Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-019-0653-y
When a strong laser pulse induces the ionization of an atom, fields during tunnelling). Apart from fundamental interest, com-
momentum conservation dictates that the absorbed photons plete modelling—including the photon momentum—can help
transfer their momentum to the electron and its parent ion. one to better understand strong-field phenomena such as high-
The sharing of the photon momentum between the two par- harmonic generation15–17 (and thus attosecond science18,19), time-
ticles and its underlying mechanism in strong-field ioniza- resolved photoelectron holography14 or molecular imaging12,13,
tion, occurring when the bound electron tunnels through the which are all sensitive to small perturbations of the light field.
barrier created by the superposition of the atomic potential The energy Eγ provided by the laser field for an ionization process
and the electric laser field, are still debated in theory1–4 after is accompanied by an injection of corresponding linear momentum
30 years of research. Corresponding experiments are very pγ = Eγ/c to the electron–ion system. The energy Eγ is employed to
challenging due to the extremely small photon momentum overcome the ionization potential Ip as well as to give the emitted
and their precision has been too limited, so far, to ultimately electron its kinetic energy Ee,kin. The ionization event can be viewed
resolve this debate5–8. By utilizing an experimental approach as a two-step process. In a first step, the ionization potential Ip must
relying on two counter-propagating laser pulses, we present be overcome. One might thus expect that the corresponding photon
a detailed study of the effects of the photon momentum in momentum is transferred to the centre-of-mass of the system (that
strong-field ionization. The high precision of the method and is, essentially to the much heavier parent ion (equation (1), left, with
the intrinsically known zero momentum allow us to unambigu- x being the direction of the light)). If in the second step the electron
ously demonstrate the action of the light’s magnetic field on is accelerated by the laser field independently of its parent ion, one
the electron while it is under the tunnel barrier, which has only might expect that it absorbs the photon momentum associated with
been theoretically predicted so far1–3,9, thereby disproving its gain in kinetic energy (equation (1), right).
opposing predictions5,10,11. Our results deepen the understand-
ing of, for example, molecular imaging12,13 and time-resolved Ip Ee;kin P2e
hPion;x i ¼ hPe;x i ¼ ¼ ð1Þ
photoelectron holography14. c c 2c
The advent of pulsed laser systems, which are capable of gen-
erating ultrashort light pulses with electric field amplitudes on In recent work, Chelkowski et al.1 predicted a surprising devia-
the order of the atomic binding field, launched the research field tion from this intuitive consideration: the photon momentum asso-
of strong-field ionization. The overwhelming majority of theoreti- ciated with Ip is not solely given to the parent ion, but a substantial
cal studies in this discipline consider ionization within the ‘electric fraction, evaluated as 1/3 of Ip/c within relativistic tunnelling the-
dipole approximation’, which neglects the linear momentum of the ory2,9, is imparted on the electron. In the adiabatic limit of tunnel
photon pγ = Eγ/c. Without the radiation pressure of the laser light, ionization, this offset is induced by the action of the laser magnetic
the momentum distribution of the emerging electron–ion system is field on the quantum mechanical tunnelling of the electron2,9 (see
by definition symmetric with respect to the propagation direction of Supplementary Information for further information). Recently,
the light. In the wave picture, the dipole approximation disregards numerical solutions of the non-dipole time-dependent Schrödinger
effects of the light’s magnetic field and of the spatial inhomogeneity equation (TDSE) in two and three dimensions confirmed that
of the electromagnetic wave. In most cases, the dipole approxima- prediction for circularly polarized light, and theory found further
tion is appropriate, as the photon momentum is typically 3–4 orders details for the case of linear light4,20–24. To summarize, by putting in
of magnitude smaller than the momenta of emitted photoelectrons the recent theoretical work, equation (1) stemming from an intui-
and ions. However, any rigorous approach needs to account tive classical perspective can be expanded to equation (2) for recol-
for momentum conservation as one of the most essential con- lision-free ionization with vanishing initial velocity v0.
cepts in physics. A comprehensive understanding of the role of the
photon momentum in strong-field ionization is therefore of Ee;kin 1 I p P2e 1 I p
hPe;x i ¼ þ ¼ þ ð2Þ
fundamental interest. c 3c 2c 3 c
Within a wide range of laser intensities, strong-field ionization
occurs as tunnelling of the bound electron through a potential bar- So far, there is no experimental observation of the two non-
rier created by the superposition of the atomic potential and the dipole effects suggested above, namely the quantum mechani-
electric field of the laser. The potential role of the light’s magnetic cal Ip-dependent shift and the dependence on the overall electron
field in such tunnel ionization processes implies interesting ques- momentum independent of laser intensity. This undertaking is
tions (for example, whether particles are susceptible to magnetic extremely challenging, mainly because the expected offset momentum
Institut für Kernphysik, Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. 2Institut für Theoretische Physik, Leibniz Universität
1
a d Intensity (counts)
g
0 0.5 1.0
0.3 0.005
px (a.u.)
Electrons 0
–0.1
0.003
–0.2
–0.3
–1.0 –0.5 0 0.5 1.0
pz (a.u.) 0.002
b Standing wave e
0.3
0.001
0.2
0.1
Electrons 0 0
–0.1
–0.2
–0.001
–0.3
–1.0 –0.5 0 0.5 1.0
pz (a.u.)
–0.002
c f
0.3
0.2
–0.003
0.1 Laser direction:
px (a.u.)
Electrons 0
–0.004 Laser direction:
–0.1
Fig. 1 | Experimental scheme. In all panels the abscissa depicts the light polarization axis z, and the ordinate depicts the light propagation axis x. a–c, The
set-up allows for three different geometries for strong-field ionization of argon. The laser can enter the interaction chamber either from one side
individually (a,c) or from both sides simultaneously, creating a standing wave (b). d–f, The corresponding electron momentum distributions obtained
for linear light do not seem to exhibit any offsets caused by the photon momentum (that is, they do not show any asymmetrical features along the light
propagation axis). The dashed coloured lines in d–f show the mean momentum in the light propagation direction, which will be described later in detail
(see g). Owing to the symmetry of the experiment in the light polarization axis z, the data were symmetrized in that dimension. For d–f the colour scale
depicts the number of collected counts on a linear scale. In d the total number of counts is 2.3 × 106, in e it is 1.0 × 106 counts and in f it is 5.1 × 106 counts.
g, By calculating the mean momentum in the light propagation direction for all three ionization scenarios and zooming in by a factor of ~100, clear non-
dipole features become visible. In the case of ionization by a standing wave, no significant momentum offset arises, because of the spatial symmetry of
the experimental arrangement. In the two cases of ionization by a single laser pulse from just one side, the parabolic shape flips sign when flipping the
propagation direction of the laser pulse. The error bars show statistical errors (that is, standard deviations of the mean).
is orders of magnitude smaller than the typical momentum of the ionization of argon in a 25 fs laser pulse with a central wavelength of
electron. In a pioneering attempt to measure non-dipole effects, 800 nm. As can be seen in Fig. 1, our set-up allows for the simultaneous
Smeenk et al.5 found a forward shift of the electron’s average momen- injection of the laser beam from opposite directions. This gives rise
tum in circularly polarized light on the order of 10−2 atomic units to three possible schemes to induce strong-field ionization: shoot-
(a.u.), increasing linearly with laser intensity. Ludwig et al.6 and later ing in from the bottom (Fig. 1a), shooting in from the top (Fig. 1c)
on Maurer et al.7 examined the peak of electron distributions in lin- and creating a standing wave of light in the interaction region by
early and elliptically polarized light. They detected a counter-intuitive simultaneous injection of light from both sides (Fig. 1b). This scheme
shift in the direction opposite to the laser propagation on the same provides essential benefits for experimental investigation of the
magnitude as Smeenk et al. Due to the experimental resolution and non-dipole effects. First, ionization in a standing wave (see Fig. 1b)
the used calibration method for finding the zero of the momentum does not—by definition—exhibit any forward–backward asymme-
distribution, the precision of previous experimental studies did not try, providing an intrinsically known zero momentum. Second, by
allow one to address both summands in equation (2) (see Methods comparing the two momentum distributions measured by injecting
for more details). For the present work, we employed an experimen- single laser beams from either side, instrumental asymmetries along
tal approach based on two counter-propagating laser pulses. the propagation axis of the laser cancel out.
We utilized the COLTRIMS technique25 to measure the momen- The momentum distributions recorded separately are shown
tum distributions of electrons and ions created by strong-field in Fig. 1d–f. The momentum of a single photon at 800 nm is
0.004 clear evidence for the forward shift of 1/3 Ip/c. This offset is, further-
more, a clear signature of the magnetic field effects in laser-induced
0.002 ionization1. Since for our laser parameters tunnel ionization is the
dominant process, the global shift may be interpreted as the action
of the laser magnetic field onto the electron, while it is under the
0
tunnel barrier2,9.
–0.001 We support our experimental data by a numerical solution of
b the non-dipole three-dimensional (3D) TDSE. The so found depen-
Intensity (counts)
0.3 1.0
dence of the average momentum <px> on the radial momentum p⊥
px (a.u.)
0 0.5 (green line in Fig. 2a) is in good agreement with the experimental
data. A quantum-orbit model (blue line in Fig. 2a) derived from the
–0.3 0 strong-field approximation3 (SFA) shows deviations from the sim-
1.5 1.0 0.5 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 ple parabola. These are caused by the initial velocity of the electron
p⊥ (a.u.)
immediately after the tunnelling process. However, for a vanishing
initial velocity, the expected shift of (Ee,kin + Ip/3)/c is reproduced.
Fig. 2 | Results for circularly polarized light. a, The mean electron Details on the TDSE and SFA can be found in the Methods.
momentum in the light propagation direction <px> plotted against the Further aspects can be learned from the case of linear polariza-
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
radial momentum jp? j ¼ p2y þ p2z obtained by using circularly polarized tion where the freed electron can return to the parent ion after each
I −2; note the scale of ~10−3 a.u. The orange points half-cycle of the laser pulse. During the post-ionization Coulomb
light at 1.7 × 1014 W cm
interaction of the electron with the parent ion, a substantial amount
show the experimental mean value. The error bars show statistical errors
of momentum can be exchanged. Therefore, deviations from the
(that is, standard deviation of the mean). The green line depicts the mean
adiabatic, potential-free estimate of equation (2) are expected.
momentum obtained by numerically solving the TDSE; the theoretical
Figure 3 shows experimental data (<px>, orange) along with
results obtained by using SFA are shown as a blue line. For comparison,
the results obtained by solving the 3D TDSE (green). The situa-
the functions given by equation (1) (equation (2)) are also shown as
tion is more complex than for circularly polarized laser pulses as
black dashed (dotted) lines. b, For visual orientation, the experimental 2D
the mean <px> does not coincide with the position of the peak
momentum distribution is displayed within the same coordinate frame as in
of the momentum distribution, plotted as purple points (experi-
a. There are 2.8 × 105 counts plotted with the same linear colour scale that
ment) and a red line (TDSE) in Fig. 3a. To obtain the peak posi-
is used in Fig. 1. Note that, by definition, p⊥ can take only positive values. For
tions, we performed Gaussian fits of the distributions (see Methods
an intuitive comparison with the other figures, the data are also depicted on
for more details). Comparison to SFA, marked as a blue line, (see
the mirrored left side of the figure.
Supplementary Information for details of the calculation) shows
that non-adiabatic effects can only partially explain the observed
deviations. Theoretical analysis shows that the maximum’s positions
4 × 10−4 a.u. Accordingly, obvious differences cannot be expected in are determined by rescattered electrons, which perform a ‘swing-by
the panoramic views of the electron momentum distributions in the process’ at the parent ion, as described in refs. 6,7,26. In the region of
range ±1.0 a.u (Fig. 1d–f). Hence, for better visualization, the mean small momenta, the experimental (|pz| < 0.1 a.u.) and more clearly
momentum <px> in the direction of the light is taken for every value the theoretical (|pz| < 0.36 a.u.) Gaussian fit centres become nega-
of momentum in the polarization direction pz. The comparison of tive, indicating a counter-intuitive ‘backward’ shift of the peak of
the three possible laser irradiation schemes in Fig. 1g clearly shows the momentum distribution against the laser propagation direction,
an effect caused by the photon momentum. As expected, we find as reported in previous experiments6,7 and theory4. The electrons in
<px> close to zero for the standing wave measurement, lying sym- the narrow central peak with nearly no kinetic energy are initially
metrically in between the distributions belonging to the two ‘single- accelerated in the laser electric field with a slight forward push in
way’ experiments. These exhibit mirror-symmetrical momentum the laser direction by the magnetic field, but subsequently when
offsets along their respective directions of light propagation and returning to the parent ion scatter from it, resulting in an overall
show an approximately quadratic dependence on the momentum, backward shift. At higher momenta (|pz| > 0.5 a.u.), no significant
as suggested by equation (2). Figure 1 illustrates the experimental Ip-dependent offset can be seen in our experiment and calculations
procedure and shows data measured with linearly polarized light. for the case of linearly polarized light. In this region, the position of
Here strong post-ionization Coulomb interaction may alter the pure the maximum is determined by the central fringe of the holographic
non-dipole concept introduced above (equation (2)). A simpler case pattern, which can be approximately described by glory rescatter-
of recollision-free ionization can be examined by using circularly ing27. Here, classical Coulomb focusing (as was recently described
polarized laser light. with the use of classical trajectory Monte Carlo simulations26) in
The experimental results in Fig. 2b show the doughnut-shaped combination with nearly constructive interference between differ-
electron momentum distribution obtained by ionization with circu- ent trajectories leads to the pronounced maximum28. During the
larly polarized laser light. The light propagation is along the posi- acceleration of the electron before rescattering, the magnetic field
tive px direction. Cylindrical coordinates are used, exploiting the causes a velocity component in the light propagation direction such
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
that the scattering probability is not symmetric about the polariza-
rotational symmetry around px by calculating p? ¼ p2y þ p2z . On
tion axis24. In contrast to the position of the maximum, the mean
the scale of Fig. 2b, the non-dipole forward shiftI of the distribution value <px> is also influenced by ‘direct’ (non-rescattered) electrons
is again not visible. The corresponding mean momentum <px> is as well as the asymmetric emission strength in the forward and
shown in Fig. 2a on a magnified scale. The data are obtained by backward direction. Taking these three effects together, on average
a 0.005
Received: 20 February 2019; Accepted: 31 July 2019;
Exp. mean Theo. TDSE mean Theo. SFA
Published: xx xx xxxx
Exp. Gaussian fit Theo. TDSE Gaussian fit
0.004 p 2z 1 Ip
<px > = +
2c 3 c References
p2
0.003 <px > = z
2c
1. Chelkowski, S., Bandrauk, A. D. & Corkum, P. B. Photon momentum sharing
between an electron and an ion in photoionization: from one-photon
<px > (a.u.)
Intensity (counts)
0.3 1.0
5. Smeenk, C. T. L. et al. Partitioning of the linear photon momentum in
multiphoton ionization. Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 193002 (2011).
px (a.u.)
Methods non-dipole corrections. We follow the scheme presented in ref. 22 such that the
Laser set-up and gas target. The laser pulses are generated by a Coherent Legend theory covers the dynamics within the electric quadrupole and magnetic dipole
Elite Duo laser system at a central wavelength of 800 nm. The repetition rate is approximation. After applying a unitary transformation to the initial system in the
10 kHz and the duration of the laser pulses is 25 fs (full-width at half-maximum Coulomb gauge, we obtain a numerical solution of the TDSE, i∂t ψ ðr; t Þ ¼ Hψ ðr; t Þ,
in intensity). The laser can be focused into the chamber from two opposite with a transformed Hamiltonian I
directions. To this end, a dielectric beamsplitter, which is located 2.3 m away 2
1 ex 1 x
from the entrance windows, splits the initial laser beam path and directs it into H¼ p þ Að t Þ þ p Aðt Þ þ A2 ðt Þ þV r � Aðt Þ ð3Þ
two pathways. Both pathways allow for the adjustment of intensity, polarization 2 c 2 c
state and time delay of the laser pulses by neutral-density filters, λ/2 and λ/4
retardation plates and a delay stage, respectively. Both laser pulses are focused by that is solved numerically using the split-operator method on a Cartesian
identical lenses (f = 25 cm), which are placed outside the vacuum chamber, into grid with a time step of 0.025 a.u. During the propagation, outgoing parts of
an argon gas target. The gas target is created by supersonic gas expansion from a the wavefunction are projected onto Volkov states. To obtain the momentum
small nozzle (opening hole diameter 30 μm) into vacuum and subsequently led distribution, these momentum-space amplitudes are summed up coherently35.
through a skimmer (diameter 210 μm). The transversal size of the gas jet can be The effective potential V for the argon atom is chosen as by Tong et al.36, but with
adjusted by piezo-controlled collimators. In the measurements, the intersection of the singularity removed using a pseudopotential37 for angular momentum l = 1.
the cropped gas jet and laser focus create an ionization volume of approximately The outermost subshell of the ground state consists of three degenerate p orbitals,
100 × 30 × 30 μm³, thereby reducing focal averaging. For the calibration of the p+1, p−1 and p0, where the index indicates the magnetic quantum number ml of
laser intensity, the average drift momentum of the electrons (pdrift = 0.87 a.u.), the orbital angular momentum in the direction of the light. The quantity Aðt Þ is
Rt I
created by circularly polarized light, is used. For circularly polarized light, a laser obtained by integration Aðt Þ ¼ � Eðt 0 Þdt 0 of the electric field
pulse with a negative vector potential of 0.87 a.u. corresponds to an intensity
of 1.7 × 1014 W cm−2 in the focus (Keldysh parameter γ = 1.2). The comparison I E0 � ωt
Eðt Þ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi sinðωt Þez þ ζ cosðωt Þey sin2 ð4Þ
of the laser powers used in the two polarization states yields an intensity of 1 þ ζ2 20
1.1 × 1014 W cm−2 for linearly polarized light (γ = 1.1).
with ζ being the ellipticity. In all calculations, a sin2-envelope with a full duration of
Particle detection and calibration. Electrons and ions produced by strong-field 10 optical cycles and a carrier frequency of ω = 0.0569 a.u. is used.
ionization are guided towards position-sensitive detectors by a homogeneous For circularly polarized light, we perform separately calculations for the
electric field (20 V cm−1). For the electrons (ions), the length of the field region is p± states co- and counter-rotating with respect to the field as initial states.
15 cm (58 cm), followed by a field-free region with a length of 30 cm (108 cm). The We perform calculations for 13 intensities ranging from 0.4 × 1014 W cm−2
earth magnetic field is compensated by Helmholtz coils and the spectrometer is to 1.6 × 1014 W cm−2 and average the results over the focal volume
further shielded from remaining magnetic fields by a μ-metal shield. The signal intensity distribution, assuming a Gaussian focus with a peak intensity of
of the electrons (ions) is amplified by a stack of 3 (2) multi-channel plates with I = 1.7 × 1014 W cm−2. The numerical grid size is 179 a.u. in all directions
a diameter of 80 mm (120 mm). Subsequently, for both types of particle, a delay- with a spacing of Δx = 0.35 a.u. The PMD is obtained with a resolution of
line anode with three layers is used to measure the 3D momentum. As is typical Δpy = Δpz = 0.0175 a.u. and Δpx = 0.0088 a.u. after propagating the wavefunction
for a COLTRIMS reaction microscope25, the momenta of electrons and ions are for one additional cycle after the end of the laser pulse. To calculate the average as
measured in coincidence. The momentum resolution is Δpx = Δpy = 0.0011 a.u., a function of the in-plane momentum p⊥ shown in Fig. 2, we follow the description
Δpz = 0.032 a.u. for electrons (x points along the light propagation direction, from ref. 22, but average over the ATI peaks as performed in the experiment. Only
y points along the direction of the gas jet and z points along the time-of-flight minor changes on the level of Δ<px> ≈ 10−4 a.u. appear when comparing the two
direction). In previous experimental studies5–7, the precise knowledge of the p states separately. Therefore, the incoherent sum of the momentum distributions
respective zero of the momentum distribution was obtained from electrons is used to obtain Fig. 2.
stemming from highly excited Rydberg states. These are created in the laser pulse For linearly polarized light, the pz state aligned along the polarization axis
by frustrated tunnel ionization31,32 and are field-ionized by the spectrometer field is irradiated with the pulse stated. The numerical grid size is 269 a.u. in all
after the laser pulse has faded33. By assuming that the Rydberg electrons experience directions with a spacing of Δx = 0.35 a.u. The momentum distribution for a
no non-dipole effects through the excitation process and that a homogeneous single peak intensity is obtained with a resolution of Δpy = Δpz = 0.0116 a.u. and
detection efficiency is given over the complete momentum distribution, the Δpx = 0.0088 a.u. after propagating the wavefunction for four additional cycles
reported momentum offsets were determined. In contrast, as described in the after the end of the pulse. We perform calculations for 15 intensities ranging
main text, in our present study the zero point for the electron momenta in the x from 0.4 × 1014 W cm−2 to 1.1 × 1014 W cm−2 and average the results over the focal
direction is found by comparing the two ‘single-way’ experiments. As an additional volume intensity distribution, assuming a Gaussian focus with a peak intensity
cross-check, the results obtained on ionization by the standing wave are used, of I = 1.1 × 1014 W cm−2. The PMD is also averaged over slices of Δpz = 0.1 a.u.
which should lie mirror-symmetrically around px = 0 a.u. The proportionality to reduce oscillations resulting from ATI rings. To determine the position of the
constant to obtain the correct final magnitude of the electron momenta in the x lateral maximum, we perform a Gaussian fit to the central region, as described in
direction and the y direction for the discussed small magnitudes is calibrated by the ‘Data analysis’ section, at each longitudinal momentum pz. We find that there is
analysing a sharp momentum sphere (|p| = 0.026 a.u.) that is due to doubly excited only a minor difference in the position of the maximum obtained from projection
auto-ionizing high-lying states in argon following the irradiance with a strong onto the px–pz plane (as shown in Fig. 3) or the cut along this plane. The focal-
linearly polarized light field34. The proportionality constant to obtain the correct averaged results show the same main features as the calculation for the highest
final magnitude of the electron momenta in the z direction is calibrated with intensity 1.1 × 1014 W cm−2, except that oscillations resulting from intra-cycle
above-threshold ionization (ATI) peaks from argon on strong-field ionization interferences are smoothed out and that the depth of the minima in the observables
with linearly polarized light. of Fig. 3 is slightly different. In addition to the 3D calculations in the main text,
we check the convergence of our calculations and the stability of the extraction
Data analysis. In the case of circularly polarized light, the value of the momentum
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi procedure by performing various calculations in two dimensions with different
in the light propagation direction px is plotted against jp? j ¼ p2y þ p2z (see Fig. 2b). position and momentum grids. We estimate errors for both observables shown in
The three (see Fig. 1a–c) resulting 2D distributions areI sliced along p⊥ with Fig. 3 by using the maximal difference between the calculation with the highest
a binning of p⊥ = 0.1 a.u. For the resulting px distributions, the mean <px> is resolution and calculations with the same grid parameters as in 3D but different
calculated. The difference of the two mean values that stem from the two ‘single- extraction procedures. We find that for high momenta the results depicted in
way experiments’ (see Fig. 1a,c) is divided by two. This procedure eliminates Fig. 3 are stable with respect to the discretization parameters. However, due
potential instrumental asymmetries. The result is shown in Fig. 2a. The error bars to the rich low energetic structures and the appearance of Rydberg states,
show the statistical error (68% confidence interval). we find only qualitative accuracy at low energies.
For linearly polarized light (polarization axis is aligned along the z
direction), an analogous analysis procedure is used. The 3D photoelectron Quantum-orbit model based on SFA. To deepen our understanding of the
momentum distributions (PMD) are projected onto the x–z plane in momentum momentum transfer in recollision-free ionization with circularly polarized laser
space. These 2D distributions are sliced along pz with a binning of pz = 0.1 a.u. fields, we have developed a quantum-orbit model based on the SFA as described
(see Supplementary Information). For each emerging px distribution, the mean in ref. 3, but taking only first-order corrections in 1/c into account. If we apply
px value is calculated and a Gaussian function is fitted to the central region of the saddle-point approximation to the SFA integral and neglect pre-exponential
the distribution (range of region |px| ≤ 0.01–0.17 a.u. dependent on the value factors, we can solve the saddle-point equation for the complex-valued ionization
of pz). The mean values as well as the centres of the fitted Gaussian time ts0 exactly and write the photoelectron signal approximately as
functions are plotted in Fig. 3, along with their respective statistical error I
(68% confidence interval). wðpÞ e�2ImSðp;ts Þ
0
ð5Þ
0
TDSE simulations. The PMD are obtained by performing numerical simulations with the imaginaryq part of the ffi generalized action ImS p; ts . For fixed in-plane
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
of the TDSE in the single-active electron approximation including leading-order momentum p? ¼ p2y þ p2z , the average <px> (p⊥I) can be approximated by the
I
Nature Physics | www.nature.com/naturephysics
NaTure PhysiCs Letters
shift of the maximum of the lateral distribution. In first order of 1/c, we obtain for emphasize that the initial velocity changes the momentum transfer mechanism
circular polarization that compared to SFA for linear polarization such that the shift is not a simple quadratic
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ! function of the momentum p⊥.
1 p? E0 χ 2? � 1
pshift
x ð p? Þ ¼ p ffiffi
ffi � U p ð6Þ
c 2ω acoshðχ ? Þ Data availability
The data that support the plots within this paper and other findings of this study
with are available from the corresponding authors upon reasonable request.
pffiffiffi
2ω 1 2
χ? ¼ p? þ Ip þ Up ð7Þ
p? E0 2 Code availability
The code that supports the theoretical plots within this paper and other findings of
and the ponderomotive potential Up ¼ E20 =ð4ω2 Þ,
whereptheffiffiffi expressions are this study is available from the corresponding authors upon reasonable request.
written such that the actual electricI field strength is E0 = 2. The analytical
expression of equation (6) contains non-adiabatic effects I (within the framework
of SFA) such as an initial velocity and is in perfect agreement with the result References
calculated from the numerical solution of the TDSE for short-range potentials. For 31. Nubbemeyer, T., Gorling, K., Saenz, A., Eichmann, U. & Sandner, W.
long-range potential and sufficiently low intensities, the transferred momentum Strong-field tunneling without ionization. Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 233001 (2008).
at small p? is lower than expected from the quantum-orbit model. This difference 32. de Boer, M. P., Hoogenraad, J. H., Vrijen, R. B., Noordam, L. D. & Muller, H. G.
can be attributed
I to the action of the Coulomb force on the outgoing photoelectron. Indications of high-intensity adiabatic stabilization in neon. Phys. Rev. Lett.
In the simplest possible picture, the photoelectrons can be described in a 71, 3263–3266 (1993).
two-step model consisting of laser-induced tunnel ionization and potential- 33. Diesen, E. et al. Dynamical characteristics of Rydberg electrons released by a
free acceleration of the electron as a classical particle in the laser field38,39. The weak electric field. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 143006 (2016).
acceleration maps an electron starting with a transverse initial velocitypΔv 0 in the
34. Fechner, L. et al. Creation and survival of autoionizing states in strong laser
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi fields. Phys. Rev. A 92, 051403 (2015).
polarization plane to the final in-plane momentum component p? ¼ I2Up þ Δv0.
If we consider adiabatic tunnelling (that is, a small Keldysh parameter I γ) 35. Lein, M., Gross, E. K. U. & Engel, V. Intense-field double ionization of
and allow only for small initial velocities, the shift of equation (6) can be helium: identifying the mechanism. Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 4707–4710 (2000).
approximated as: 36. Tong, X. M. & Lin, C. D. Empirical formula for static field ionization rates of
atoms and molecules by lasers in the barrier-suppression regime. J. Phys. B
1 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 1 Δv2 38, 2593–2600 (2005).
pshift
x ðp? Þ Up þ 2Up Δv0 þ Ip þ 0 ð8Þ
c 3 2 37. Troullier, N. & Martins, J. L. Efficient pseudopotentials for plane-wave
calculations. Phys. Rev. B 43, 1993–2006 (1991).
The first two terms result from the potential-free acceleration and can be 38. Gallagher, T. F. Above-threshold ionization in low-frequency limit. Phys. Rev.
obtained by solving Newton’s equation with an initial velocity. In contrast, the Lett. 61, 2304–2307 (1988).
third term is attributed to the momentum transfer during the quantum mechanical 39. Corkum, P. B., Burnett, N. H. & Brunel, F. Above-threshold ionization in the
under-the-barrier motion and hence cannot be interpreted classically. We long-wavelength limit. Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 1259–1262 (1989).