OSA's Digital Library

Journal of the Optical Society of America B

Journal of the Optical Society of America B


  • Vol. 16, Iss. 1 — Jan. 1, 1999
  • pp: 173–181

Semiclassical random electrodynamics: spontaneous emission and the Lamb shift

J. C. Camparo  »View Author Affiliations

JOSA B, Vol. 16, Issue 1, pp. 173-181 (1999)

View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (318 KB)

Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools



It is often remarked that an explanation of spontaneous emission and the Lamb shift requires quantization of the electromagnetic field. Here these two quantities are derived in a semiclassical formalism by use of second-order perturbation theory. The purpose of the present paper is not to argue the validity of QED but rather to develop a semiclassical approximation to QED that may nonetheless have certain computational advantages over QED. To this end, the vacuum of QED is simulated with a classical zero-point field (ZPF), and as a consequence the resulting theory is entitled semiclassical random electrodynamics (SRED). In the theory, the atom is coupled to the ZPF and to its own radiation-reaction field through an electric dipole interaction. These two interactions add to produce exponential decay of excited states while they cancel each other to prevent spontaneous excitation of the ground state; the Lamb shift appears in the theory as an ac Stark shift induced by the ZPF. The spontaneous decay rate of an excited-state derived in SRED is equal to the Einstein A coefficient for that state, and the Lamb shift agrees with that of nonrelativistic QED. Moreover, SRED is shown to be useful for the numerical simulation of spontaneous decay.

© 1999 Optical Society of America

OCIS Codes
(020.3690) Atomic and molecular physics : Line shapes and shifts
(020.5580) Atomic and molecular physics : Quantum electrodynamics
(300.6210) Spectroscopy : Spectroscopy, atomic

J. C. Camparo, "Semiclassical random electrodynamics: spontaneous emission and the Lamb shift," J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 16, 173-181 (1999)

Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset


  1. P. Meystre and M. Sargent III, Elements of Quantum Optics (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991).
  2. L. Allen and J. H. Eberly, Optical Resonance and Two-Level Atoms (Dover, New York, 1987).
  3. C. P. Slichter, Principles of Magnetic Resonance (Harper & Row, New York, 1963).
  4. We do not consider here the absorber theory of radiation, which posits the existence of advanced radiation fields from distant absorbers as the seat of radiation reaction. For a review of absorber theory see D. T. Pegg, “Absorber theory of radiation,” Rep. Prog. Phys. 38, 1339–1383 (1975).
  5. J. N. Dodd, Atoms and Light: Interactions (Plenum, New York, 1991), Chap. 10.
  6. P. W. Milonni, “Semiclassical and quantum-electrodynamical approaches in nonrelativistic radiation theory,” Phys. Rep. 25, 1–81 (1976).
  7. See, for example, G. W. Series, “A long journey with classical fields,” Phys. Scr. T12, 5–13 (1986); J. N. Dodd, “Spontaneous emission and the vacuum field,” Phys. Scr. T70, 88–93 (1997).
  8. J. R. Ackerhalt, P. L. Knight, and J. H. Eberly, “Radiation reaction and radiative frequency shifts,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 30, 456–460 (1973); I. R. Senitzky, “Radiation-reaction and vacuum-field effects in Heisenberg-picture quantum electrodynamics,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 31, 955–958 (1973); P. W. Milonni, J. R. Ackerhalt, and W. A. Smith, “Interpretation of radiative corrections in spontaneous emission,” Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 31, 958–960 (1973); J. Dalibard, J. Dupont-Roc, and C. Cohen-Tannoudji, “Vacuum fluctuations and radiative reaction: identification of their respective contributions,” J. Phys. (Paris) JOPQAG 43, 1617–1638 (1982).
  9. H. Panofsky and M. Phillips, Classical Electricity and Magnetism (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1962), Chap. 21; J. D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics (Wiley, New York, 1975), Chap. 17.
  10. P. L. Knight, “Dynamics of spontaneous emission,” Phys. Scr. T70, 94–100 (1997); M. B. Plenio and P. L. Knight, “The quantum jump approach to dissipative dynamics in quantum optics,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 101–144 (1998).
  11. A. G. Kofman, G. Kurizki, and B. Sherman, “Spontaneous and induced atomic decay in photonic band structures,” J. Mod. Opt. 41, 353–384 (1994).
  12. P. W. Milonni, The Quantum Vacuum (Academic, Boston, Mass., 1994).
  13. An important exception to this statement occurs in the theory of QED based on self-energy. See A. O. Barut and J. F. Van Huele, “Quantum electrodynamics based on self-energy: Lamb shift and spontaneous emission without field quantization,” Phys. Rev. A 32, 3187–3195 (1985).
  14. It is worth mentioning here that (as was pointed out by Eberly) when a classical Lagrangian for the field–atom system is supplanted by the assumption of stochastic, homogenous solutions, a description of the field–atom interaction is obtained that “...doesn’t differ from QED at all in its second-order predictions of decay rates and level shifts.” See J. H. Eberly, “Unified view of spontaneous emission in several theories of radiation,” in Foundations of Radiation Theory and Quantum Electrodynamics, A. O. Barut, ed. (Plenum, New York, 1980).
  15. T. H. Boyer, “A brief survey of stochastic electrodynamics,” in Foundations of Radiation Theory and Quantum Electrodynamics, A. O. Barut, ed. (Plenum, New York, 1980); L. de la Peña, “Stochastic electrodynamics: its development, present situation and perspectives,” in Stochastic Processes Applied to Physics and Other Related Fields, B. Gomez, S. M. Moore, A. M. Rodriguez-Vargas, and A. Reuda, eds. (World Scientific, Singapore, 1983).
  16. D. K. Ross and W. Moreau, “Stochastic gravity,” Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 27, 845–858 (1995).
  17. L. de la Peña and A. M. Cetto, The Quantum Dice: An Introduction to Stochastic Electrodynamics (Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1996).
  18. H. M. Franca and T. W. Marshall, “Excited states in stochastic electrodynamics,” Phys. Rev. A 38, 3258–3263 (1988); L. de la Peña and A. M. Cetto, “Quantum phenomena and the zeropoint radiation field,” Found. Phys. 25, 573–604 (1995).
  19. For a discussion of these issues, see G. N. Plass, “Classical electrodynamic equations of motion with radiative reaction,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 33, 37–62 (1961); F. Rohrlich, “The dynamics of a charged sphere and the electron,” Am. J. Phys. 65, 1051–1056 (1997); G. W. Ford and R. F. O’Connell, “Radiative reaction in electrodynamics and the elimination of runaway solutions,” Phys. Lett. A PYLAAG 157, 217–220 (1991).
  20. J. A. Wheeler and R. P. Feynman, “Interaction with the absorber as the mechanism of radiation,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 17, 157–181 (1945).
  21. C. Cohen-Tannoudji, B. Diu, and F. Laloe, Quantum Mechanics (Wiley, New York, 1977), Vol. 1, pp. 315–328; R. R. Schlicher, W. Becker, J. Bergou, and M. O. Scully, “Interaction Hamiltonian in quantum optics or: p⋅A vs. E⋅r revisited,” in Quantum Electrodynamics and Quantum Optics, A. O. Barut, ed. (Plenum, New York, 1984), pp. 405–441.
  22. Physically, in SRED the missing factor of 2 in Eq. (5b) is to be attributed to an explicit role for the vacuum field in describing an oscillating dipole’s dynamics.
  23. T. H. Boyer, “Random electrodynamics: the theory of classical electrodynamics with classical electromagnetic zero-point radiation,” Phys. Rev. D 11, 790–808 (1975).
  24. T. H. Boyer, “Classical statistical thermodynamics and electromagnetic zero-point radiation,” Phys. Rev. 186, 1304–1318 (1969).
  25. M. Ibison and B. Haisch, “Quantum and classical statistics of the electromagnetic zero-point field,” Phys. Rev. A 54, 2737–2744 (1996).
  26. C. Cohen-Tannoudji, J. Dupont-Roc, and G. Grynbert, Photons and Atoms: Introduction to Quantum Electrodynamics (Wiley, New York, 1989), Chap. I.
  27. Heitler, The Quantum Theory of Radiation (Dover, New York, 1984), Chap. 2.
  28. E. Merzbacher, Quantum Mechanics (Wiley, New York, 1961), p. 446.
  29. H. A. Bethe, “The electromagnetic shift of energy levels,” Phys. Rev. 72, 339 (1947).
  30. It should at least be mentioned in passing that the connection between the Lamb shift and the ac Stark shift goes back to some of the first ac Stark shift investigations. See, for example, S. Pancharatnam, “Lights shifts in semiclassical dispersion theory,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 56, 1636 (1966), and references therein.
  31. H. M. Franca, T. W. Marshall, and E. Santos, “Spontaneous emission in confined space according to stochastic electrodynamics,” Phys. Rev. A 45, 6436–6442 (1992).
  32. F. Reif, Fundamentals of Statistical and Thermal Physics (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1965), Chap. 15; H. B. Callen and T. A. Welton, “Irreversibility and generalized noise,” Phys. Rev. 83, 34–40 (1951).
  33. E. A. Power, Introductory Quantum Electrodynamics (Elsevier, New York, 1964), Chap. 2.
  34. O. S. Heavens, “Radiative transition probabilities of the lower excited states of the alkali metals,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 51, 1058–1061 (1961).
  35. R. C. Hilborn, “Einstein coefficients, cross sections, f values, dipole moments, and all that,” Am. J. Phys. 50, 982–986 (1982).
  36. The computation first simulated each mode of the ZPF over the ~100-ns simulation time (Δtstep~1 ns) and then summed over modes. For the case of Δν=10 kHz the entire simulation of P2(t) required only 4 min. on a 133-MHz Pentium computer.

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited