shot noise in mesoscopic conductors - Low Temperature Laboratory
shot noise in mesoscopic conductors - Low Temperature Laboratory
shot noise in mesoscopic conductors - Low Temperature Laboratory
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
18 Ya.M. Blanter, M. Bu( ttiker / Physics Reports 336 (2000) 1}166<br />
Table 2<br />
Output probabilities for one particle <strong>in</strong>cident <strong>in</strong> each <strong>in</strong>put arm (from Ref. [8])<br />
Probability Classical Bosons Fermions<br />
P(2, 0) R¹ R¹(1#J) R¹(1!J)<br />
P(1, 1) R#¹ R#¹!2R¹J R#¹#2R¹J<br />
P(0, 2) R¹ R¹(1#J) R¹(1!J)<br />
particles went which way at the scatterer and there is thus no <strong>in</strong>terference. The outcome is classical:<br />
P(1,1)"R for an <strong>in</strong>itial state with a sp<strong>in</strong> up <strong>in</strong> arm 1 and a sp<strong>in</strong> down <strong>in</strong> arm 2. For the same<br />
state we have P(1,1)"¹.<br />
Now let us assume that there is no way of detect<strong>in</strong>g the sp<strong>in</strong> state of the outgo<strong>in</strong>g particles. For<br />
a given <strong>in</strong>itial state we have P(1, 1)" P(1,1) where and are sp<strong>in</strong> variables. If we consider<br />
all possible <strong>in</strong>cident states with equal probability, we "nd P(1, 1)"¹#R#¹RJ i.e. a result<br />
with an <strong>in</strong>terference contribution which is only half as large as given <strong>in</strong> Eq. (26). For further<br />
discussion, see Appendix B.<br />
The scatter<strong>in</strong>g experiments considered above assume that we can produce one or two particle<br />
states either <strong>in</strong> a s<strong>in</strong>gle mode or by excit<strong>in</strong>g many modes. Below we will show that thermal sources,<br />
the electron reservoirs which are of the ma<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>terest here, cannot be described <strong>in</strong> this way: In<br />
the discussion given here the ground state is the vacuum (a state without carriers) whereas <strong>in</strong> an<br />
electrical conductor the ground state is a many-electron state.<br />
2.3. The scatter<strong>in</strong>g approach<br />
The idea of the scatter<strong>in</strong>g approach (also referred to as Landauer approach) is to relate transport<br />
properties of the system (<strong>in</strong> particular, current #uctuations) to its scatter<strong>in</strong>g properties, which are<br />
assumed to be known from a quantum-mechanical calculation. In its traditional form the method<br />
applies to non-<strong>in</strong>teract<strong>in</strong>g systems <strong>in</strong> the stationary regime. The system may be either at equilibrium<br />
or <strong>in</strong> a non-equilibrium state; this <strong>in</strong>formation is <strong>in</strong>troduced through the distribution functions of<br />
the contacts of the sample. To be clear, we consider "rst a two-probe geometry and particles<br />
obey<strong>in</strong>g Fermi statistics (hav<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> m<strong>in</strong>d electrons <strong>in</strong> <strong>mesoscopic</strong> systems). Eventually, the generalization<br />
to many probes and Bose statistics is given; extensions to <strong>in</strong>teract<strong>in</strong>g problems are<br />
discussed at the end of this Section. In the derivation we essentially follow Ref. [9].<br />
2.3.1. Two-term<strong>in</strong>al case; current operator<br />
We consider a <strong>mesoscopic</strong> sample connected to two reservoirs (term<strong>in</strong>als, probes), to be referred<br />
to as `lefta (L) and `righta (R). It is assumed that the reservoirs are so large that they can be<br />
To avoid a possible misunderstand<strong>in</strong>g, we stress that the long-range Coulomb <strong>in</strong>teraction needs to be taken <strong>in</strong>to<br />
account when one tries to apply the scatter<strong>in</strong>g approach for the description of systems <strong>in</strong> time-dependent external "elds,<br />
or "nite-frequency #uctuation spectra <strong>in</strong> stationary "elds. On the other hand, for the description of zero-frequency<br />
#uctuation spectra <strong>in</strong> stationary xelds, a consistent theory can be given without <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g Coulomb e!ects, even though<br />
the #uctuations themselves are, of course, time-dependent and random.