setup for performing homodyne detection of matter - wave fields .
a gas of identical , bosonic atoms is confined in two distinguishable regions of space . in the left region it forms a bose - einstein condensate , that acts as reference system for measuring the condensate fraction of the right system .
a pump - probe laser setup outcouples the atoms from both wells .
the photon flux of the probe beam is constituted by the photon scattered in the outcoupling process and exhibits oscillations whose amplitude depend on the condensate fraction of the right system , and which vanish when this is zero .
the first - order correlation function of a quantum gas can be determined in an extension of this setup , where the shaded regions denoted by @xmath0 and @xmath1 correspond to the spatial regions of the quantum gas trapped in a single well . in this case
, the amplitude of the photon flux oscillations provides a measurement of the spatial correlation function as a function of the distance @xmath2 .
detail on the parameters are reported in the text . , scaledwidth=34.0% ]    the measurement technique , which is mostly employed in experiments with ultracold atoms , is based on time of flight @xcite .
used in different setups , it allows one to determine the quantum state of matter @xcite
. the most recent demonstration of in - situ imaging of atoms in optical lattices @xcite has opened further exciting directions for probing and manipulating atoms in periodic arrays @xcite . in addition , the remarkable progress in coupling ultracold atomic gases with high - finesse optical resonators @xcite has generated a renewed interest in revealing the correlation functions of matter by photodetection of the scattered light .
this progress opens , amongst several others , the possibility to monitor properties of the quantum state of matter in a non - destructive way @xcite .
photons emitted by rayleigh scattering , and in general in a pump - probe type of experiment , have been used in order to characterize the quantum state of atomic gases @xcite .
they deliver information on the structure form factor of the quantum gas and thus on the density and density - density correlations @xcite .
proposals for optical detection of certain quantum states of matter have appeared in the literature @xcite . to our knowledge , however , a setup has not yet been identified , which would allow one measure the mean value of the atomic field operator by means of the scattered light .
this measure would be analogous to homodyne detection of light fields @xcite , and specifically allow one to determine the condensate fraction of a quantum gas @xcite by photodetection .    in this article
we propose a setup in which detection of the photons scattered by a quantum gas allows one to determine the mean value of the atomic field .
the setup for determining the condensate fraction is sketched in fig .
[ fig : homodynesetup ] , and is based on an interferometer for bose - einstein condensates ( bec ) realized in refs .
we establish a direct connection between our theoretical model and the experimental setup in ref .
@xcite , and then focus on a scheme in which the second system is not necessarily a bec . we then show that this setup allows one to determine the condensate fraction of the second system by measuring the flux of the scattered photon .
furthermore , we argue that this scheme can be extended to determine the first - order correlation function of an atomic gas , when the two illuminated regions belong to the same quantum gas .
the dynamics is based on first creating entanglement between the scattered photon and the scattering atom of the quantum gas , and then on performing an operation similar to a quantum eraser @xcite , thereby allowing one to measure the correlation functions of matter in the flux of the scattered light .
this article is organized as follows . in sec .
[ sec:1 ] the setup and the theoretical model are introduced . in sec .
[ sec:2 ] a formal connection is derived between the photon flux and the correlation functions of the scattering atoms . in sec .
[ sec:3 ] the photon flux is evaluated for three exemplary cases : when the scattering systems are two bose - einstein condensates at zero temperature , when they are at different temperatures , and when one of the systems is composed by ultracold atoms in a two - dimensional optical lattice . in sec .
[ sec:4 ] it is discussed how this setup may allow one to measure the first - order correlation function .
the conclusions are drawn in sec .
[ sec:5 ] .
the appendices report details of the calculations presented in secs .
[ sec:2 ] , [ sec:3 ] , and [ sec:4 ] .
a realization of the setup we consider in this paper is depicted in fig .
[ fig : homodynesetup ] . here
, ultracold bosonic atoms of mass @xmath3 are initially prepared in the stable electronic state @xmath4 and confined by the ( state - dependent ) potential @xmath5 .
the atoms , that are illuminated by the lasers , are coherently coupled to the electronic state @xmath6 , which is stable and not confined : the outcoupled atoms propagate freely in space .    in this section
we introduce the hamiltonian and the physical quantities which are at the basis of our analysis .
we denote by @xmath7 the hamiltonian governing the dynamics of photons and atoms , which we decompose into the sum @xmath8 with @xmath9 the hamiltonian governing the atoms dynamics in absence of interaction with the lasers , @xmath10 the hamiltonian for the free , transverse electromagnetic ( e.m . )
field , while @xmath11 describes the coupling between states @xmath4 and @xmath6 induced by coherent raman scattering .
hamiltonian @xmath12 includes the dynamical stark shift due to off - resonant coupling between atoms and e.m .- field modes .
these hamiltonians are reported in a second - quantized description of matter- and photon - fields . in detail
, @xmath13 gives the energy of the transverse electromagnetic field in free space ( and is reported without the vacuum energy ) , where @xmath14 labels a mode of the e.m .- field at wave vector @xmath15 , polarization @xmath16 , and frequency @xmath17 , with @xmath18 the velocity of light .
the operators @xmath19 and @xmath20 annihilate and create , respectively , a photon in mode @xmath14 , and obey the bosonic commutation relation @xmath21=\delta_{\lambda,\lambda'}$ ] .    the atomic hamiltonian @xmath9 is conveniently rewritten as @xmath22 , where @xmath23 describes the atoms dynamics when the atoms are in the electronic state @xmath24 ( at frequency @xmath25 ) . here
@xmath26 and @xmath27 are the annihilation and creation operator , respectively for a bosonic atom at position @xmath28 and in the electronic state @xmath29 , obeying the commutation relation @xmath30=\delta_{j , k}\delta({{\bf r}}-{{\bf r}}')$ ] .
parameter @xmath31 is the strength of @xmath32-wave scattering between the atoms in state @xmath24 , with @xmath33 the @xmath32-wave scattering length in the corresponding electronic state @xcite .
hamiltonian term @xmath34 describes @xmath32-wave scattering between an atom in electronic state @xmath4 and an atom in electronic state @xmath6 : we do not report its explicit form as we will consider situations for which these types of collisions can be neglected .
the interested reader can find the corresponding term , for instance , in refs .
@xcite .
the hamiltonian terms describing the interactions between photons and atoms are given using normal ordering @xcite .
they include a term describing coherent raman coupling between the states @xmath4 and @xmath6 , in which a photon in mode @xmath35 is scattered into mode @xmath36 and vice versa .
raman transitions follow from a pump - probe type of excitation , and the corresponding hamiltonian reads @xmath37 \ , , \ ] ] with the position - dependent coupling strength @xmath38 .
this interaction can be tailored by means of a laser , pumping the atoms , and a cavity mode , acting as a probe , that are both far - detuned from the atomic excited state but are set close to resonance with an atomic raman transition .
for later convenience we denote by the quantity @xmath39 the difference between the frequencies of the two e.m.f .- modes .
moreover , we assume @xmath40 , i.e. , the two lasers drive quasi - resonantly the raman transition coupling the stable electronic states @xmath4 and @xmath6 .
the interaction with the pump and probe laser also induces a dynamical stark shift , whose corresponding hamiltonian reads ( in normally - ordered form ) @xmath41 where the parameter @xmath42 has the dimension of an angular frequency .
it can be written as @xmath43 , with @xmath44 the rabi frequency of the mode coupling the transition @xmath45 and @xmath46 the detuning between the mode and the atomic transition frequencies ( the lamb shifts are included in the frequencies of the atomic states ) .    in the following
we will assume that the pump and probe fields are traveling waves with wave vectors @xmath47 .
in this case , the raman - coupling strength @xmath48 reads @xmath49 with @xmath50 and @xmath51
.      we will now provide more details on the potential which confines the atoms .
we will assume that the atoms in state @xmath6 propagate freely , namely , @xmath52 in eq .
( [ eqn : hamoutcouplgen:1 ] ) , which we set equal to zero .
the atoms in state @xmath4 are trapped by potential @xmath53 .
this potential confines the atoms in two spatially separated regions around the two potential minima , which are at distance @xmath2 and , specifically , are localized at the points @xmath54 and @xmath55 . the potential can be then decomposed in the sum @xmath56 , with @xmath57 the potential center at @xmath58 and @xmath59 .
the two atomic clouds at each well are initially uncorrelated , and there is no tunneling between the two spatial region .    in principle , hence , the atoms in the two regions of space are distinguishable .
it is then useful to consider the partition @xmath60 , where we denote by @xmath61 and @xmath62 the field operators which do not vanish on the left and right region of space , respectively , such that @xmath30=\delta_{j , k}\delta({{\bf r}}-{{\bf r}}')$ ] for @xmath63 @xcite . using these definitions
, we can write @xmath64 , with @xmath65 and where we have set @xmath66 . with this representation , the hamiltonian describing the interaction with the lasers takes the form @xmath67 \,.\ ] ] we note that our model is an extension to the one studied in refs .
@xcite , where the authors studied the outcoupling of atoms from a single bec by means of _ classical _ raman lasers . by considering the quantum dynamics of the interaction between photons and atoms , we take into account the quantum fluctuations of the light field due to the scattering process , which are discarded in @xcite . we will indeed show that these fluctuations give access to some correlation functions of the scattering system .
we now study the properties of the scattered photons by considering the photon field operators in heisenberg picture .
the heisenberg equations of motion are determined assuming that the coupling between matter and photons is sufficiently weak to be treated in second - order perturbation theory . in this limit
the operators for the photonic modes read    @xmath68 \psi_2^{(0)}({\bf r},\tau ) a_2(0 ) \ , , \\
\label{eqn : heisenberg:2 } a_2(t)&=&a_2(0 ) { \rm e}^{-{\rm i}(\omega_2 t+\phi_2(t))}-{\rm i}\,{\rm e}^{-{\rm i}\omega_2 t}\int_0^t { \rm d}\tau\ , { \rm e}^{-{\rm i}\omega_{12}\tau } \int { \rm d}{\bf r}\;\gamma({\bf r } )   \psi_2^{(0)\dagger}({\bf r},\tau)\bigl[\psi_l^{(0)}({\bf r},\tau)+\psi_r^{(0)}({\bf r},\tau)\bigr ] a_1(0 ) \ , , \end{aligned}\ ] ]    where @xmath69 .
the physical origin of the individual terms on the right - hand side ( rhs ) can be simply identified .
the first term on the rhs of both equations is the free - field component .
it is characterised by a time - dependent phase @xmath70 , which is proportional to the atomic density in the electronic state @xmath24 .
when the born approximation can be performed , it is a density - dependent phase shift of the field mode , with the form    @xmath71    since all atoms are initially prepared in the electronic state @xmath4 , this density - dependent shift can be measured in the frequency shift the field - mode @xmath35 after it has interacted with the atomic medium .
this would allow a quantum - non - demolition measurement of the density of the medium integrated over the path along which light propagates @xcite .
it is interesting to note that in the considered setup this shift contains also the operator @xmath72 and its adjoint .
hence , its measurement would reveal tunneling events between the wells .
this is however not relevant for the case considered in this work , since we assume that there is no tunneling between the two separate wells .
the second term on the rhs establishes a direct proportionality relation between the photonic and the matter - wave fields @xmath73 and @xmath74 ( @xmath75 and @xmath76 ) .
it shows , in particular , that the source term of field @xmath75 is the coherent overlap of the field scattered from the right and from the left wells . in this shape
the outcoupling process in this system resembles a beam - splitter operation .
this property establishes an analogy with an interferometric setup , which we will exploit in order to perform homodyne detection of matter - wave field . differing from a simple interferometer
, however , atoms and photons are correlated by the scattering process .
this important difference is at the basis of the dynamics we observe .
before we discuss the signal at the photodetector , we will introduce few approximations which will notably simplify the treatment . in first place
we neglect atomic collisions between outcoupled atoms in state @xmath6 , since we assume that the gas of outcoupled atoms is at very low densities .
this regime also permits us to neglecting collisions between outcoupled atoms and trapped atoms in state @xmath4 @xcite .
the quantity we analyse in this paper is the flux of photons of mode 2 , namely , the rate of change of the photon number in the mode at frequency @xmath77 .
formally , the photon flux is given by the equation @xmath78 where the expectation value @xmath79 is taken over the initial state of the atoms and the e.m .- field .
the photon flux , integrated over the detection time , gives the integrated intensity of the field at the detector .
it can be verified that @xmath80 where the proportionality factor is the mean number of photons in mode 1 .
this equality shows indeed that flux of scattered photons and of the corresponding outcoupled atoms carry the same information .    for the specific setup we consider the photon flux can be rewritten as the sum of two contributions , @xmath81 with    @xmath82    where @xmath83 is a scaling factor , proportional to the number of photons in mode 1 . here , @xmath84}\left\langle
\psi_2({\bf r'},t ' ) \psi_2^{\dagger}({\bf r},t)\right\rangle \ , , \label{fun : f } \nonumber \\\end{aligned}\ ] ] where the initial state is the vacuum state of the e.m .
field except for mode 1 and 2 , which are assumed to be in coherent states with non - vanishing photon number , while all atoms are in internal state @xmath85 and at equilibrium in the grand - canonical ensemble at temperature @xmath86 .
the atoms in state @xmath6 propagate freely and do not undergo collisions , since we assume that the density is very low .
therefore , eq .  ( [ fun : f ] ) can be cast in the form @xmath87 } \
, , \ ] ] with @xmath88 the recoil frequency and @xmath89 the two - photon detuning .
in order to obtain explicit expressions for the correlation functions @xmath90 it is convenient to work in the interaction picture with respect to the grand canonical ensemble @xmath91 , where @xmath92 is the chemical potential of the atoms in either the right or left cloud and @xmath93 .
the new atomic field operators are obtained from the ones in heisenberg picture with respect to @xmath9 by replacing @xmath94 . from now on we will denote by @xmath95 the atomic field operators in heisenberg picture with respect to @xmath96 .
we now discuss how the considered setup can be used in order to measure the mean value of the atomic field operator by means of photons .
we first note that the photon flux is the sum of two terms : the component @xmath97 , that is the sum of the flux from each well , and the component @xmath98 , that arises from the coherent superposition of a photon ( atom ) scattered by the wells .
we will denote @xmath97 by `` background contribution '' and @xmath98 by `` interference contribution '' . in absence of initial correlations ,
this latter term is proportional to the product of the mean value of the field operators @xmath99 .
let us now consider the case in which , say , the left well confines weakly - interacting atoms forming a bose - einstein condensate . under this assumption
the atomic field operator can be written as @xcite @xmath100 where @xmath101 is the macroscopic wave function , which solves the gross - pitaevskii equation for the quantum gas in the left well of the potential ( with chemical potential @xmath102 ) .
then , when the order parameter of the left condensate is known , the interference term will deliver the mean value of the field operator in the right well .    in the following we use eq .
( [ eqn : psisplit ] ) in the equations for the background contribution to the photon flux , eq .
( [ f : b ] ) , and for the interference term , eq .
( [ f : i ] )
. in particular , we will take @xmath103 and assume that both @xmath104 and @xmath105 are real valued .
hence , @xmath106 is the density of condensed atoms , while the phase @xmath105 is assumed to be constant in space ( hence discarding the possibility of superfluid currents in the bose - einstein condensate @xcite ) .
the background contribution can be decomposed into the sum of the photon flux from the left and from the right well , @xmath107 .
since we make a specific assumption on the quantum state of the gas trapped in the left well , we can provide an explicit form for @xmath108 .
for this purpose , we consider the integrand @xmath109 in @xmath108 and observe that it can be splitted into two terms : @xmath110\,,\nonumber\\\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath111 accounts for the contribution of the noncondensed atoms to the photon flux . here , @xmath112
\right\rangle   \,\ ] ] is the spectral density @xcite , with @xmath113^ { -1}$ ] .
similar expressions can be found for the background contribution of the quantum gas in the right well .    in order to gain insight on the equations we just derived
, we assume that the gas can be considered homogeneous .
this assumption allows us to write the spectral density as @xmath114 .
we then inspect the equations for the flux using the momentum representation for the atomic field operator .
the terms giving the contribution to the photon flux from the left cloud can be cast in the form @xcite    [ eqnket : fcb ] @xmath115    where @xmath116 is the spectral weight function , which is the fourier transform of @xmath117 and gives strength of the collective excitations at wavevector @xmath118 and frequency @xmath119 , weighted by the bose function @xmath120 @xcite .
the other parameters are the volume @xmath121 in which the atoms of the left well are confined , the fourier transform of the macroscopic wave function @xmath122 , and the frequency @xmath123 giving the effective detuning of the laser from the collective transition . moreover , in eqs .
we have introduced the quantity @xmath124 that is proportional to the diffraction function @xmath125 , enforcing energy conservation for long interaction times @xmath126 . in particular , @xmath127 for @xmath128 , with @xmath129 dirac - delta function @xcite .
definition contains a time - dependent phase and highlights that the corresponding factor tends to unity in the limit in which energy conservation applies .
nevertheless , since we are going to also consider intermediate times , we will systematically keep this time - dependent phase in the equations for the photon flux .
the integrals in eqs .
runs over all values of the atomic momentum @xmath118 .
the integrands are the product of the momentum distribution at @xmath130 and of the diffraction function : the first accounts for the effect of the photon recoil @xmath131 on the atomic distribution due to the outcoupling process , while the diffraction function imposes energy conservation in the scattering process .
equations  ( [ eqnket : fcb]a ) and  ( [ eqnket : fcb]b ) show thus that the contributions to the flux come from the total number of condensed and noncondensed atoms , respectively , which fulfill energy and momentum conservation of the scattering process .
+ we remark that according to eq .
( [ eqn : mlequiv ] ) , the flux evaluated in eqs .
( [ eqnket : fcb ] ) gives also the corresponding component of the atomic flux .
the latter agrees with the corresponding expressions derived in ref .
@xcite for the atomic flux outcoupled from a single bec by classical fields .      in order to determine the interference contribution to the photon flux , @xmath132 in eq .
, one needs the explicit form of the correlation functions @xmath133 , @xmath134 . for the considered setup , however
, one can already make general statements . in absence of initial correlations ,
in fact , they are the product of the mean value of the field operators in each well , and thus take the form @xmath135 while @xmath136^*$ ] .    from eq .
( [ g : lr ] ) one observes that these correlation functions are proportional to the mean value of atomic field operator @xmath137 . when this is zero , the interference contribution vanishes . otherwise , the amplitude of this term is proportional to the condensate fraction of the quantum gas in the right well .
we remark that the noncondensed atoms in the left well do not contribute to the signal , since ( i ) there are no initial correlations between the atoms in the left and right wells , and ( ii ) the mean value @xmath138 .    in the shape of eq .
( [ g : lr ] ) the analogy with homodyne detection , as it is performed with light fields , can be drawn : the condensate in the left well plays the role of the local oscillator @xcite .
identifying the analon of the phase of the local oscillator is however a more delicate issue , that deserves some more analysis .
for this purpose , we first assume that the mean value @xmath137 can be evaluated within a mean - field approach , such that @xmath139 , with @xmath140 real - valued function and @xmath141 real constant .
the integral in eq .
( [ f : i ] ) can then be cast in the form    @xmath142\ , , \label{f : i:2}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    with @xmath143 and @xmath144 equation evidentiates that the interference contribution is an oscillating signal . the phase of the oscillation , however , depends on time and oscillates with a frequency determined by the difference @xmath145 between the chemical potentials , while the phase offset is determined by the relative phase between the two quasi - condensate . since the two quantum gases are independent , this relative phase will be defined only for a single experimental run @xcite .
some remarks on the oscillating behaviour of the interference term are now in order . in first place , for the example considered in eq .
( [ f : i:2 ] ) the photon flux oscillates in time with frequency @xmath145
. this oscillation is observed , however , only when one chooses a time - window at the detector @xmath146 such that @xmath147 .
indeed , the photon flux is composed by two components : one is constituted by the atoms extracted from the left condensate , which interfere with the atoms extracted from the right trap during the time interval @xmath146 ( first term on the rhs of eq . ) . the second component is constituted by the atoms extracted from the right trap , which interfere with the atoms extracted from the left condensate during the time interval @xmath146 ( second term on the rhs of eq . ) .
this interference is analogous to the interference between two lasers at different frequencies : interference fringes are observed provided that the time window of the detector is sufficiently small so not to resolve the detuning between the lasers @xcite . as in the case of two independent lasers ,
there is no well defined phase offset : the relative phase is defined only for a single experimental run , while the average over a statistically significant number of runs gives no interference pattern @xcite .
differing from the situation of two laser beams @xcite , however , photon scattering here creates correlations among the scattered photon , the corresponding outcoupled atom , and the quantum gas .
this correlation is a form of a which - way information , that in general washes out any interference in the photon flux @xcite and can be considered as a form of photon - atoms entanglement @xcite .
oscillations in the photon flux , and hence interference , can be recovered if ( i ) the beam of atoms outcoupled from one well overlap spatially with the wave function of the atoms in the second trap and ( ii ) if there are either initial correlations between the atoms in the two wells or if they both possess a non - vanishing condensate fraction .    condition ( i ) corresponds to a quantum eraser @xcite : when it is fulfilled , in fact , the outcoupled atom is no more entangled with the scattered photon .
we will see in the following that it can be fulfilled for certain geometries and after a certain time , corresponding to the time needed for the outcoupled atoms to travel to the second well .    condition ( i ) alone is however not sufficient .
the photon is not only correlated with the outcoupled atom , but also with the scattering system .
therefore , only when either the atoms in left and right system are correlated ( via e.g. tunneling events which may wash out the which - way information @xcite ) or when these correlations are partly classical , as it occurs when there is a finite condensate fraction in both systems , then interference can be reestablished .
this is essentially condition ( ii ) .
we remark that oscillations of the photon flux as a function of time have been observed in this setup in refs .
@xcite . here
, they have been discussed in terms of josephson junction , taking into account the possibility that the outcoupled atoms from one condensate can be then retrapped in the second well by means of an inverse raman process .
the discussion we just reported provides a quantum optical interpretation of the phenomenon , that is valid for short times , when the quantum state of the scattering atoms is not substantially perturbed by the scattering process .
we now analyse the onset of oscillations in time .
as we mentioned , the photon flux starts oscillating after a finite time has elapsed from the beginning of the experiment .
this can be also seen in our theory , by performing the integral over @xmath15 in eq .
( [ f : i:2 ] ) . in app .
[ app : int ] we show that @xmath98 can be recast in the form @xmath148 , with    [ eqn : fcint_postext ] @xmath149    here , @xmath150 is the overlap between the left and the right condensate , with one being displaced by the amount @xmath151 , with the recoil velocity @xmath152 that is acquired by the outcoupled atom by scattering the photon .
this overlap vanishes at time @xmath153 , i.e. , when the outcoupling lasers are switched on ( recall that the two clouds initially do not overlap ) .
we note that the overlap integral is zero at all times if @xmath154 and @xmath155 are orthogonal , while it may become maximum after a certain time , when @xmath154 and @xmath155 are parallel , say , pointing along the positive @xmath156 axis . in this case , the component @xmath157 may not vanish and can be interpreted as the contribution to the interference flux @xmath158 from the outcoupled atoms that propagate from left to right ( for the term @xmath159 this is just opposite ) .
interference will set in , provided that a sufficiently long time has elapsed to warrant overlap .
this corresponds to times @xmath160 with @xmath161 where @xmath162 is the effective distance of the two systems taking into account their width @xmath163 . in terms of an interference experiment , for times @xmath160
the which - way information has been erased and oscillations in the photon flux can be observed .    in interferometric setups
the amount of visibility and which - way information are related by an inequality @xcite .
it is therefore useful to determine a visibility of the oscillating signal , as it contains information on the properties of the scattering systems .
a visibility can be defined for sufficiently long times , averaging over several oscillating periods after the instant @xmath164 , and will be proportional to the amplitude of the oscillations of the photon flux , hence to the product of the condensate fractions of both systems .
we remark , once again , that oscillations can be observed only in a single experimental run , while they will disappear after performing an ensemble average .
therefore , this behaviour can only be measured in systems , whose properties are not deeply modified by the outcoupling of atoms .
when this is not verified , the presence of a condensed fraction in the right system can be revealed by performing an ensemble average over a sufficient large number of experiments , in which the signal is monitored for sufficiently short times , warranting that the properties of the quantum gas have not been significantly modified , and taking the statistical distribution of the intensity of the photon flux at a given instant of time .
an amplitude can be extracted from the width of the distribution by taking into account the finite width of the diffraction function .
the theory presented so far will be now applied to some specific examples .
the main idea is to use the setup in fig .
[ fig : homodynesetup ] in order to determine the mean value of the field operator of a quantum gas , using a bose - einstein condensate at known temperature as reference system .
such setup is a matter - wave analogon of homodyne detection in quantum optics .
the individual elements can be so identified : the bec acts as a local oscillator , the outcoupling procedure as beam splitter , the relative phase can be varied by changing the interwell distance .
the information on the atomic gas is carried by both scattered photons and outcoupled atoms : homodyne detection of the scattered field , hence , allows one in principle to determine the mean value of the quadrature of the atomic field operator .
we first discuss the case in which two bec are trapped in the left and right well , respectively , and are both illuminated by the pump and probe beams .
the outcoupled atoms from both condensates propagate along the direction determined by the distance between the minima of both wells , and overlap after the time @xmath164 has elapsed .
the scattered photons are revealed at a detector in the far - field .
this setup has been realized in the experiment reported in refs .
@xcite , where time - dependent oscillations in the atom and photon flux were measured . here , we apply the theoretical model developed so far and find it reproduces qualitatively the results of these experiments . moreover , we discuss the results in the light of question addressed in the present work .    we assume two bec with equal number of atoms @xmath165 and temperature @xmath86 , that are confined either in the left or right well .
the wells are described by the potential @xmath166 with @xmath167 , and @xmath168 denotes the constant offset between the two traps . for simplicity
we take that both bec are at zero temperature , @xmath169 , and the atoms weakly interact , such that the contribution of the noncondensed atoms to the photon flux is small and can be neglected . in this limit
the chemical potential of both condensates is equal and given by @xmath170 . with definition ( [ eqn : trappot ] ) then @xmath171 and @xmath172 .
the photon flux is evaluated using the thomas - fermi approximation for the condensate wave functions @xcite , @xmath173^{1/2}\ , , \ ] ] where @xmath174 is the chemical potential at zero temperature and @xmath175 is the size of the ground state of a harmonic oscillator with frequency @xmath176 .
the condensate macroscopic wave function has size @xmath177 .
its fourier transform reads @xmath178 ( for the right condensate @xmath179 ) , where @xmath180 is the fourier transform of the macroscopic wave function centered at the origin and is real valued . in particular , @xmath181 where @xmath182 is a scalar and @xmath183 the bessel function of second order of the variable @xmath184 defined as @xmath185 , see @xcite .
the integral for the interference contribution to the photon flux in eq .
( [ f : i:2 ] ) can be then cast in the form    @xmath186\,.\ ] ]    this equation can be simplified , taking that both @xmath154 and @xmath155 point along the positive @xmath156-direction . following the derivation reported in app .
[ app : ketterle ] , we find that the total flux can be approximated by the expression @xmath187 \ , , \ ] ]    where @xmath188 and @xmath189 $ ] is a gaussian of width @xmath190 . equation shows that the photon flux starts oscillating for times @xmath160 , with @xmath191 , namely , when the outcoupled atoms from one condensate have reached the second one .
the time - dependent oscillations have frequency @xmath192 and amplitude @xmath193 the expression in eq .
( [ eqn : ftpostot ] ) has been obtained neglecting the momentum dependence of the trapped clouds ( this approximation is verified in app .
[ app : ketterle ] ) and the contribution of the noncondensed fraction .
we note that , although oscillations as a function of time are observed provided that @xmath194 , nevertheless their visibility ( which corresponds to @xmath195 ) is always smaller than unity , @xmath196 for @xmath194 .
this can be understood considering that due to energy conservation in the scattering process , a scattered photon carries partial information about from which cloud it was scattered .
we now turn our attention to the phase offset , characterising the oscillations of the photon flux as a function of time in eq .
( [ eqn : ftpostot ] ) .
this phase offset is here given by the quantity @xmath197 , where @xmath198 is the relative phase between the two bec , which can take any value ( we refer to the discussion in sec .
[ sec : phase ] ) , and by the quantity @xmath199which is the phase the outcoupled atoms accumulate when travelling from left to the right well ( the corresponding phase offset for the outcoupled atoms travelling from the right to the left well is given in app .
[ app : ketterle ] ) .
this phase can be varied by either tuning the laser frequency , and thus @xmath200 , or changing the distance between the minima of the two wells .
the phase offset in eq .
agrees with the one reported in ref .
@xcite , that was derived from a phenomenological model . in ref .
@xcite , in particular , the rate of change of the difference in phase offset between atoms outcoupled to the left and atoms outcoupled to the right was measured as a function of the bragg - frequency @xmath200 , and found in agreement with the prediction of eq .
( [ eqn : phaseoffset ] ) .
we also note that our theory predicts correctly the oscillation period observed in the experiment , and also accounts for the fact why the interference current needs some time to build up .
the linear response treatment we apply , however , does not predict any decrease in the visibility of the interference pattern with time , in marked contrast with the experimental results .
possible reasons for the decrease in visibility in the experimental data are depletion of the condensate and heating of the sample , which could be due to spontaneous rayleigh scattering events @xcite .
these effects are not taken into account in our model , but could be introduced by means of quantum langevin equations , using a formalism similar to the one developed in ref .
@xcite .
photon flux @xmath201 ( in units of the background contribution @xmath202 ) as a function of time ( in units of @xmath203 ) and of the angle @xmath204 at which the atoms are emitted .
the photon flux is computed by numerically integrating eq .
( [ eqn : fluxesmomentumketterle ] ) .
the condensates are composed by @xmath205 sodium atoms in a spherical harmomic trap of frequency @xmath206 .
the scattering length is @xmath207 with @xmath208 bohr radius .
the other parameters are @xmath209 , @xmath210 , @xmath211 , @xmath212 , @xmath213 and @xmath214 . ]
we finally discuss the dependence of the photon flux on time and on the angle of emission of the outcoupled atoms , thus for geometries where the direction of emission @xmath155 of the outcoupled atoms forms an angle @xmath204 with the vector @xmath215 . for simplicity we assume that both vectors lie in the @xmath216 plane .
the calculation is performed by numerically integrating eq .
( [ eqn : fluxesmomentumketterle ] ) .
figure  [ fig : fluxesmomentum ] displays the photon flux @xmath201 as a function of time and of the emission angle @xmath204 .
oscillations as a function of time are observed for values of the angle about @xmath217 , corresponding to the atoms propagating in the direction parallel to @xmath218 .
the period of the oscillation is @xmath219 , independent of the angle of emission .
the oscillations disappear for angles in the interval @xmath220 : the photon flux is here solely given by the background contribution @xmath202 . for these angles , in fact , at all times there is no spatial overlap between the wavefunction of the outcoupled atoms and the wavefunction of the trapped atoms in the other well . indeed , from a simple geometric argument one finds that the overlap vanishes for angle @xmath221 and @xmath222 .
this implies that the setup must be so constructed , that the atoms outcoupled from one well could in principle be transferred , by a raman process , into the second well .
this property is the key element on which the analogy to a josephson junction has been drawn @xcite .
it is also basically the way in which a quantum eraser is realised in this setup .
we refer the reader to the discussion on the properties of this quantum interference process in sec .
[ sec : phase ] .
we now show how the setup of ref .
@xcite could be used in order to determine the temperature of a bose - einstein condensate , using as reference a second bec at known temperature . for this purpose
, we make the same assumptions as in the previous section , with the difference that while the left gas is a bec at temperature @xmath169 , the gas in the right well is a bec at temperature @xmath86 to be determined .
we further assume that the thomas - fermi approximation can be performed also for the right condensate .
hence , the chemical potential of the second condensate can be written as @xmath223 , with @xmath224 the critical temperature for the noninteracting gas in a harmonic trap , while the size of the macroscopic wave function of the right condensate scales with @xmath225 , see @xcite . using these relations the integral for the interference contribution to the photon flux
can be cast in the form    @xmath226\,,\end{aligned}\ ] ]    with @xmath227 .
the integral depends on the temperature both through a scaling factor as well as the function @xmath228 in the integrand , while the phases depend on the temperature of the second bec via the chemical potential of the right bec , which enters in the quantity @xmath229 with @xmath230 .
we note that @xmath132 oscillates as a function of time with both frequency and amplitude which depend on the temperature of the second condensate . for @xmath231 , in particular , one finds that @xmath232 , where @xmath233 is the condensate fraction in the right trap .
figure  ( [ fig : flrtemperature]a ) displays @xmath234 as function of time and temperature @xmath86 of the right condensate , when the trap is spherical .
the oscillations are visible for times @xmath160 .
the oscillation frequency depends on @xmath86 , as one can clearly observe from the figure @xcite .
the dependence of the amplitude of the oscillation on the temperature is visible in fig .
( [ fig : flrtemperature]a ) and is singled out in fig .
( [ fig : flrtemperature]b ) , where the amplitude @xmath235 \ , , \ ] ] evaluated at times @xmath160 , is displayed as a function of @xmath86 in units of @xmath236 .
the red dashed curve represents the squared root of the condensate fraction , @xmath237 , and is reported for comparison .
function @xmath238 decreases monotonically as the temperature increases from @xmath169 , and vanishes at the critical temperature @xmath239 ( which takes into account the effect of the interactions and is such that @xmath240 ) @xcite .
we now assume that the quantum system in the right trap is a two - dimensional optical lattice , where the parameters can be tuned so that the ultracold atomic gas is either in a mott - insulator or superfluid state , while the left system is a bec at @xmath169 . within a mean - field treatment , in the superfluid phase
a nonvanishing superfluid order parameter would give rise to a time - oscillating behaviour of the photon flux @xcite .
before we start , we recall that the mott - insulator / superfluid transition in two dimensions has been experimentally characterised in ref . @xcite , and the condensate fraction has been measured in ref .
@xcite , while bragg scattering by this system was recently reported in ref .
@xcite .    here , we argue that the photon flux may allow one to detect the superfluid order parameter , and thus monitor the quantum state of the system across the phase transition .
we note , however , that a measurement based on outcoupling atoms from the optical lattice will change the phase of the atoms , if they have been prepared in the mott - insulator phase . for this specific situation , indeed , the approximation we make by treating photon scattering as a weak perturbation of the many - body state remains valid as long as the scattering is performed over a time - scale in which the creation of the local defect does not affect the rest of the system . this time scale will be inversely proportional to the sound velocity with which a perturbation propagates in the corresponding superfluid state .
this restriction shows that this measurement procedure will not provide a reliable estimate of the superfluid order parameter close to the phase transition point .    keeping this in mind ,
let us now assume that the two atomic gases are at @xmath169 and tightly confined in the @xmath156-direction by a harmonic potential , so that the motional degrees of freedom in the @xmath156-direction are frozen out and the systems are essentially two dimensional .
the left potential is assumed to be a highly - anisotropic harmonic trap and right potential is a two - dimensional optical lattice .
they read @xmath241 with @xmath242 , while @xmath243 is the height of the optical lattice potential and @xmath244 the spatial periodicity in the transverse directions .    assuming that the left quantum gas forms a weakly - interacting bose - einstein condensate at @xmath169 , and that @xmath245 , with @xmath246 the chemical potential of the left condensate , then the macroscopic wave function reads @xmath247 , with @xmath248 is the planar density of condensed atoms in the left trap ( which is here assumed to be constant , under the condition that the laser beams illuminates the center of the condensate ) and @xmath249 is the motional ground state of the harmonic oscillator in the @xmath156-direction .
the wave function for the right quantum gas is here given assuming the tight - binding limit .
using the wannier decomposition , in the single - band limit one finds @xmath250 where @xmath251 is the wannier function centered at @xmath252 ( @xmath253 ) and @xmath254 annihilates an atom at the lattice site with @xmath255 and @xmath256 .
the corresponding bose - hubbard model reads  @xcite @xmath257 with @xmath258 the number of atoms at site @xmath259 , @xmath260 the hopping rate , @xmath261 the onsite interaction , and @xmath262 the chemical potential for the right system .
we note that the two - dimensional limit is consistent when @xmath263 . in the superfluid phase the expectation value of operator @xmath264 over the lattice ground state does not vanish and
is a constant , @xmath265 , and the wavefunction for the superfluid fraction reads @xmath266 .
the photon flux , and in particular the interference contribution , can now be evaluated using these quantities . for simplicity , in the following
we assume that the geometry of the laser is such that @xmath155 is parallel to the vector @xmath154 .
an analytical expression can be determined using the gaussian ansatz for the wannier functions @xcite and shows that @xmath267 and is a convolution of signals oscillating with phase @xmath268 , weighted by the occupation of the momentum @xmath269 fulfilling energy conservation .
we evaluate @xmath132 by numerically integrating eq .  .
the superfluid order parameter @xmath270 is determined numerically within the mean - field treatment of the bose - hubbard model  @xcite .
figure  [ fig : flrandfa](a ) displays the interference contribution @xmath132 as a function of time and of the ratio @xmath271 between hopping strength and the onsite interaction , with @xmath272 the coordination number .
this ratio is assumed to be varied by changing the onsite interaction @xmath261 , while the lattice depth @xmath243 is kept constant . for small values of @xmath271 ,
when the atoms in the right well are in the mott - insulator state , no interference signal is found . at a critical value @xmath273 ( unit filling ) @xcite
the right system undergoes the quantum phase transition to the superfluid state and the interference photon flux @xmath132 starts to oscillate in time with finite amplitude .
we study the amplitude of the oscillations as a function of @xmath274 by characterizing the quantity@xmath275 where the minimum and maximum of @xmath132 are found over a time interval large compared to the inverse oscillation frequency of @xmath132 , similarly to eq .
( [ eqn : atr ] ) .
this quantity is displayed in fig .
[ fig : flrandfa](b ) as a function of @xmath274 . for @xmath276 the amplitude @xmath277 is nonvanishing and increases proportional to the magnitude of the superfluid order parameter
several methods have been proposed in the literature for determining the first - order correlation functions , that are based on time - of - flight techniques , see for instance refs .
measurements of the first - order correlation function have been performed on bose - einstein condensates in refs .
@xcite .    in the following
we will show how an extension of our previously considered setup may allow one to determine the spatial first - order correlation function of a quantum gas by the scattered photons . in this case
, the lasers shall illuminate two spatially separated regions of a quantum gas confined in a _ single well _ potential . more specifically , the spatial dependence of the laser - atom interaction in eq .
[ eqnket : v:0 ] will be characterized by the gaussian envelope @xmath278 with width @xmath279 between the two regions ( we remark that the excitation could be realized with subwavelength resolution @xcite ) .
the corresponding photon flux then reads @xmath280 where @xmath281 is the first - order correlation function and @xmath282 is defined in eq .
( [ fun : f ] ) .
let the pump - probe excitation be a pulse of mean duration @xmath126 such that @xmath283 , but @xmath284 , with @xmath285 the typical frequency characterising the excitation spectrum .
in this limit we can approximate @xmath286 in eq .
( [ f : t : g:1 ] ) . for convenience ,
we denote by @xmath287 the spatial correlation function . for @xmath288 sufficiently small ,
so that it can be approximated with a @xmath289-like excitation , the photon flux can be recast in the form @xmath290 with @xmath291 is a constant , determined by the details of the excitation scheme , and @xmath292 is the density at @xmath293 ( assuming the system has reflection symmetry about @xmath294 ) .
therefore , the photon flux exhibits oscillations with a visibility which is determined by the spatial first - order correlation function . by varying the scattering wave vector @xmath295
one would thus measure the first - order correlation function as a function of @xmath215 .
realistic excitation schemes are of course characterized by finite spatial resolution @xmath288 , which results in averaging the correlation function in eq . over the finite size of the illuminated region and hence to a diminution of the contrast @xcite .
this setup could be extended to measure time - dependent correlation function by applying a pair of laser pulses : assuming that the photon scattered after the first pulse can interfere with the photon scattered after the second pulse , then the photon flux at the detector will exhibit oscillations whose amplitude is proportional to the first - order correlation function .
a possible realization could use a mirror placed in front of the quantum system , as realized in @xcite .
in this work we have discussed a setup which allows one , to measure the condensate fraction and the first - order correlation function of a quantum gas by means of photo - detection .
the photons are scattered by the quantum gas in a pump - probe type of excitation , such that the scattered photon is associated with an outcoupled atom , with which it is entangled .
in addition , photon and atom are correlated with the quantum gas .
this correlation is detected in the photon flux , provided that certain conditions are fulfilled , which we have identified and discussed .
our analysis is based on the impulse approximation @xcite , hence on neglecting the back action of the scattering process on the quantum gas .
it is therefore valid for short time transients . from the point of view of collecting a sufficient statistics , hence ,
time - of - flight techniques are a more convenient tool .
nevertheless , one could consider to modify existing techniques , such as the one successfully demonstrated in refs .
@xcite , in order to access to the same kind of information that the setup here discussed provides .
an interesting outlook is to identify a setup , along the lines of the proposal ref .
@xcite , which permits one to perform a quantum - non - demolition measurement of any correlations function of of the external degrees of freedom of atomic gases , and more in general , which realizes quantum - state transfer between matter and light .
this would open several interesting perspectives for quantum communications @xcite .
the authors acknowledge e. demler , r. fazio , j. ruoteskovki , w. schleich , and p. vignolo for stimulating discussions and helpful comments .
this work was supported by the european commission ( emali , mrtn - ct-2006 - 035369 ; integrating project aqute , strep picc ) , by the spanish ministerio de ciencia y innovacin ( consolider - ingenio 2010 qoit ; fis2007 - 66944 ; ai hu2007 - 0013 , euroquam `` cmmc '' ) , and the german research foundation ( dfg , mo1845 ) .          we now show that the term @xmath157 ( @xmath298 ) is the contribution due to the atoms which are outcoupled and propagate from the left to the right ( right to the left ) . for this purpose
we perform the @xmath118 integral in eq .
( [ eqn : intf ] ) and obtain      where @xmath300 is the relative phase of the macroscopic wavefunctions defined in eq . .
with the change of variables @xmath301 , @xmath302 , we can rewrite eq .
( [ hom : propposa ] ) as @xmath303   f_l({{\bf r}}-\frac{\bar{{{\bf r}}}}{2})f_r({{\bf r}}+\frac{\bar{{{\bf r}}}}{2 } ) \ , .\end{aligned}\ ] ]    the exponential in the integral over @xmath304 oscillates very fast with respect to the wave functions @xmath305 .
therefore the main contribution to the integral over @xmath304 comes from @xmath306 , where the term in the exponential vanishes . by means of the saddle - point approximation
we take the wave functions at the point @xmath307 out of the integral .
performing the @xmath304 integration using the fresnel integral @xcite @xmath308 where @xmath309 is the recoil velocity , eq . .
the calculation that leads to eq .
( [ eqn : fcint_pos ] ) is exact in the limit of homogeneous atomic systems . in such case
the momentum distribution of the condensate fraction is a dirac - delta function at zero momentum and all outcoupled atoms have exactly the same momentum @xmath310 .
the condensates we consider are confined by an external potential and have a finite extension in space which leads to a certain width @xmath311 in their momentum distribution , and thus to a spread in the momentum of the outcoupled atoms around the mean value @xmath310 . by taking the value of the atomic wave functions at the point of the stationary phase of the exponential in eq .
( [ bvorsaddle ] ) one neglects this momentum width : the saddle - point approximation is thus applicable if @xmath312 .
equation  ( [ eqn : fcint_pos ] ) agrees with the corresponding expression in eq .
( [ eqn : fcint_postext]a ) . for completeness
we also give the contributions of the macroscopic wavefunctions to the background contribution , eq .
( [ f : b ] ) , making the same approximations as in eqs .
( [ eqn : fcint_pos ] ) : @xmath313      we derive here approximate expressions of the raman scattering rate for the experimental setup of  @xcite , which lead to eq .
( [ eqn : ftpostot ] ) . using eq .
( [ eqn : thomasfermi ] ) for the condensate wavefunctions in eq .
( [ eqn : fcb_pos ] ) we find @xmath314 g(z ) \ , , \nonumber \\\end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath315 the length @xmath316 determines the typical size of the condensates and can be written as  @xcite @xmath317      the function @xmath318 in eq .
( [ eqn : fposcalc ] ) reads @xmath319 a numerical evaluation of @xmath318 is shown in fig .
( [ fig : gaintvgl ] ) , and is here compared with a gaussian of the form @xmath320 showing that this function provides a good approximation of eq . .
using eq .
( [ eqn : gz_gauss ] ) in eq .
( [ eqn : fposcalc ] ) one gets @xmath321 e^{- 1.25 z^2 } \ , , \nonumber \\\end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath322 . for times
@xmath160 , with @xmath323 , such that @xmath324 we find from eq .
( [ eqn : fluxespossmalltimes ] ) @xmath325 e^{-1.25 z^2 }   \nonumber \\ & \approx & \pi \gamma n_c
\sqrt{\frac { t_0 ^ 2 } { 5 \pi } }   e^{-\frac{1}{5}[(\omega_{{{\bf q}}}-\omega)t_0]^2 } \ , .\end{aligned}\ ] ] when performing the integral in eq .
( [ eqn : err ] ) we neglected the imaginary part in the error - functions which one gets from the exact integration .
this is a good approximation for @xmath326 , as can be checked by numerical evaluation . for values @xmath327 the exponential in eq .
( [ eqn : err ] ) is negligible compared to the resonant case @xmath328 : the oscillating tails of the error - functions given by their imaginary parts will only play a role for parameters where the outcoupling efficiency vanishes and which are thus not relevant to our treatment . using the same argumentation for the other contributions to the photon flux we find    [ eqn : ftc_position_final ] @xmath329 \ , , \\
f_{r \rightarrow l}(t ) & \approx & 2 \pi \gamma n_c k(\omega_{{{\bf q}}}-\omega+\delta
\mu ) f_{\theta}(-q , t ) \nonumber \\ & & \times \cos \left [ \delta \mu t-\varphi_{lr}-(\omega_{{{\bf q}}}-\omega + \delta \mu)\frac{d}{v_{q } } \right ]    \ , , \nonumber \\\end{aligned}\ ] ]    with @xmath330 from eqs .
( [ eqn : ftc_position_final ] ) one then obtains eq .
( [ eqn : ftpostot ] ) for @xmath331 .
the phase difference between @xmath157 and @xmath332 as measured in @xcite is obtained from eqs .
( [ eqn : ftc_position_final]c , d ) and reads @xmath333     ( color online ) total photon flux @xmath201 in units of background contribution @xmath202 as a function of time in units of @xmath334 .
the solid black line is computed by numerically integrating eq .
( [ eqn : fluxesmomentumketterle ] ) and compared to the approximate result eq .
( [ eqn : ftpostot ] ) ( dashed red line ) .
parameters are as in fig .
( [ fig : fluxesmomentum ] ) with @xmath213 . ]
figure  ( [ fig : fluxesmomentumalpha0 ] ) displays the total photon flux computed from eq .
( [ eqn : ftpostot ] ) ( dashed line ) and the one calculated from eq .
( [ eqn : fluxesmomentumketterle ] ) ( solid line ) for the experimental parameters of @xcite . quantitative agreement between the two solutions is found , showing that neglecting the initial momentum distribution is well justified for the considered parameters .
a. imambekov , v. gritsev , and e. demler , `` fundamental noise in matter interferometers '' , in `` ultracold fermi gases '' , proceedings of the international school of physics `` enrico fermi '' , 2006 ( ios press , amsterdam , the netherlands , 2007 ) .
j. f. sherson , c. weitenberg , m. endres , m. cheneau , i. bloch , and s. kuhr , nature * 467 * , 68 ( 2010 ) ; c. weitenberg , m. endres , j. f. sherson , m. cheneau , p. schau , t. fukuhara , i. bloch , and s. kuhr , nature * 471 * , 319 ( 2011 ) .
k. w. murch , k. l. moore , s. gupta , and d. m. stamper - kurn , nature phys . * 4 * , 561 ( 2008 ) ; n. brahms , t.p .
purdy , d.w.c .
brooks , t. botter , and d.m .
stamper - kurn , preprint arxiv:1012.1285 ( 2010 ) , to appear in nature phys .
( 2011 ) .
s. slama , c. von cube , a. ludewig , m. kohler , c. zimmermann , and ph .
w. courteille , phys .
a * 72 * , 031402(r ) ( 2005 ) ; s. slama , c. von cube , b. deh , a. ludewig , c. zimmermann , and ph.w .
courteille , phys .
* 94 * , 193901 ( 2005 ) ; s. slama , c. von cube , m. kohler , c. zimmermann , and ph .
w. courteille , phys .
a * 73 * , 023424 ( 2006 ) .
this commutation relation is well defined provided that @xmath335 .
the mathematical subtlety related to this specific point is irrelevant to our study , being practically zero the probability that an atom in the electronic state @xmath4 can be found around this point in space .
s. hofferberth , i. lesanovsky , t. schumm , a. imambekov , v. gritsev , e. demler , and j. schmiedmayer , nature physics * 4 * , 489 ( 2008 ) ; a. imambekov , i. e. mazets , d. s. petrov , v. gritsev , s. manz , s. hofferberth , t. schumm , e. demler , and j. schmiedmayer , phys .
a * 80 * , 033604 ( 2009 ) .
we note that the condensate depletion , following from the outcoupling , induces a variation of @xmath165 as a function of time , which also leads to a change in the chemical potential .
this effect is not taken into account in our treatment , where we neglect the change of atom number in the condensates .
the use of the gaussian ansatz in place of wannier functions should be handled with care , for wannier functions decay exponentially at infinity , see e.g. w. kohn , phys .
rev . * 115 * , 809 ( 1959 ) .
nevertheless , the precise form of the ansatz is not important for the purpose of this estimate .    here , we use the critical value determined by the mean - field , @xmath340 , see @xcite .
we remark that a more precise determination of @xmath341 has been reported in s. wessel , f. alet , m. troyer , and g. batrouni , phys .
a * 70 * , 053615 ( 2004 ) , where it was obtained by means of quantum monte - carlo simulations .