] J. The linewidth narrows again in the high density limit. [11] J. 1997). Savona. where b is a bosonic operator for the effec2 tive theory. Note added in proof. J. [9] J. Solid State Commun. Rev. 2(d). To determine the linewidth of the spectrum. resulting in a half occupancy of v2 . states. 161310(R) (2003). A reservoir coupling is assumed for both cases. Ciuti. Eastham and P. M. Scully and M. 105. R. Keldysh and A. with a asymmetric linewidth with an exponential tail towards high energy. [13] D. Inclusion of nonequilibrium effects resulting from a coupling to an external bath is left as future work. Porras and C.K. P. F. N. B 58. [5] C. 3(b). Comte and P. Tejedor. [14] C. Marchetti. 199 (2002).. the self-interaction energy is in agreement with the polariton-polariton interpﬃﬃﬃ action V % 6E0 jXj4 [14]. B.6 0.. Quattropani. [7] J. Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press. New York. (Paris) 43. Opt. R. Schwendimann. Littlewood. R1 (2007). P. M. Phys. [3] L. Contrary to the exciton case. Eastham. 1069 (1982). Phys. B. Phys. Mol. Nozieres. Kasprzak et al. The central peak of the excitonic PL should exhibit a similar behavior to that shown in Fig. 235101 (2001). The PL spectrum gradually shifts from the lower polariton energy to the cavity photon energy. (b) The photonic PL for the BCS model at all densities. MEXT. S. Keeling. Cambridge. R. V. 1996). At low densities. Technol.PRL 105. This work is supported by the Special Coordination Funds for Promoting Science and Technology. and a peak in the singlet pair function develops.9 1 1. and P. [13] gives the PL spectrum Fig. Ogawa. We have analyzed the crossover between low and high density limits of exciton-polariton condensates using a BCS wave-function approach. originating from the saturation of the electron-hole occupancy. Lett. Keeling. k the system has BCS-like properties in the sense that the pairbreaking energy is less than the energy required for destroying the condensate.2 1. the side peaks of the Mollow’s triplet should disappear at intermediate densities. 409 (2006). the FIRST program for JSPS. C. 93. and NICT. N66001-091-2024. 226403 (2004). Phys. 521 (1968). [6] P. Nature (London) 443. 186402-4 . we use the results of our ground state BCS wave function to obtain the PL emission parameters. Phys. which is by deﬁnition equal to the chemical potential . Tinkham. Kozlov. we became aware that the strong binding of electrons and holes due to the photon ﬁeld was also independently found in Ref. Littlewood.—Recently. Szymanska. 115320 (2005). The self-interaction energy V is shown in Fig. when the saturation effect of the excitons becomes negligible. (a) The PL intensity of the BCS model in the high density limit for the photonic PL and excitonic PL. U. A. [15] M. Science 298. Eastham. Piermarocchi. 056401 (2010). Littlewood. R. due to the decreased interactions. Rev.2 0. Sci. Zubairy. Intuitively we picture this state as a strong cavity photon ﬁeld continuously creating and destroying electron-hole pairs at localized positions in the quantum well.8 1 PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS 0. 1 (2006). Rev. We expect that inclusion of this effect will reduce the energy gap due to pair-breaking dephasing processes [15]. Semicond. Phys. Rev. 186402 (2010) PL intensity 0 0. The peak energy of the PL is the energy of adding a single particle to the system. and P. 103 (2002). M. Keeling. Rev. JETP 27. Adv. Phys. Littlewood. 22. Navy/SPAWAR Grant No. Assuming this is true for all intermediate densities. B 67. The photonic PL shifts from the lower polariton energy towards the cavity photon energy with a broadening of the linewidth due to the increased interactions. 3 (color online). we may write down an effective Hamiltonian for the BCS theory Heff ¼ by b þ Vby by bb. In the intermediate density regime. At. B. Superconductivity of Metals and Cuprates (IOP Publishing. [16]. We note that only the zero center of mass momentum PL is considered in our analysis and we leave calculations of dispersion characteristics as future work. giving the linewidths as shown. Lett. Szymanska. Inputting the condensate interaction energy into the theory of Ref.

- Eric Varoquaux- Superdluid helium interferometry: an introductionUploaded byJelloma
- Nuclear_Physics_SS18_Sheet2.pdfUploaded byIndrajit Kamalanathan
- the War for MeaningUploaded bysam iam / Salvatore Gerard Micheal
- 1d AbsorbtionUploaded bySina
- Spectroscopy SWNTUploaded bysabitavabi
- Ch2TheoryUploaded byUdoy Paul
- solar cellUploaded byKoushik Sarkar
- Black PhosphorusUploaded byferreirasidnei
- 41 - Interaction of Radiation with Matter.pdfUploaded byUltrazord
- Lecture OutlineUploaded byAli
- Unit 1Uploaded byClaire Ye
- DK2015_CH02Uploaded byTalha Yasin
- GUIDELINES FOR A SPACE PROPULSION DEVICE BASED ON HEIM'S QUANTUM THEORYUploaded bystaredsky
- Shadow People - Or Opening Up a Can of WormsUploaded byMarija Komatiasmeni
- MatkoEPICS (Experimental Physics and Industrial Control System) - ”Driver” for Kenwood power supplysvich Sebastian ProjektarbeitUploaded bysebastian_matkovich
- Photon Interaction With Matter (1)Uploaded byShafuan Wan
- Chapter 27 CPUploaded byphuonglehuuyen
- Dental Radiology Text ProblemUploaded bymejjab
- Dissertation KuderaUploaded byAngela Stefan
- God and Quantum Mechanics (PDF): Is the Material World Truly Real? Is the Entire Universe Just a “Simulation” in a Supercomputer?Uploaded byBogdan-John Vasiliu
- Atma cheUploaded bysamurai_jackle
- GCE Rev Spec Physics 09Uploaded bySamuel William Mark Colville
- Development of Copper-doped TiO2 Photocatalyst for Hydrogen Production under Visible LightUploaded byreborn_willy
- Angels and Demons ReviewUploaded by9460
- The Bohr AtomUploaded byHayley Welsh
- Electroluminescence Spectra in Weakly Coupled Single-molecule JunctionsUploaded byDanil Korzhonov
- NUS PHYSICS sample 31.pdfUploaded byHanson Roommate
- Highly Efficient GaAs Solar Cells by Limiting Light Emission AngleUploaded bya k
- David L. Bergman and Charles W. Lucas, Jr.- Physical Models of MatterUploaded byJuiomSDF
- Talent+100+HSC+Reference+HandbookUploaded byEren Sevince