Exact nonlinear wave generation past an obstacle in linearly coupled binary

Bose-Einstein condensates

Eric de l’or Tchamba T.,1, 2, 3, ∗ D. Belobo Belobo,2, 4, 5 and H. P. Ekobena Fouda2, 5

1
Laboratory of Atomic, Molecular and Nuclear Physics,
Department of Physics, Faculty of Science,
University of Yaounde I, P.O. Box 812, Yaounde, Cameroon
2
African Centre for Advanced Studies, P.O. Box 4477,Yaounde, Cameroon
3
Faculty of Sciences and Technology, Université des Montagnes, P.O. Box 208, Bangangté, Cameroon
4
Department of Mathematics and Physical Sciences,
National Advanced School of Engineering of Yaounde,
University of Yaounde I, P.O. Box 8390, Yaounde, Cameroon
5
Laboratory of Biophysics, Department of Physics, Faculty of Science,
University of Yaounde I, P.O. Box 812, Yaounde, Cameroon
(Dated: October 13, 2022)

ABSTRACT

Binary Bose-Einstein condensates linearly experiencing a Raman coupling are investigated

analytically. The mechanism of wave generation past an obstacle is examined exactly.
Focusing on stationary states solutions, it is shown that the presence of both the Raman
coupling and the height of the obstacle deeply alter the profiles and amplitudes of waves gen-
erated. Nonlinear wave solutions generated past an obstacle are Weierstrass functions that,
in the case of condensates applications, degenerate to the Jacobi elliptic function of sn-type.
The condition of existence of the latter solutions are clarified in detail. It appears that the
interplay among the nonlinearities, the height of the obstacle and the strength of the Raman
coupling profoundly affects the properties of the nonlinear waves generated past the obstacle.

keywords Wave generation; Linearly coupled; binary Bose-Einstein condensates.

1 INTRODUCTION

In cold atomic physics, the generation and transport properties of one-component Bose-Einstein
condensates (BECs) have always been a subject of intense interest [1–7]. Many aspects of transport
of one-component BECs were investigated in previous works. In Ref. [2], it has been shown that the
∗
Corresponding author: ericdelor78@gmail.com
 2

variation of the height of a barrier potential affects the dynamical characteristics of dark solitons
(solitons being localized topological excitations of nonlinear systems which preserve their shapes
during their evolution). Authors in Refs. [3, 8] studied the effect of a double barrier potential on
transport of BECs and found that it is a stable nonlinear system. In Ref. [9] authors found exact
transmission states of BECs, and analyzed metastability, spatial configuration, superfluidity and
the transport properties, and predicted from exact solutions, the resonant transmission through
the potential. The work in Ref. [6] showed that the incident flux at which the solitonic flow is
perfectly transmitted always exists for any chemical potential. The transmission of one-component
BECs in a magnetic waveguide were addressed by Paul et al. in Ref. [6] who proved that resonant
transport is suppressed in interaction-induced regime of bistability [7, 8].
In the last two decades, the study of two-component nonlinear waves has been attracting con-
siderable research interest due to potential applications in many fields such as optical fibers [13],
biophysics [14], and BECs [10] to name just a few. The experimental realization of two-component
BECs (BECs made of two distinct atomic species or the same atomic species but with opposite
spin orientations) [10–12] paved the way for investigations of properties of matter-waves both on
theoretical and experimental sides. For example, new quantum phenomena were predicted such
as novel Josephson oscillations [15, 16], Rabbi-Josephson oscillations [17, 18], symmetry break-
ing instabilities [19, 20], four wave mixing [21], complex phase diagrams [22, 23], vortex transfer
dynamics [24, 25], spin-orbit couplings in neutral atomic BECs [26, 27].
Though most of the previous works on two-component BECs addressed important aspects of
nonlinear matter-waves, the important topic of transport of nonlinear matter-waves in BECs has
been mainly tackled only in the case of one-component BECs [1–7]. As the physics of two-
component BECs is well known to be much richer than that of its one-component counterpart,
it is important to understand on the physics side and for potential technological applications, the
conditions at which two-component matter-waves may be transported as well as their properties
and the shapes of nonlinear waves. A few works on transport of matter-waves in two-component
BECs past an obstacle or an impurity have been carried [28]. Especially, when untrapped BECs
move they may hit an impurity that may be modeled by a step potential [6]. The knowledge
between incoming matter-waves and the nonlinear waves past the step potential in two-component
BECs remains to be analyzed and clarified in details.
The aim of this work is to fill in such a gap by constructing analytical solutions for the coupled
nonlinear waves past a step potential and unveil the influence of atom-atom interactions on the
generation of nonlinear matter-waves and their properties. In particular, the combined effects of
 3

the height of the potential barrier and a linear coupling of Rabbi type in two-component BECs
have on the properties of matter-waves past the step potential will be addressed.
The presentation of the rest of the work is structured as follows. In Sec. II, we present the
model. Exact solutions are constructed in Sec. III. A discussion of the properties of the solutions
such as their existence, different shapes and effects of the system parameters on their dynamics is
presented. The findings are summarized in Sec. IV.

2 MODEL

The dynamics of coupled BECs at the mean-field level valid for condensates near the zero
temperature limit is governed by two coupled three-dimensional Gross-Pitaevskii equations [29].
However, when the transverse excitations of the condensates are frozen, say in two orthogonal
directions, the condensates become quasi-one dimensional. In such a case, the dynamics takes the
well-known dimensionless form [30, 31]
h  i
1 ∂2 2 2
i ∂ψ
∂t
1
= − 2 + V (x) + g11 |ψ1 | + g12 |ψ2 | ψ1 + Ωψ2 ,
h 2 ∂x2  i (1)
2 2
i ∂ψ 1 ∂
∂t = − 2 ∂x2 + V (x) + g21 |ψ1 | + g22 |ψ2 |
2
ψ2 + Ωψ1 .
∂2
In Eq. (1), ∂x2
accounts for the Laplacian being nothing else but the one dimensional kinetic-
energy operator and Ψj (x, t), (j = 1, 2) is the macroscopic wave function of the j-th component.
gjj and gj3−j represent two-body intraspecies and interspecies interaction strengths, respectively,
their values might be tuned independently with high precision thanks to the Feshbach resonance
management technique [32–34]. In experiments, the coefficients gjl , j, l = 1, 2 may take either neg-
ative or positive values. Negative (positive) values of gjl , j, l = 1, 2 represent attractive (repulsive)
intraspecies (j = l) or interspecies (j 6= l) interactions, the linear cross coupling parameter Ω de-
notes a Rabbi frequency of a Raman coupling and has been used to predict atoms transfer [35, 36]
and miscibility properties [37–39] of states in coupled condensates and observed in experiments
[40, 41]. The Raman coupling may be realized in two-component condensates by means of reso-
nant two-photon combined radio frequency and microwave radiation [40] or a pair of Raman lasers
intersecting at a specific angle [41]. V (x) is the external potential oriented in the longitudinal (x)
direction in which the condensates are loaded, here is the step function given by

 0 for x < 0;
V (x) = (2)
 V for x ≥ 0,
0

where V0 is a positive constant. External potentials in BECs are routinely realized nowadays
and may take a wide range of geometries. They may be created with magnetic fields [42, 43], or
 4

quantum propagating laser beams [44, 45] using the so-called optical dipoles traps [46, 47]. In
the special case of the external potential in Eq. (2), it mimics the step potential. To realize a
step potential in BECs, a detuned laser beam is shined over a razor edge to make a sharp barrier,
where the diffraction-limited fall-off of the laser intensity is smaller than the healing length of the
condensate [4]. An impurity in a BEC is accounted for any object with a length scale much smaller
than the BEC’s healing length and may be realized by a tightly focused laser beam [4]. In BEC
experiments, single atoms or few atoms are some examples of impurities [47].

3 EXACT SOLUTIONS

In this part of the work, we look for stationary scattering states of Eq. (1) that are defined as
states which exhibit perfect transmission over the potential V (x). Such scattering states are given
by stationary solutions of the form

Ψj (x, t) = ψj (x) exp(−iµj t), j = 1, 2, (3)

where µj is the chemical potential for a conserved number of particles of the j-th component.
p
ψj (x) = pj (x) exp(iθj (x), pj (x) being the probability density to find a particle at position x and
dθj (x)
θj (x) the phase that helps to define the velocity field as vj (x) = dx j = 1, 2. For the sake
of simplicity, we assume in the following that p1 (x) = p2 (x) = p(x) , θ1 (x) = θ2 (x) = θ(x) and
µ1 = µ2 = µ. Inserting Eq. (3) into Eq. (1) then separating the real part one have
2 2
1 d2 p(x) 1
 
dp(x) 1 1 dθ(x)
− = Gp(x)3 + (Ω − µ + V (x)) p(x)2 + p(x)2 , (4)
4 dx2 8 dx 2 2 dx

where G = g11 + g12 + g21 + g22 , and imaginary parts yields

dθ(x) dp(x) d2 θ(x)

+ p(x) = 0. (5)
dx dx dx2

Direct integration of Eq. (5) gives

dθ(x)
p(x) = C, (6)
dx

where C is an arbitrary constant of integration. Assuming that the density flow J0 , which describes
the transport property, is given by
 
dθ(x) i ∂Ψ ∂Ψ
p(x) = Ψ−Ψ = J0 . (7)
dx 2 ∂x ∂x
 5

Inserting Eq. (7) into Eq. (6) one finds that J0 = C implying that the system is flow-conserving
and the last term of Eq. (4) is constant everywhere. With this observation, Eq. (4) is rewritten
as
2
d2 p(x) J2
    
1 1 dp(x) 1
− = Gp(x) + Ω − µ + V (x) p(x)2 + 0 = 0, (8)
4 dx2 8 dx 2 2
In the following we consider that the function p(x) obeys the initial conditions

dp(x) d2 p(x)
lim p(x) = p0 , lim = 0, lim = 0. (9)
x→−∞ x→−∞ dx x→−∞ dx2

Since lim V (x) = 0, we choose the normalisation condition lim p(x) = p0 = 1 along with
x→−∞ x→−∞
p
J0 = 2µ − 2Ω − G. (10)

Equation (10) means that the current flow may be controlled externally by adjusting the strengths
of the linear cross coupling Ω and the sum of all nonlinearities. Integrating Eq. (8) once for x ≥ 0,
V (x) = V0 and p(x) 6= p0 = 1, after some algebra leads to [48]

1 dp(x) 2
 
= a3 p(x)3 + a2 p(x)2 + a1 p(x) + a0 , (11)
4 dx
with

a0 = −2 µ + 2 Ω + G,
4 µ − 4 Ω − 2 V0 − 23 G ,


a1 =
a2 = (Ω − µ + V0 ) ,
1
a3 = 2 G.

With the help of the following transformation

a2
p(x) = u(x) − ,
3 a3
Eq. (11) is converted into the Weierstrass like ordinary differential equation given by [49–51]

du(x) 2
 
= u(x)3 − α2 u(x) − α3 , (12)
dx
where
2
2 (4 V0 +3 G+4 Ω−4 µ) −12 V0 G
α2 = 3 G ,
4 (4 V 0 +3 G+4 Ω−4 µ) ( 0 G+4 Ω−4 µ)2 −18 V0 G)
(4 V +3
α3 = − 27 G2
.

Solutions of Eq. (12) are Weierstrass functions that do not have in many cases important physical
applications. Conversely, Weierstrass functions degenerate in some cases to Jacobian elliptic func-
tions, the latter indeed do have important applications in engineering as well as in physics [50, 51].
 6

In the following, we focus on Jacobian elliptic functions of Eq. (12). Assuming that ej , (j = 1, 2, 3)
are roots of the right hand side of Eq. (12), and satisfy e1 + e2 + e3 = 0, e1 > e2 > e3 and
e1 > 0 > e3 , Eq. (12) can be rewriten in compact form as
 2
1 du(x) 1
= G (u(x) + e1 ) (u(x) + e2 ) (u(x) + e3 ) , (13)
4 dx 2

where

1 4 V0 +3 G+4 Ω−4 µ
e1 = 3 G ,
√
(4 V0 +3 G+4 Ω−4 µ)2 −16 V0 G
− 32 V0 − 21 G− 23 Ω+ 23 µ+ 12
e2 = G ,
2 1 2 2 1
√ 2
− 3 V0 − 2 G− 3 Ω− 3 µ− 2 (4 V0 +3 G+4 Ω−4 µ) −16 V0 G
e3 = G .

Introducing the following transformation into Eq. (13),

u (x) = Y (x)2 − e1 ,

then, integrating the resulting equation, one obtains

Z √
dY (x) 2G
  = x. (14)
(Y (x)) − e1 + e2 (Y (x))2 − e1 + e3
2 2

The integral in Eq. (14) is a Jacobian elliptic integral of the first kind and its solutions take the
form [49–51]
√
−2 2G
b El (R Y (x), k) = x. (15)
2

From Eq. (15) one derives

√ ! !
−1 2 −1 2G
Y (x) = R El b x , k + L,
2

where El is an appropriate Jacobian elliptic function, R is a density prefactor, b is a translational

scaling, k is the elliptic parameter, and L is a vertical density offset. The period of the density is
given by 2K(k)/b, where K(k) is the complete elliptic integral of the first kind [50, 51]. Resorting to
the normalisation conditions at the two boundaries along with the continuity of the wave function
and its derivative one retrieves the solutions [49]

 
2 1p
p(x) = (e1 − e2 ) sn 2 G(e1 − e3 ) x, k + 1, (16)
2
q
with k = e1 −e2
e1 −e3 . When (4 V0 + 3 G + 4 Ω − 4 µ)2 − 16 V0 G > 0, ( Ω G
µ , µ ) belongs to the shaded area
 7

FIG. 1. (Color online) Domain of existence of the solutions, region delimited by the curves
n o
2
0 ≤ (4 V0 + 3 G + 4 Ω − 4 µ) − 16 V0 G, Ω ≤ µ − 12 G, 0 ≤ Ω, 0 < G

n o
of Fig. 1 delimited by the curves 0 ≤ (4 V0 + 3 G + 4 Ω − 4 µ)2 − 16 V0 G, Ω ≤ µ − 12 G, 0 ≤ Ω, 0 < G .
The explicit form of the solution given by Eq. (16) depends on whether all the points ( Ω G
µ , µ ) are

in the shaded zone (ABCDE) of Fig. 1 or not.

For all gij , (i, j = 1, 2) if G = g11 + g12 + g21 + g22 > 0, and for all points ( Ω G
µ , µ ) belonging to

the curves (AED) and (BC) of Fig. 1,when V0 = 0, e1 = e2 > 0, k = 0, variations of Ω and G do
not alter the plane wave since there is no barrier potential see (Fig. 2 left). However, if V0 = 1,
 p 
e2 = e3 < 0, k = 1, p(x) = 1 + (e1 − e2 ) tanh2 12 2 G(e1 − e2 ) x which is nothing else but a
kink solitary wave and the effect of Ω on the amplitude is opposite to that of G as one observes in
 
Fig. 2. Moreover, for any couple of points Ω ;
µ µ
G
belonging the curve (BC), the variation of Ω
and (G) modify only the wave’s period and has no effect on wave’s amplitude (Fig. 3). The period,
amplitude and existence of the wave can be controlled thanks to the Raman coupling strength (Ω)
which contributes to the destabilization of the plane wave. As Ω increases, the amplitude decreases
but the period increases see (Fig. 2).
 
For all the pairs of points Ω ,
µ µ
G
located on the shaded area of Fig. 1 , for a given value of
Ω (respectively G) an increase of values of G (respectively of Ω ) leads to a decrease for both the
amplitude and period of the wave as can been seen on the left panel of Fig. 4 (respectively right
panel of Fig. 4). This implies that it is possible to manage at will both the phase and the period
 8

FIG. 2. (Color online) Analytical solution of Eq.1, for V0 = 0 (left panel) and V0 = 1,(right panel).

FIG. 3. (Color online) Effect of Ω and G on the period of solutions, V0 = 1 on the branch BC of Fig. 1

of the wave by tuning the values of the intra and inter species interaction. Such managements
of the phase and period of the wave are possible in state-of-the art experiments thank to the
Feshback resonance management technique [33]. The wave has enough energy and crosses the
potential barrier. For a given value of Ω (respectively G) on the branch (BC) of Fig. 1), we have
√

2 √
e2 = e3 < 0, k = 1, p(x) = tanh 4 2x 2 + 1 which is nothing else but a kink solitary wave.
 9

4
FIG. 4. (Color online) Analytical solution of Eq. 1, for Ω = 0.4, and G = 9, The amplitude of the
transmitted wave increases with decraesing values of G left panet or Ω right panel. V0 = 1.

1
The parameter region 3 µ = Ωcrit+ ≤ Ω corresponds to periodic waves p(x) whose amplitudes and
periods decrease with incresing values of Ω as shown in right panel of Fig. 4. It is worth noting
that only parameters belonging to the shaded region in Fig. 1 admit viable solutions past the
potential barrier of height V0 .

In order to better characterize the nonlinear waves transmitted past the step potential, we
dθ(x)
analyse their velocity field v(x) = dx . From Eq. (6) and Eq. (16) it is possible to infer the
velocity field of transmitted waves. The amplitude of transmitted wave decreases while the period
decreases with increasing values of V0 (see Fig. 5, meaning that the step potential or impurity
slows down the nonlinear waves transmitted). A similar behavior was reported in single BECs
in the presence of a double barrier potential [2]. In a similar fashion, the linear cross coupling
parameter also slows down the velocity of the waves transmitted. Ω and V0 may be used to control
the velocity field of the nonlinear waves generated past the step potential (Fig.5).

The experimenter has two tools to manage the profiles, amplitudes and periods of the waves
generated past the obstacle. Such results may be realized within the state-of-the-art experiments
in BECs [33]. Though the effects of nonlinearities are not considered above, it is clear from Eq.
(6) and Eq. (16) that attractive and repulsive intraspecies and interspecies nonlinearities may
also be used to further control the dynamical characteristics of nonlinear waves past the impurity.
Nonlinear waves constructed above may find applications in coherent transport phenomena using
 10

guided atom lasers [4], atom-chip quantum circuits [52], scan-probes to detect surfaces of several
material structures [53].

G 4 Ω 1
FIG. 5. (Color online) Analytical solution of Eq. 1,, for µ = 9 and µ = 2

4 TRANSPORT MODES

We study in this section, the stationary transport modes of condensate flow through a one
dimensional waveguide with a step potential. The motion for the amplitude p(x) is given by Eq.(8).
Considering that an incident beam of condensate propagates from the upstream region, i.e., for
x → −∞, (V (x) = 0, p(x) = 1) to the downstream region, i.e., for x → +∞ (V (x) = 1, p(x) 6= 1).
In order to properly define the scattering problem, we first study the asymptotic behavior of the
flow where V (x) = 0. Eq. 8 can be integrated one time, yielding the first-order equation of motion

 2
1 dp(x)
E= + W (n), (17)
8 dx

where W (n = p(x)) = (−Ω + µ − V0 ) n2 − 41 G n3 + 12 J0 2 and E is an integration constant denoted

as a classical energy. Eq. (17) expresses the energy conservation of a one-dimensional Hamiltonian
system for a fictitious classical particle with position p(x) and time x in a potential W . In the
upstream region, Eu = −Ω+µ− 41 G+ 12 J0 2 and Ed = −Ω n2 +µn2 − 14 G n3 + 12 J0 2 in the downstream
region. The energie transfer (∆E = Ed − Eu ) is a measure for the amplitude of the density
 11

oscillations in the upstream region, i.e., increasing values of ∆E imply a larger backreflection. Our
purpose is now to determine the reflection and transmission coefficients, T and R,

NEW ABSORBING BOUNDARY CONDITIONS.

Using the one-dimensional Schrödinger equation

∂ ~2 ∂ 2
i~ ψ (x, t) = − ψ (x, t) + V ψ (x, t) , (18)
∂t 2 m ∂x2
with V constant and ψ (x, t) = e−i(−kx+µ t) the wave-function, dispersion relation is given by

k 2 ~2 = 2 m (~ µ − V ) (19)

The group velocity C is found by deriving Eq.(19) with respect to k. the group velocity of a wave
packet as it is evolved by the Schrödinger equation is given by
~k
C= . (20)
m
Since a single differential equation can absorb only a waves of a certain group velocity, let us
consider an approximation to Eq.(20) of the form
~k
=a (21)
m
On the boundary, where a is positive and real. the correspondance between the dual k and the
∂


partial derivative in x, i.e k = −i ∂x yeald from Eq.(21) to
∂ maψ (x, t)
i ψ (x, t) + =0 (22)
∂x ~
If this differential equation is satisfied on the boundary, then the waves traveling to the right with
group velocity a would be absorbed completely, leading to no reflections off the boundary from
that component of the numerical solution for the wave. But in general waves are composed of more
than one component with different group velocities. Therefore, a generalization of the operator in
Eq.(22) is
p
Y ∂ mal ψ (x, t)
i ψ (x, t) + =0 (23)
∂x ~
l=1
If ak 6= al , k 6= l, then the effect of the differential Eq.(38), when applied to the boundary, would be
to completely absorb p different components of the computed wave solution with p different group
velocities each being absorbed to the first order If ak 6= al , k 6= l, then the effect of this differential
equation, when applied to the boundary, would be to completely absorb the component of the
computed wave solution with group velocity aj to the pth order about each interpolation point of
m ai
the dispersion relation ~ at the value k.
 12

COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS WORK.

∂
By taking p = 2 , and k = −i ∂x , Eq.38 yield
  
ma1 ψ1 (x, t) ma2 ψ2 (x, t)
−kψ1 (x, t) + −kψ2 (x, t) + =0 (24)
~ ~
From dispersion equation we have ~2 k 2 = 2 m (~ µ − V ) introducing it in Eq.(24), and solving for
~ k one have
~µ − V ma1 a2
~k = 2 + (25)
a1 + a2 a1 + a2
√ √ √ √ √ √ √ √
(2 mα2 − 2 mα1 )(~ µ−V ) α2 2 mα1 −α1 2 mα2
by comparison to Shibata’s relationship (~ k = α2 −α1 + α2 −α1 ),
we found
1
α1 = 2 ma1 2
(26)
1
α2 = 2 ma2 2

For p=3 we have

 ma1   ma2   ma3 
−k + −k + −k + = 0, (27)
~ ~ ~
substituting ~2 k 2 by 2 m(µ − V ) this simplifies to the relation
2 m2 (~ µ − V ) (a1 + a2 + a3 ) + m3 a1 a2 a3
~k = (28)
2 m (~ µ − V ) + m2 a1 a2 a3 (a1 −1 + a2 −1 + a3 −1 )
by letting h1 = m (a1 + a2 + a3 ) ; h2 = m2 a1 a2 a3 a1 −1 + a2 −1 + a3 −1 and h3 = m3 a1 a2 a3 we

found
2 mh1 (~ µ − V ) + h3
~k = , (29)
2 m (~ µ − V ) + h2
to obtain the equation for left-going waves, multiply the right-hand side of Eq.(29) by −1 By
~ k0
setting a1 = a2 = a3 = m , we obtain

6 m ~ k0 (~, µ − V ) + ~3 k0 3
~k = (30)
2 m (~ µ − V ) + 3 ~2 k0 2
Eq.(30) can be rewrite in terms of Kuska’s symbol
~ k0 (3 z + 1)
~k = (31)
z+3
where z = 2 m(~ µ−V )
~2 k 2
. Therefore, Shibata’s relationship for ~ k is equivalent to our second order
0

(p = 2) absorbing boundary condition and Kuska’s relationship for ~ K is equivalent to a special

case of our third order (p = 3) boundary condition. For p = 4 we have
 ma1   ma2   ma3   ma4 
−k + −k + −k + −k + =0 (32)
~ ~ ~ ~
 13

Eq.(32) after few mathematical operations yield

4 m2 (~ µ − V )2 + 2 m (−~ kg1 + g2 ) (~ µ − V ) − g3 ~ k + g4 = 0 (33)

where g1 = m (a1 + a2 + a3 + a4 ) ; g2 = m2 (a1 a2 + a1 a3 + a1 a4 + a2 a3 + a2 a4 + a3 a4 ); g3 =

m3 a1 a2 a3 a4 a1 −1 + a2 −1 + a3 −1 + a4 −1 and g4 = m4 a1 a2 a3 a4 . Again, we have replaced ~ k

with its lower order equivalent (Eq.19). If we let all the interpolation points be identical,
~ k0
a1 = a2 = a3 = a4 = m , then we obtain
! −1
m2 (~ µ − V )2 m (~ µ − V ) m (~ µ − V )
hk = ~ k0 4 4 + 12 +1 8 +4 (34)
~4 k0 ~2 k0 2 ~2 k0 2

setting z = 2 m(~ µ−V )

~2 k 2
, Eq.(34) yield
0

1 ~ k0 z 2 + 6 z + 1


~k = (35)
4 z+1

REFLECTION COEFFICIENTS

Consider a wave, with a reflected component

ψ (x, t) = e−i(−kx+µ t) + re−i(kx+µ t) (36)

∂
By applying the boundary condition (i ∂x ψ (x, t)+ maψ(x,t)
h = 0), to Eq.(36) and solving with respect
to r, one found
 
 −k + ma
e−i(−kx+µ t) 
h

R = |r| =  (37)


 k+ hma −i(kx+µ t)
e 

Note that |r| is always less than one if ~ k and ai have the same sign. The general form of the
reflection for the full absorbing boundary condition (Eq.38) is
p 

−i(−kx+µ t) 
ma
Y  −k + h
e
R=
 (38)
 k + ma −i(kx+µ t)

l=1 h e 

5 CONCLUSION

In this work, we have investigated the dynamics of two-component BECs linearly coupled with
a Raman laser in the presence of an obstacle modelled by a step potential. Focusing on stationary
states, it has been shown that only kink solitary waves or Jacobi elliptic function of sn-type may
 14

be transmitted over the step potential. The explicit forms of the kink solitary waves as well as
that of the Jacobi elliptic function of sn-type are exactly constructed. The influence of the system
parameters on the properties and the existence conditions are elucidated. For example it is shown
that the height of the step potential, strength of the Raman coupling and nonlinearities may be
used to control the amplitudes and periods of wave generates as well as their profiles. These results
may be tested in the state-of-the-art experiment with BECs, in optical fibers or waveguides arrays
due to the analogy between BECs and nonlinear optical systems [54].

Funding This work was financially supported by the authors. This work was also performed
as part of the University of Yaounde I. It was also supported by the African Centre for Advanced
Studies (ACAS).

Conflict of interest: The authors declare no competing interest

REFERENCES

[1] M. Hartung, T. Wellens and P. Schlagheck, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 020603 (1994):
[2] Li Jin-Hui, Chin. Phys. B 19, 4 (2011)
[3] F. Jian-Shu, Chin. Phys. B 17, 11 (2008)
[4] P. Tobias and P. Schlagheck, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 020404 (2005)
[5] A. Ishkhanyan and V. P. Krainov, Phys. Rev. A 80 045601, (2009)
[6] P. Leboeuf, N. Pavloff and S. Simba, Phys. Rev. A 68 063608, (2003)
[7] P. Leboeuf and N. Pavloff, Phys. Rev. A 64, 063602 (2001)
[8] P. Richter and Schlagbeck, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 020404 (2001)
[9] V. P. Kyraynov, and H. A. Ishkanyan, Phys. Scr. T140, 014052 (2010)
[10] D. Belobo, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 133, 297 (2017)
[11] M. Burt, C. Wieman and E. Cornell, Phys. Rev. Lett 78, 586 (1997)
[12] D. Hall, C. Wieman, and E. Cornell, Phys. Rev. Lett 81, 1539 (2018)
[13] Y. S. Kivshar and G. P. Agrawal Optical solitons : from fibers to photonic crystals, 2nd ed., (Academic
Press, San Diego, 1995)
[14] R. Y. Ondoua and D. Belobo Belobo, Phys. Rev. E 102, 062414 (2020)
[15] J. Williams, R. Walser, J. Cooper, E. Cornell and M. Holland, Phys. Rev. A. 59, R31 (1999)
[16] G. Mazzarella, M. Moratti, L. Salasnich, M. Salerno and F. Toigo 2009, J. Phys. B 42 125301
[17] S. Ashhab and C. Lobo, Phys. Rev. A 66, 013609 (2002)
 15

[18] G. Mazzarella, B. A. Malomed, L. Salasnich, M. Salerno and F. Toigo, J. Phys. B 44, 035301 (2011)
[19] P. Öhberg and S. Stenholm, Phys. Rev. A 57, 1272 (1998)
[20] B. D. Esry and C. H. Greene, Phys. Rev. A 59, 1457 (1999)
[21] M. Trippenbach, Y. B. Band and P. S. Julienne, Phys. Rev. A 62, 023608 (2000)
[22] T. L. Ho and V. B. Shenoy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3276 (1996)
[23] E. Timmermans, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5718 (1998)
[24] M. R. Matthews, B. P. Anderson, P. C. Haljan, D. S. Hall, C. E. Wieman and E. A. Cornell, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 83, 2498 (1999)
[25] J. J. Garcia-Ripoll and V. M. Perez-Garcia, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 4264 (2000)
[26] Y.-J. Lin, K. Jimenez-Garcıa and I. B. Spielman, Nat. Lett. 471, 83 (2003)
[27] D. Belobo and T. Meier, Sci. Rep. 8, 3706 (2018)
[28] A. M. Kamchatnov and Y. V. Kartashov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 140402 (2013)
[29] D. M. Stamper-Kurn and M. Ueda, Rev. Mod. Phys. 85, 1191 (1989)
[30] W. Bao and Y. Ca, Kinet. Relat. Models 6, 1 (2013)
[31] W. Bao and Y. Cai, SIAM J. Appl. Math 75, 492 (2015)
[32] H. Feshbach, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 5, 375 (1958)
[33] S. Inouye et al, Nature (London) 392, 151 (1998)
[34] J. H. V. Nguyen, De Luo and R. G. Hulet, Science 356, 422 (2017)
[35] B. Deconinck, P. G. Kevrekidis, H. E. Nistazakis and D. J. Frantzeskakis, Phys. Rev. A 70, 063605
(2004)
[36] H. E. Nistazakis, Z. Rapti, D. J. Frantzeskakis, P. G. Kevrekidis, P. Sodano and A. Trombettoni, Phys.
Rev.A 78, 023635 (2008)
[37] C. P. Search and P. R. Berman, Phys. Rev. A 63, 043612 (2001)
[38] S. D. Jenkins and T. A. Brian Kennedy, Phys. Rev. A 68, 053607 (2003)
[39] I. M. Merhasin, B. A. Malomed and and R. Driben, J. Phys. B 38, 877 (2005)
[40] H. Strobel, T. Zibold, C. Gross, B.A. Malomed, P.G. Kevrekidis and M.K. Oberthaler, Phys. Rev.Lett.
107, 193001 (2011)
[41] Y.-J. Lin, K. Jimenez-Garcıa and I. B. Spielman, Nat. Lett. 471, 83 (2011)
[42] E. A. Cornell and C. E. Wieman, Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 875 (2002)
[43] W. Ketterle, Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 1131 (2002)
[44] D. M. Stamper-Kurn, M. R. Andrews, A. P. Chikkatur, S. Inouye, M. H. Miesner, J. Stenger and W.
Ketterle, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 2027 (1998)
[45] M. D. Barrett, J. A. Sauer and M. S. Chapman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 010404 (2001)
[46] J. Weiner, V. S. Bagnato, S. Zilio and P. S. Julienne, Rev. Mod. Phys. 71, 1 (1999)
[47] R. Grimm, M. Weidemüller and Y. B. Ovchinnikov, Adv. At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 42, 95 (2000)
[48] H. Ishkhanyan, A. Manukyan and A. Ishkhanyan, Int. J. Mod. Phys. 15, 232 (2012)
[49] M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun, Handbook of Mathematical Functions (National Bureau of Stan-
 16

dards,Washington D.C. 1964)

[50] D. F. Lawden, Elliptic Functions and Applications (Springer-Verlag, New York. 2014)
[51] F. P. Byrd and M. D. Friedman, Handbook of elliptic integrals for engineers and Scientists, 2nd ed.,
(Springer-Verlag: Revised, 1971)
[52] R. Labouvie, B. Santra, S. Heun, S. Wimberger, and O. Herwig, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 050601 (2015)
[53] M. Gierling et al., Nature Nanotech 6, 446 (2011)
[54] Y. V. Kartashov, B. A. Malomed, and L. Torner, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 247 (2011)