Relativistic ionization of hydrogen by linearly polarized light

doi:10.1364/OE.2.000289

« Show journal navigation

Relativistic ionization of hydrogen by linearly polarized light

Douglas Crawford and Howard Reiss »View Author Affiliations

Optics Express, Vol. 2, Issue 7, pp. 289-297 (1998)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.2.000289

View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (551 KB)

Journal Search
Article Lookup

Article Tools

Citations

Alert me when this article is cited
Export Citation/Save

Article Navigation

▸ Article Outline
– Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Relativistic Dirac calculation
3. Numerical examples
4. Discussion and conclusions
– References and links

Article Tools
Full Text
Article Info
References
Cited By
Figures
Metrics
Download PDF

Viewing Equations in the
HTML Article

Optimal Viewing Recommendations

Full Text
Article Info
References (16)
Cited By
Figures (2)
Metrics

Abstract

Relativistic ionization of hydrogen by intense, linearly polarized light is treated by the Strong Field Approximation (SFA). Both bound and ionized states are described by the Dirac equation, with spin effects fully included. The applied laser field is also treated relativistically. There is no recourse to the dipole approximation nor to large-component, small-component approximations. Examples are calculated for the long-pulse limit of a uniformly distributed laser field. A prediction is verified that relativistic effects will appear with linear polarization of the laser at lower intensities than with circular polarization. Strong-field atomic stabilization is found to be enhanced by relativistic effects.

[Optical Society of America ]

1. Introduction

When an atom is ionized by an intense laser field, the final-state electron will have an energy of interaction with the field measured by the ponderomotive energy U_p . This quantity represents the energy of the oscillatory motion of the free electron immersed in the strong field. When U_p approaches the rest energy mc ² of the electron, then the velocity of the electron must be regarded as relativistic, and theoretical treatments of the ionization process must be done relativistically. This conclusion is borne out by fully relativistic calculations[1

H. R. Reiss, “Relativistic strong-field ionization”, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 7, 574–586 (1990). [CrossRef]

],[2

D. P. Crawford and H. R. Reiss, “Stabilization in relativistic photoionization with circularly polarized light”, Phys. Rev. A 50, 1844–1850 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] done for ionization by circularly polarized light. In those calculations it is found that the inequality

U_{p} ≪ m c^{2}

(1)

is satisfied in that U_p ≈ .01 mc ² leads to observable relativistic effects. The criterion in Eq. (1) is strongly frequency dependent because of the inverse quadratic dependence of U_p on the frequency. A factor 10^-2 inserted into Eq. (1) would correspond to about 10¹⁸ W/cm ² laser intensity for an excimer laser wavelength of 248 nm, 10¹⁷ W/cm ² for 800 nm, and 5 × 10¹⁴ W/cm ² for the CO ₂ laser at 10.6 μm. These intensities are achievable.

When the ionizing laser radiation is linearly polarized, an additional relativistic effect emerges. In contrast to the simple straight-line oscillatory motion of a free electron in a plane-wave field in the non-relativistic case, a free electron in a strong plane-wave field executes a figure-8 motion[3

L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Classical Theory of Fields (Pergamon, Oxford, 1959).

],[4

E. S. Sarachik and G. T. Schappert, “Classical theory of the scattering of intense laser radiation by free electrons”, Phys. Rev. D 1, 2738–2753 (1970). [CrossRef]

] with the long axis along the polarization direction of the electric field, and the plane of the figure defined by that direction and the direction of propagation of the plane wave. This figure-8 motion arises from the magnetic field of the plane wave coupled to the electric field, and the usual non-relativistic dipole approximation neglects the magnetic field. A failure of the dipole approximation should have physical consequences when the short axis of the figure-8 is of the order of the atomic radius. On these grounds, the dipole approximation is expected to fail[5

H. R. Reiss,“Theoretical methods in quantum optics: S-matrix and Keldysh techniques for strong-field processes”, Prog. Quantum Electron. 16, 1–71 (1992). [CrossRef]

] when

U_{p} < \frac{2 ħ ω}{α},

(2)

where α is the fine-structure constant. The limit (2) is even more strongly frequency dependent than the condition (1) for most frequencies, and is reached at lower intensities. It is found herein that a factor of about 10^-2 is appropriate in Eq. (2), just as it was in Eq. (1), at least for the high frequencies examined here. However, the effects of this loss of the dipole approximation on total ion yields, angular distributions, or photoelectron spectra may not be of equal significance. All of this remains to be explored at the low frequencies (ω≪1 a.u.) for which very intense lasers are available.

The theoretical method to be employed here is the Strong Field Approximation (SFA). This has already been applied to the problem of atomic ionization under relativistic conditions, but results have been published[1

H. R. Reiss, “Relativistic strong-field ionization”, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 7, 574–586 (1990). [CrossRef]

, 2

D. P. Crawford and H. R. Reiss, “Stabilization in relativistic photoionization with circularly polarized light”, Phys. Rev. A 50, 1844–1850 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] only for circular polarization of the laser radiation, in the framework of the Dirac theory. We report here analogous Dirac results for linear polarization [6

D. P. Crawford, “Relativistic ionization with intense linearly polarized light”, doctoral dissertation, American University, 1994.

] of the ionizing laser.

We note that the SFA, by employing Volkov solutions for the final state, automatically includes all field-induced oscillations of the ionized electron. Rescattering in the final state is neglected. The neglect of rescattering is unimportant in the circular polarization case, which explains the great accuracy attainable with the SFA [7

H. R. Reiss, “Energetic electrons in strong-field ionization”, Phys. Rev. A 54, R1765–R1768 (1996). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] for this case. With relativistic Volkov solutions employed, the emitted photoelectrons acquire the expected relativistic projection in the direction of propagation of the field[1

H. R. Reiss, “Relativistic strong-field ionization”, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 7, 574–586 (1990). [CrossRef]

], an effect that can be interpreted as a result of the momentum of the absorbed photons. The resulting increase in the distance from the atom of the field-induced trajectory of the photoelectron can be viewed as the cause of the relativistic strengthening of the stabilization effect that was found[2

D. P. Crawford and H. R. Reiss, “Stabilization in relativistic photoionization with circularly polarized light”, Phys. Rev. A 50, 1844–1850 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

A brief overview of the SFA is helpful to understand why it is useful for the description of relativistic ionization in strong fields. In its original non-relativistic form[8

H. R. Reiss,“Effect of an intense electromagnetic field on a weakly bound system”, Phys. Rev. A 22, 1786–1813 (1980). [CrossRef]

, 5

H. R. Reiss,“Theoretical methods in quantum optics: S-matrix and Keldysh techniques for strong-field processes”, Prog. Quantum Electron. 16, 1–71 (1992). [CrossRef]

], the SFA approximates the exact time-reversed transition amplitude

{(S - 1)}_{fi} = - i \int_{- \infty}^{\infty} dt (Ψ_{f}^{(-)}, H_{I}, Φ_{i})

i \partial_{t} Φ = H_{0} Φ

i \partial_{t} Ψ = (H_{0} + H_{I}) Ψ

(3)

H_{I} = - \frac{1}{c} A \cdot p + \frac{1}{2 c^{2}} A^{2}

(4)

by replacing the complete final-state wave function Ψ by the Volkov solution. Equation (3) is written in atomic units. These units are employed in the remainder of the paper. The Volkov solution Ψ^Volk is an exact solution for a free charged particle in an electromagnetic field, and so the nature of the SFA is that it assumes that the final-state motion of the ionized electron is dominated by the laser field, and effects on the detached electron of the binding potential are neglected.

We remark on the differences between the SFA and the well-known Keldysh approximation[9

L. V. Keldysh, “Ionization in the field of a strong electromagnetic wave”, Sov Phys. JETP 20, 1307–1314 (1965).

]. The Keldysh approximation can be formulated from Eq.(3), though it was not so expressed by Keldysh. The differences are: (a) The H^I used by Keldysh is in the “length” gauge, rather than the “velocity” gauge of Eq. (4); (b) Keldysh makes a low-frequency approximation from the outset; and (c) Keldysh assumes that the final state electron is produced with zero momentum. Extension to the relativistic case is not possible because of limitation (a); limitation (b) precludes extension to high frequencies, unlike the SFA, which works well[10

H. R. Reiss, “High-frequency, high-intensity photoionization”, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 13, 355–362 (1966). [CrossRef]

] at high frequency; and (c) taken together with (a) make the Keldysh approximation into a tunneling method, which cannot be used to explore the stabilization phenomenon for which the SFA is well suited[11

H. R. Reiss, “Frequency and polarization effects in stabilization”, Phys. Rev. A 46, 391–394 (1992). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 2

D. P. Crawford and H. R. Reiss, “Stabilization in relativistic photoionization with circularly polarized light”, Phys. Rev. A 50, 1844–1850 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

The limitations of SFA have been explored for circular polarization of the electromagnetic field by finding the principal Coulomb correction[12

H. R. Reiss and V. P. Krainov, “Approximation for a Coulomb-Volkov solution in strong fields”, Phys. Rev. A 50, R910–R912 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] to the SFA. When so corrected, the SFA is valid when either α ₀ ≳ 10 or U_p /E_B ≳ 10, where α ₀ is the radius of motion of a classical free electron in the circularly polarized field, and E_B is the binding energy of the field-free atom. Since either or both of these conditions are satisfied in recent strong-field experiments, a comparison of the predictions of the SFA with experimental measurements[13

U. Mohideen, M. H. Sher, and H. W. K. Tom, “High intensity above-threshold ionization of He”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 509–512 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] of the photoelectron spectrum shows essentially perfect agreement [7

H. R. Reiss, “Energetic electrons in strong-field ionization”, Phys. Rev. A 54, R1765–R1768 (1996). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] for circular polarization. For conditions leading to relativistic ionization by circularly polarized fields, the SFA has negligible error.

The situation is more complicated for linear polarization. The essential difference between the two polarization states is that the photoelectron spectrum for strong-field circular polarization is relatively narrow, and centered approximately at the U_p corresponding to the peak laser intensity laser in the laser pulse. All emitted electrons are thus energetic, and the Coulomb field has little effect. Furthermore, there is no “revisiting” of the ionized atom by the photoelectron. For linear polarization, a substantial portion of the spectrum is at low energy, and the ionized electron does oscillate back to the vicinity of the ionized atom. Although calculated linear polarization spectra [7

H. R. Reiss, “Energetic electrons in strong-field ionization”, Phys. Rev. A 54, R1765–R1768 (1996). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] show all the features of the experimental spectra[13

U. Mohideen, M. H. Sher, and H. W. K. Tom, “High intensity above-threshold ionization of He”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 509–512 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 14

B. Walker, B. Sheehy, and L. F. DeMauro, “Precision measurement of strong-field double ionization of helium”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 1227–1230 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], the agreement is not unqualified, as it is for circular polarization. However, as the laser intensity increases into the relativistic domain, field dominance of the photoelectron motion will be more strongly asserted, and a decreasing proportion of the spectrum is at low energy. Stated in other terms, the rescattering effects neglected in the SFA are of decreasing significance as the intensity increases. Therefore, the SFA should work well for linear polarization in the relativistic domain.

2. Relativistic Dirac calculation

The transition amplitude in a Dirac formulation of the ionization problem starts from the exact expression

{(S - 1)}_{fi} = - i \int d^{4} x {\bar{Ψ}}_{f}^{(-)} \frac{1}{c} A^{μ} γ_{μ} Φ_{i}

(5)

(\frac{i γ^{μ} \partial_{u} - γ^{0} V}{c - c}) Φ = 0

(6)

(\frac{i γ^{μ} \partial_{u} - γ^{μ} A_{μ}}{c} - \frac{γ^{0} V}{c - c}) Ψ = 0

(7)

replacing the non-relativistic Eq. (3). In place of the “natural units” with ħ = 1, c = 1 customarily employed in relativistic work, atomic units are retained here to be consistent with the non-relativistic expressions. The states Φ and Ψ are Dirac spinor states for the atom bound by the central potential V for, respectively, the system without and with the laser field present. The laser field is defined by the four-vector potential A^μ , and the γ^μ are the Dirac matrices. Conventions for quantities in the Dirac space are as described in the book of Bjorken and Drell[15

J. D. Bjorken and S. D. Drell, Relativistic Quantum Mechanics (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1964).

As in the non-relativistic SFA, the Dirac form of the relativistic SFA comes from the replacement of Ψ representing an exact solution of Eq. (7) with the corresponding Dirac Volkov solution

Ψ_{Volk}^{(-)} = {(\frac{c^{2}}{EV})}^{\frac{1}{2}} (1 + \frac{1}{2 cp \cdot k} k_{μ} A_{ν} γ^{μ} γ^{ν}) u

\times \exp [- ip \cdot x + i \int_{k \cdot x}^{\infty} d (k \cdot x)' (\frac{A \cdot p}{cp \cdot k} - \frac{A^{2}}{2 c^{2} p \cdot k})],

(8)

where m is the mass of the electron, E is the relativistic electron energy, V is the volume of a box normalization, p^μ and k^μ are four-momentum vectors for the electron and the applied field of frequency ω, and scalar products like p ∙ k, k ∙ x, and A ∙ p are relativistic scalar products such that, for example,

p \cdot k = p^{0} k^{0} - p \cdot k

= \frac{Eω}{c^{2}} - p \cdot k .

The quantity u in Eq. (8) is a Dirac spinor that satisfies the equation (γ^μ p_μ - c) u = 0. The field-free solution Φ_i in Eq. (5) is taken to be the solution of the Dirac equation for the hydrogen atom as given, for example, in [15

J. D. Bjorken and S. D. Drell, Relativistic Quantum Mechanics (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1964).

The procedure followed in proceeding from the transition amplitude in Eq. (5) to the expression for the transition rate follows closely that given for the circular polarization calculation in Ref. [1

H. R. Reiss, “Relativistic strong-field ionization”, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 7, 574–586 (1990). [CrossRef]

]. The differential transition rate with respect to the solid angle Ω is

\frac{dW}{d Ω} = \frac{2 a^{2}}{π c^{2} Z^{3}} \sum_{n} \frac{p (𝑈_{A} + 𝑈_{B} + 𝑈_{C})}{{[1 + {(\frac{ρ}{Z})}^{2}]}^{4}},

(9)

where Z is the magnitude of the charge on the hydrogen-like atom, a is the amplitude of the vector potential, and ρ is the magnitude of the three-vector

ρ = \frac{p}{c} - (n - η) \frac{k}{c},

where p and k are the three-vector parts of p^μ and k^μ , and η = a ²/4c ² p ∙ k. The summation index n can be identified as the number of photons participating in the process. Considerable physical content is represented by the 𝑈 parameters (that is, 𝑈_A, 𝑈_B, and 𝑈_C) stated below.

The non-relativistic limit of Eq. (9) is equivalent to the expression in Ref. [8

H. R. Reiss,“Effect of an intense electromagnetic field on a weakly bound system”, Phys. Rev. A 22, 1786–1813 (1980). [CrossRef]

]

\frac{dW}{d Ω} = \frac{8 ω}{π} {(\frac{E_{B}}{ω})}^{\frac{5}{2}} \sum_{n = n_{0}}^{\infty} \frac{{(n - z - \frac{E_{B}}{ω})}^{\frac{1}{2}}}{{(n - z)}^{2}} {(J_{n})}^{2},

(10)

where the angular dependence is contained in the Bessel function, J_n . For linear polarization J_n is the generalized Bessel function described in previous work [8

H. R. Reiss,“Effect of an intense electromagnetic field on a weakly bound system”, Phys. Rev. A 22, 1786–1813 (1980). [CrossRef]

]

J_{n} (z^{\frac{1}{2}} χ, - \frac{z}{2}), χ = 8^{\frac{1}{2}} {(n - z - \frac{E_{B}}{ω})}^{\frac{1}{2}} \cos θ .

(11)

In the polar coordinate system chosen for the linear polarization case, θ is the angle between the velocity vector of the emitted electron and the polarization vector. The quantity z is the intensity parameter defined by

z \equiv \frac{U_{p}}{ω} .

A similar derivation was also performed [6

D. P. Crawford, “Relativistic ionization with intense linearly polarized light”, doctoral dissertation, American University, 1994.

] in the context of a scalar electron, where solutions to the Klein-Gordon equation were used for the Volkov solution and for the hydrogen-atom wave functions. Spin-averaged results for Dirac spin-1/2 electrons were found[6

D. P. Crawford, “Relativistic ionization with intense linearly polarized light”, doctoral dissertation, American University, 1994.

] to be very similar to those for Klein-Gordon scalar electrons. These results will not be presented here. Both derivations rely upon the SFA which is expected to become very accurate at high energies. That is, when U_P ≫ E_B and p ²/2 ≫ E_B then the solution using the SFA method should be very accurate.

The differential transition rate resulting from the derivation reported here follows from a Dirac treatment of all elements of the problem, including bound states, unbound states, and interaction terms. Hence, spin effects are included in full. As derived, the differential transition rate is a result of averaging over initial spin states of the electron, and summing over final spin states.

Since fully relativistic Dirac formalisms are used, many physical processes are implicitly accounted for, including negative energy state processes such as pair production. With suitably stated S matrices, the rates for any of the processes can be derived. The process of interest in this treatment is the ionization of an electron from a ground state.

The polar coordinate system used in this derivation is defined such that Θ is the angle between p, the spatial part of the momentum four-vector for the emitted electron, and k, the spatial part of the em field propagation four-vector. A coordinate system is adopted where the direction of propagation of the laser field is along the x ³ axis, and the field is polarized along the x ¹ axis. Furthermore, Φ is defined as the angle between the projection of the momentum in the spatial plane transverse to k and the x ¹ axis.

The 𝑈 quantities are

𝑈_{A} = \frac{1}{4} 𝙋 {(\frac{ρ}{Z})}^{2} {[J_{n + 1} (u, v) + J_{n - 1} (u, v)]}^{2}

\times {(\frac{E}{c^{2}} - 1) {(\frac{ξρ}{Z})}^{2} 𝑈^{2} + (\frac{E}{c^{2}} + 1) β^{2} ν^{2}

+ 2 ξ (\frac{β}{Z}) \frac{p}{c} [\frac{p}{c} (1 - 2 \sin^{2} Θ \cos^{2} Φ) - (n - η) \frac{ω}{m} \cos Θ] UV},

(12)

𝑈_{B} = - \frac{𝙋}{4} {(\frac{ρ a_{0}}{Z})}^{2} \frac{{(\frac{zω}{m})}^{\frac{1}{2}}}{(\frac{E}{m} - \frac{p}{m} \cos Θ)} \frac{p}{m} \sin Θ \cos Φ

\times {(\frac{n}{v} + 2) J_{n} (u, v) - \frac{u}{2 v} [J_{n - 1} (u, v) + J_{n + 1} (u, v)]}

\times [J_{n - 1} (u, v) + J_{n + 1} (u, v)]

\times [{(\frac{ξρ a_{0}}{Z})}^{2} 𝑈^{2} + 2 (\frac{β a_{0}}{Z}) mξ (2 \frac{p}{m} \cos Θ - \frac{E}{m} - \frac{bω}{m}) UV + β^{2} V^{2}],

(13)

and

𝑈_{C} = \frac{ω}{m} \frac{z}{8 (\frac{E}{m} - \frac{p}{m} \cos Θ)} 𝙋 {(\frac{ρ a_{0}}{Z})}^{2}

\times {[(2 + \frac{n}{v}) J_{n} (u, v) - \frac{u}{2 v} [J_{n - 1} (u, v) + J_{n + 1} (u, v)]]}^{2}

\times [{(\frac{ξρ a_{0}}{Z})}^{2} U^{2} + 2 (\frac{βm a_{0}}{Z}) ξ (\frac{p}{m} \cos Θ - \frac{bω}{m}) UV + β^{2} V^{2}] .

(14)

Auxiliary quantities used in these expressions are

ξ \equiv (1 - Z^{2} α^{2}),

β \equiv \frac{(1 - ξ)}{Zα}

P \equiv \frac{(1 + ξ) {[Γ (ξ)]}^{2} 2^{2 (ξ - 1)}}{Γ (1 + 2 ξ)} \frac{{[1 + {(\frac{ρ}{Z})}^{2}]}^{2 - ξ}}{{(\frac{ρ}{Z})}^{6}} .

(15)

Upon reduction to the non-relativistic limit, the differential transition rate becomes

\frac{dW}{d Ω} \underset{NRL}{\to} \frac{8 ω ∊_{B}^{\frac{5}{2}}}{π} \sum_{n = n_{0}}^{\infty} \frac{{(n - z - ∊_{B})}^{\frac{1}{2}}}{{(n - z)}^{2}} J_{n}^{2} (u_{NRL}, - \frac{1}{2} z),

(16)

which is identical to the expression derived using the non-relativistic state vectors in the SFA (see Reiss[8

H. R. Reiss,“Effect of an intense electromagnetic field on a weakly bound system”, Phys. Rev. A 22, 1786–1813 (1980). [CrossRef]

]).

3. Numerical examples

Results for the dependence of ionization rate on field intensity are given here for two frequencies, both large. The computation of low frequency rates is very computer intensive, and will be presented in a later publication. Angular distributions require extensive graphics, and will not be reported here. Sample results for angular distributions and photoelectron spectra may be found in Ref. [6

D. P. Crawford, “Relativistic ionization with intense linearly polarized light”, doctoral dissertation, American University, 1994.

Figures 1 and 2 show ionization rates as a function of intensity for frequencies of ω = 8 a.u. and ω = 2 a.u., respectively. Some common features are exhibited in both figures:

Figure 1. Transition rate as a function of intensity for a frequency ω = 8 a.u. Both scales are logarithmic. One hundred points were computed for each decade in intensity.

A “stabilization peak” (i.e., a maximum in the transition rate) precedes a sharp drop in transition rate, followed by large-amplitude oscillations in rate thereafter.
The oscillations in rate are strongly suppressed in the relativistic as compared to the non-relativistic case for the first several oscillations after the maximum rate, with later (albeit more subdued) resumption of oscillations in relativistic vis-a-vis non-relativistic rates.
A consequence of the above property is that the relativistic rates have a much more isolated and prominent pre-stabilization maximum than do the non-relativistic rates.
The onset of significant departure between relativistic and non-relativistic rates is not far beyond the occurrence of the rate maximum.
The stabilization effect is more strongly manifested in the relativistic rates than in the non-relativistic case.

Figure 2. Transition rate as a function of intensity for a frequency ω = 2 a.u. Both scales are logarithmic. Twenty five points were computed for each decade in intensity.

4. Discussion and conclusions

The linear polarization problem has no azimuthal symmetry about the propagation vector axis as in the circular polarization case. Furthermore, with relativistic effects, the linear polarization differential transition rate loses the symmetry about the polarization axis that exists in the non-relativistic calculation. Also, the relativistic differential transition rate is shifted in the direction of the propagation vector due to the momentum of the absorbed photons, thereby destroying symmetry about this axis.

The numerical predictions, appropriately, show that the relativistic ionization rate approaches the non-relativistic ionization rate at low intensities. At intensities somewhat beyond the pre-stabilization maximum in the rate, the relativistic ionization rate is depressed by an order of magnitude or more when compared to the non-relativistic rate, and its oscillations are suppressed. At still higher intensities, the relativistic rate begins to oscillate in similar fashion to the non-relativistic case, but always retains a smaller value - that is, the stabilization phenomenon remains more pronounced in the relativistic domain.

From Figs. 1 and 2, one can appraise the applicability of Eq.(2). If the factor 10^-2 is incorporated in Eq.(2) as was found to be true for Eq. (1), then the dipole approximation (which is a type of non-relativistic approximation) should fail when the intensity is about I ≈ 10ω ³. In fact, the figures show major differences between relativistic and non-relativistic results when

I \approx 5 ω^{3},

(17)

which can be regarded as good agreement.

An interesting correspondence between the dipole limit in Eq. (17) and the predicted onset of stabilization can be found. In Ref. [16

H. R. Reiss, “Physical basis for strong-field stabilization of atoms against ionization”, Laser Phys. 7, 543–550 (1997).

] it was found that, at high frequencies, a maximum in the transition rate as a function of intensity (i.e., stabilization) will occur when

I \approx 4 ω^{3} (1 - \frac{E_{B}}{ω}) = 4 ω^{3} - 2 ω^{2} \approx 4 ω^{3}

(18)

for the case of hydrogen, where the binding energy E_B is E_B = -5 a.u. The last element of Eq. (18) follows from the presence of high frequencies. In fact, Eq. (18) is found to be well satisfied in both figures. Furthermore, the ω ³ behavior found for both the onset of relativistic effects as found in Eq. (17) and for the onset of stabilization as in Eq. (18) means that the near concurrence of the two effects found in Figs. 1 and 2 is a general feature of strong-field ionization at high frequency.

We note that, in the long-pulse, fixed-intensity problem treated here, there is no field-induced drift of the photoelectron beyond its simple circular (circular polarization) or figure-8 (linear polarization) motion. This motion occurs in a frame of reference fixed with respect to the atom. “Revisiting” of the atom as described by the Volkov solution replicates itself on each cycle of the field. Quantum calculations involve no statement of initial conditions as in the case of classical problems. (One may say that quantum calculations represent an average over the possible initial conditions arising in the corresponding classical calculations.) These statements must be modified to some degree when the temporal intensity profile of the laser pulse is included, so that some net drift of the classical orbit with respect to the atom might occur. This effect should appear in a full laser-pulse calculation (as in Ref. [7

H. R. Reiss, “Energetic electrons in strong-field ionization”, Phys. Rev. A 54, R1765–R1768 (1996). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]), where the spatial and temporal profile of a laser brought to a Gaussian focus in included, and where even the acceptance angle of the electron spectrometer is contained in the calculation. This type of completely detailed calculation has not yet been performed with relativistic expressions.

References

1.	H. R. Reiss, “Relativistic strong-field ionization”, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 7, 574–586 (1990). [CrossRef]
2.	D. P. Crawford and H. R. Reiss, “Stabilization in relativistic photoionization with circularly polarized light”, Phys. Rev. A 50, 1844–1850 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
3.	L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Classical Theory of Fields (Pergamon, Oxford, 1959).
4.	E. S. Sarachik and G. T. Schappert, “Classical theory of the scattering of intense laser radiation by free electrons”, Phys. Rev. D 1, 2738–2753 (1970). [CrossRef]
5.	H. R. Reiss,“Theoretical methods in quantum optics: S-matrix and Keldysh techniques for strong-field processes”, Prog. Quantum Electron. 16, 1–71 (1992). [CrossRef]
6.	D. P. Crawford, “Relativistic ionization with intense linearly polarized light”, doctoral dissertation, American University, 1994.
7.	H. R. Reiss, “Energetic electrons in strong-field ionization”, Phys. Rev. A 54, R1765–R1768 (1996). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
8.	H. R. Reiss,“Effect of an intense electromagnetic field on a weakly bound system”, Phys. Rev. A 22, 1786–1813 (1980). [CrossRef]
9.	L. V. Keldysh, “Ionization in the field of a strong electromagnetic wave”, Sov Phys. JETP 20, 1307–1314 (1965).
10.	H. R. Reiss, “High-frequency, high-intensity photoionization”, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 13, 355–362 (1966). [CrossRef]
11.	H. R. Reiss, “Frequency and polarization effects in stabilization”, Phys. Rev. A 46, 391–394 (1992). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
12.	H. R. Reiss and V. P. Krainov, “Approximation for a Coulomb-Volkov solution in strong fields”, Phys. Rev. A 50, R910–R912 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
13.	U. Mohideen, M. H. Sher, and H. W. K. Tom, “High intensity above-threshold ionization of He”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 509–512 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
14.	B. Walker, B. Sheehy, and L. F. DeMauro, “Precision measurement of strong-field double ionization of helium”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 1227–1230 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
15.	J. D. Bjorken and S. D. Drell, Relativistic Quantum Mechanics (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1964).
16.	H. R. Reiss, “Physical basis for strong-field stabilization of atoms against ionization”, Laser Phys. 7, 543–550 (1997).

OCIS Codes
(020.4180) Atomic and molecular physics : Multiphoton processes
(270.6620) Quantum optics : Strong-field processes
(350.5720) Other areas of optics : Relativity

ToC Category:
Focus Issue: Relativistic effects in strong eectromagnetic fields

History
Original Manuscript: November 6, 1997
Published: March 30, 1998

Citation
Douglas Crawford and Howard Reiss, "Relativistic ionization of hydrogen by linearly polarized light," Opt. Express 2, 289-297 (1998)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-2-7-289

Sort: Journal | Reset

References

H. R. Reiss, "Relativistic strong-field ionization", J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 7, 574-586 (1990). [CrossRef]
D. P. Crawford and H. R. Reiss, "Stabilization in relativistic photoionization with circularly polarized light", Phys. Rev. A 50, 1844-1850 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Classical Theory of Fields (Pergamon, Oxford, 1959).
E. S. Sarachik and G. T. Schappert, "Classical theory of the scattering of intense laser radiation by free electrons", Phys. Rev. D 1, 2738-2753 (1970). [CrossRef]
H. R. Reiss,"Theoretical methods in quantum optics: S-matrix and Keldysh techniques for strong-field processes", Prog. Quantum Electron. 16, 1-71 (1992). [CrossRef]
D. P. Crawford, "Relativistic ionization with intense linearly polarized light", doctoral dissertation, American University, 1994.
H. R. Reiss, "Energetic electrons in strong-field ionization", Phys. Rev. A 54, R1765-R1768 (1996). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
H. R. Reiss, "Effect of an intense electromagnetic field on a weakly bound system", Phys. Rev. A 22, 1786-1813 (1980). [CrossRef]
L. V. Keldysh, "Ionization in the field of a strong electromagnetic wave", Sov Phys. JETP 20, 1307-1314 (1965).
H. R. Reiss, "High-frequency, high-intensity photoionization", J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 13, 355-362 (1966). [CrossRef]
H. R. Reiss, "Frequency and polarization effects in stabilization", Phys. Rev. A 46, 391-394 (1992). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
H. R. Reiss and V. P. Krainov, "Approximation for a Coulomb-Volkov solution in strong fields", Phys. Rev. A 50, R910-R912 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
U. Mohideen, M. H. Sher, and H. W. K. Tom, "High intensity above-threshold ionization of He", Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 509-512 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
B. Walker, B. Sheehy, and L. F. DeMauro, "Precision measurement of strong-field double ionization of helium", Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 1227-1230 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
J. D. Bjorken and S. D. Drell, Relativistic Quantum Mechanics (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1964).
H. R. Reiss, "Physical basis for strong-field stabilization of atoms against ionization", Laser Phys. 7, 543-550 (1997).

Other

H. R. Reiss, "Relativistic strong-field ionization", J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 7, 574-586 (1990). [CrossRef]
D. P. Crawford and H. R. Reiss, "Stabilization in relativistic photoionization with circularly polarized light", Phys. Rev. A 50, 1844-1850 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Classical Theory of Fields (Pergamon, Oxford, 1959).
E. S. Sarachik and G. T. Schappert, "Classical theory of the scattering of intense laser radiation by free electrons", Phys. Rev. D 1, 2738-2753 (1970). [CrossRef]
H. R. Reiss,"Theoretical methods in quantum optics: S-matrix and Keldysh techniques for strong-field processes", Prog. Quantum Electron. 16, 1-71 (1992). [CrossRef]
D. P. Crawford, "Relativistic ionization with intense linearly polarized light", doctoral dissertation, American University, 1994.
H. R. Reiss, "Energetic electrons in strong-field ionization", Phys. Rev. A 54, R1765-R1768 (1996). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
H. R. Reiss, "Effect of an intense electromagnetic field on a weakly bound system", Phys. Rev. A 22, 1786-1813 (1980). [CrossRef]
L. V. Keldysh, "Ionization in the field of a strong electromagnetic wave", Sov Phys. JETP 20, 1307-1314 (1965).
H. R. Reiss, "High-frequency, high-intensity photoionization", J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 13, 355-362 (1966). [CrossRef]
H. R. Reiss, "Frequency and polarization effects in stabilization", Phys. Rev. A 46, 391-394 (1992). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
H. R. Reiss and V. P. Krainov, "Approximation for a Coulomb-Volkov solution in strong fields", Phys. Rev. A 50, R910-R912 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
U. Mohideen, M. H. Sher, and H. W. K. Tom, "High intensity above-threshold ionization of He", Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 509-512 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
B. Walker, B. Sheehy, and L. F. DeMauro, "Precision measurement of strong-field double ionization of helium", Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 1227-1230 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
J. D. Bjorken and S. D. Drell, Relativistic Quantum Mechanics (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1964).
H. R. Reiss, "Physical basis for strong-field stabilization of atoms against ionization", Laser Phys. 7, 543-550 (1997).

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.

Click here to see a list of articles that cite this paper