1986
DOI: 10.1103/physreva.33.1677
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Lifetime of excited atomic states

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

3
73
1

Year Published

1987
1987
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(77 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
3
73
1
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the calculation of Cresser et al (1986) was incomplete, since in their attempt to separate the "1 + 1" photon contributions to the two-photon formula 2 from the "pure" twophoton decay terms, without clear justification they neglected the first non-resonant term . Physically, it seems very difficult to separate the "pure" two-photon decay rate from the "1 + 1" resonant contributions (see discussions in Hirata 2008;Karshenboim & Ivanov 2008;Labzowsky et al 2009;Jentschura 2009), e.g., because of non-classical interference effects.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, the calculation of Cresser et al (1986) was incomplete, since in their attempt to separate the "1 + 1" photon contributions to the two-photon formula 2 from the "pure" twophoton decay terms, without clear justification they neglected the first non-resonant term . Physically, it seems very difficult to separate the "pure" two-photon decay rate from the "1 + 1" resonant contributions (see discussions in Hirata 2008;Karshenboim & Ivanov 2008;Labzowsky et al 2009;Jentschura 2009), e.g., because of non-classical interference effects.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Using rate coefficients for the vacuum two-photon decays of the 3s and 3d-levels in hydrogen, as computed by Cresser et al (1986), Wong & Scott (2007) concluded that Dubrovich & Grachev (2005) overestimated the impact of two-photon transitions on the ionization history by about one order of magnitude. However, the calculation of Cresser et al (1986) was incomplete, since in their attempt to separate the "1 + 1" photon contributions to the two-photon formula 2 from the "pure" twophoton decay terms, without clear justification they neglected the first non-resonant term .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the QED approach [31], [32] based on the Low derivation of the Lorentz profile from QED [33], the regularization is performed via the introduction of the sum of two widths, for the initial and intermediate states. Note, that in [13] the possibility of using the sum of the widths was briefly mentioned. In [34]- [36] the QED approach for the description of the multiphoton transitions with cascades was applied to the decays of 3s, 3p, 3d and 4s states in the hydrogen atom.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This regularization is performed by the introduction of the level widths in the energy denominators which otherwise turn to zero for the photon frequencies, corresponding to the cascade resonances. In the QM phenomenological approach only the width of the intermediate state is usually employed for regularization [12], [13], [27]. We call this approach phenomenological since the width is introduced as an phenomenological parameter.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation