Stimulated Emission from Radiation Trapping Atoms: The Copper Vapor Laser

  • Ahmet Elci
  • Jin Joong Kim
Conference paper


Stimulated emission in the atomic copper vapor laser takes place in a rather unique way in that the upper levels of the laser transitions (2P states) are electric dipole–coupled to the ground state (2S), the lower laser levels (2D) are metastable, and yet the gain is one of the highest among all the visible lasers [1]. It is generally believed that the radiation trapping in the 2P–2S resonant transitions greatly enhance the transition probabilities for the 2P–2D transitions, thereby making the lasing action possible for the Cu atoms. There have been theoretical studies to analyze the pumping mechanism and to understand the spectral composition of the copper vapor laser in connection with the efforts to develop high-power copper vapor lasers [2,3]. In these studies, radiation trapping has been treated by Holstein’s theory which is based on a transport equation and the Beer’s law absorption coefficient [4]. An earlier work by Leonard [5] analyzed the copper vapor laser by means of a three level laser model without considering the radiation trapping. As far as we know, however, there has been no analysis of the stimulated emission in the atomic copper vapor from the perspective of Rabi oscillations between the 2P — 2S states. It is the purpose of this paper to present a semiclassical calculation of the gain of the stimulated emission in the atomic copper vapor and discuss some new features that arise in the Rabi oscillation picture [6]. For instance the gain becomes proportional to the entire ground state atomic density, modulated by some factor that depends on the intensity of the trapped fields, in contrast to the usual laser systems where the gain is proportional to the population inversion density [7]. Also, there appears to be a “conservation law” which relates the gains of the two laser transitions (yellow and green).


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    W. T. Walter, N. Solimene, M. Piltch, and G. Gould, IEEE J. Quantum Electron. QE-2 (1966) 474.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. J. Kushner, IEEE J. Quantum Electron. QE-17 (1981) 1555.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. A. Isaev, Sov. J. Quantum Electron. 10 (1980) 336.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    T. Holstein, Phys. Rev. 72 (1947) 1212; Phys. Rev. 83 (1951) 1159.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    D. A. Leonard, IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 3 (1967) 380.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    For a detailed discussion of the Rabi oscillations, see P. L. Knight and P. W. Millonni, Physics Reports 66 (1980) 21.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    See, for example, R. Bonifacio, F. Hopf, P. Meystre, M. O. Scully, “The theory of a short wavelength swept-gain amplifier,” in Physics of Quantum Electronics Vol. 3 edited by S. F. Jacobs, M. O. Scully, M. Sargent, and C. D. Cantrell (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1976 ).Google Scholar
  8. 8. Transition Probabilities for Spectral Lines of Seventy Elements U. S. National Bureau of Standards Monograph 53, 1962.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    C. J. Chen, Phys. Rev. A18 (1978) 2192.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ahmet Elci
    • 1
  • Jin Joong Kim
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Modern Optics Department of Physics and AstronomyUniversity of New MexicoAlbuquerqueUSA

Personalised recommendations