• Advanced Photonics
  • Vol. 1, Issue 4, 046002 (2019)
Da Xu1, Zi-Zhao Han1, Yu-Kun Lu1, Qihuang Gong1,2,3,4..., Cheng-Wei Qiu5, Gang Chen3,6,** and Yun-Feng Xiao1,2,3,4,*|Show fewer author(s)
Author Affiliations
  • 1Peking University, State Key Laboratory for Artificial Microstructures and Mesoscopic Physics, School of Physics, Beijing, China
  • 2Nano-optoelectronics Frontier Center of the Ministry of Education, Collaborative Innovation Center of Quantum Matter, Beijing, China
  • 3Shanxi University, Collaborative Innovation Center of Extreme Optics, Taiyuan, China
  • 4Beijing Academy of Quantum Information Sciences, Beijing, China
  • 5National University of Singapore, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Singapore, Singapore
  • 6Shanxi University, Institute of Laser Spectroscopy, State Key Laboratory of Quantum Optics and Quantum Optics Devices, Taiyuan, China
  • show less
    DOI: 10.1117/1.AP.1.4.046002 Cite this Article Set citation alerts
    Da Xu, Zi-Zhao Han, Yu-Kun Lu, Qihuang Gong, Cheng-Wei Qiu, Gang Chen, Yun-Feng Xiao, "Synchronization and temporal nonreciprocity of optical microresonators via spontaneous symmetry breaking," Adv. Photon. 1, 046002 (2019) Copy Citation Text show less
    Schematic diagram of the system. (a) Two detuned and self-sustained optical microcavities with different resonant frequencies, ω10 and ω20, which are directly coupled at strength g. (b)–(d) Frequency spectra of the coupled cavities, showing three different long-term states: unsynchronized, limit cycle (LC), and synchronized (Sync.). Light blue represents the noise backgrounds from which the first- and second-order synchronizations are distinguished.
    Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the system. (a) Two detuned and self-sustained optical microcavities with different resonant frequencies, ω10 and ω20, which are directly coupled at strength g. (b)–(d) Frequency spectra of the coupled cavities, showing three different long-term states: unsynchronized, limit cycle (LC), and synchronized (Sync.). Light blue represents the noise backgrounds from which the first- and second-order synchronizations are distinguished.
    Long-term evolutions of the two cavity modes under different coupling strengths. Three different categories are shown: (a) the unsynchronized (g˜=0.3), (b) limit cycle (g˜=0.398), and (c) synchronized states (g˜=0.4). (a1)–(c1) Phase difference; (a2)–(c2) transient frequencies; (a3)–(c3) trajectory encircling types (black cross as the axis); and (a4)–(c4) dynamical potential near the synchrony point. In all figures, the given detuning Δ˜=0.3 and Kerr factor δ˜=0.1.
    Fig. 2. Long-term evolutions of the two cavity modes under different coupling strengths. Three different categories are shown: (a) the unsynchronized (g˜=0.3), (b) limit cycle (g˜=0.398), and (c) synchronized states (g˜=0.4). (a1)–(c1) Phase difference; (a2)–(c2) transient frequencies; (a3)–(c3) trajectory encircling types (black cross as the axis); and (a4)–(c4) dynamical potential near the synchrony point. In all figures, the given detuning Δ˜=0.3 and Kerr factor δ˜=0.1.
    Parameter dependence of the synchronization. (a), (b) Maximum of the frequency differences, max|ω1−ω2|, versus the coupling strength g˜, with (Δ˜=0.2, δ˜=0.1) in (a) and (Δ˜=0.3, δ˜=0.1) in (b); inset shows the derivative. (c) Phase diagram in the (Δ˜,g˜) plane with the Kerr factor δ˜=0.1. The inaccessible (gray), limit cycle (dark blue), and synchronized (light blue) regimes are marked. The red cross stands for the triple phase point (Δ˜T,g˜T). (d) The triple phase point (Δ˜T,g˜T) depending on the Kerr factor δ˜.
    Fig. 3. Parameter dependence of the synchronization. (a), (b) Maximum of the frequency differences, max|ω1ω2|, versus the coupling strength g˜, with (Δ˜=0.2, δ˜=0.1) in (a) and (Δ˜=0.3, δ˜=0.1) in (b); inset shows the derivative. (c) Phase diagram in the (Δ˜,g˜) plane with the Kerr factor δ˜=0.1. The inaccessible (gray), limit cycle (dark blue), and synchronized (light blue) regimes are marked. The red cross stands for the triple phase point (Δ˜T,g˜T). (d) The triple phase point (Δ˜T,g˜T) depending on the Kerr factor δ˜.
    Hysteresis behavior in frequency difference. (a), (b) Frequency differences |ω1−ω2| versus the evolution time τ in the first- and second-order transition regimes. Insets: the real-time evolution of the coupling strength g˜(τ). (c), (d) Maxima of the frequency differences, max|ω1−ω2| versus g˜(τ). For each plot, the Kerr factor δ˜=0.1; the detuning Δ˜=0.2 in (a) and (c), and Δ˜=0.3 in (b) and (d).
    Fig. 4. Hysteresis behavior in frequency difference. (a), (b) Frequency differences |ω1ω2| versus the evolution time τ in the first- and second-order transition regimes. Insets: the real-time evolution of the coupling strength g˜(τ). (c), (d) Maxima of the frequency differences, max|ω1ω2| versus g˜(τ). For each plot, the Kerr factor δ˜=0.1; the detuning Δ˜=0.2 in (a) and (c), and Δ˜=0.3 in (b) and (d).
    Da Xu, Zi-Zhao Han, Yu-Kun Lu, Qihuang Gong, Cheng-Wei Qiu, Gang Chen, Yun-Feng Xiao, "Synchronization and temporal nonreciprocity of optical microresonators via spontaneous symmetry breaking," Adv. Photon. 1, 046002 (2019)
    Download Citation