pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.22923 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-24 · ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas · quant-ph

Fraunhofer Patterns in Atomic Josephson Junctions

Kevin T. Geier , Giampiero Marchegiani , Vijay Pal Singh , Juan Polo , Luigi Amico This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 09:03 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas quant-ph
keywords atomic Josephson junctionssynthetic magnetic fieldsFraunhofer patternscritical currentJosephson vorticesneutral superfluidsspatial interferencematter-wave circuits
0
0 comments X

The pith

Synthetic magnetic fields induce Fraunhofer-like modulations of the critical current in atomic Josephson junctions.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper demonstrates that synthetic magnetic fields applied to atomic Josephson junctions produce modulations in the critical current that resemble Fraunhofer patterns seen in superconductors. A reader would care because this provides a controllable platform to study spatial phase coherence and interference effects in neutral superfluids, which underpin many proposed quantum devices. The work emphasizes that the neutral character of the atoms leads to distinctive features compared with charged superconducting systems. Numerical simulations are used to trace how spatial interference arises and how Josephson vortices shape the current distribution.

Core claim

Synthetic magnetic fields induce Fraunhofer-like modulations of the critical current in atomic Josephson junctions. Although analogous to the patterns in superconducting devices, the effect shows distinctive features due to the neutral nature of the superfluid. The underlying spatial interference mechanisms are investigated and the role of Josephson vortices in forming modulated current distributions is clarified through numerical simulations.

What carries the argument

Synthetic magnetic fields applied to neutral atomic superfluids in a Josephson junction, which produce spatially modulated supercurrents through interference and the formation of Josephson vortices.

If this is right

  • Atomic Josephson junctions gain tunable control over critical current via applied synthetic fields.
  • Spatial coherence in neutral superfluid junctions can be probed with new precision.
  • Josephson vortex dynamics become directly observable through current modulation patterns.
  • Matter-wave circuits acquire an additional handle for engineering interference effects.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Similar setups could map electromagnetic phenomena onto neutral-atom systems for analog simulation.
  • Time-dependent synthetic fields might reveal dynamic versions of the same interference patterns.
  • The approach connects to broader efforts in engineering gauge fields for ultracold atoms.

Load-bearing premise

The numerical simulations accurately capture the spatial interference and Josephson vortex dynamics without major unaccounted effects from experimental imperfections or model approximations.

What would settle it

An experiment measuring the critical current versus synthetic field strength in an atomic Josephson junction that finds no periodic modulation would contradict the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.22923 by Giampiero Marchegiani, Juan Polo, Kevin T. Geier, Luigi Amico, Vijay Pal Singh.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Fraunhofer pattern in an atomic Josephson junction. (a) The junction is created by a repulsive barrier potential, view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Microscopic dynamics underlying the formation of view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Signatures of Josephson vortices. The solid lines view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Current–phase relation as an alternative method for view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The magnetic field strength B0 (and thus the magnetic flux Φ) is slowly increased in a sequence of consecutive sweeps, each consisting of a ramping phase over a time tramp/τ = 240 and a holding phase for a time thold/τ = 120. The barrier velocity is ramped up alongside the magnetic field to a value v/cs = 0.0075 during the first sweep, then kept constant. The step val￾ues of Φ are chosen representative of … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of Fraunhofer-like patterns extracted view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Driven atomic Josephson junctions allow one to monitor phase-coherent dynamics with unprecedented control and flexibility of the system's physical conditions. While cold-atom manifestations of the Josephson effect have been extensively studied in a wide variety of settings, atomic Josephson junctions in synthetic electromagnetic fields remain largely unexplored. Here, we show that synthetic magnetic fields can induce Fraunhofer-like modulations of the critical current in atomic Josephson junctions. Although this effect presents analogies to the Fraunhofer patterns found in superconducting devices, distinctive features emerge due to the neutral nature of the superfluid. We investigate the underlying spatial interference mechanisms and elucidate the role of Josephson vortices in the formation of spatially modulated current distributions based on numerical simulations. Our results open up new avenues for matter-wave circuits to deepen our understanding of spatial coherence in Josephson junctions, which are fundamental to the development of novel quantum technologies.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that synthetic magnetic fields induce Fraunhofer-like modulations of the critical current in atomic Josephson junctions. It argues that while analogies exist with superconducting Fraunhofer patterns, distinctive features arise due to the neutral nature of the atomic superfluid. The authors investigate the underlying spatial interference mechanisms and the role of Josephson vortices using numerical simulations, concluding that these results open avenues for matter-wave circuits and quantum technologies.

Significance. If the numerical results hold after validation, the work would be significant for extending Josephson physics to neutral superfluids under synthetic gauge fields, providing a platform to study spatial coherence beyond charged systems. The focus on vortex dynamics and interference mechanisms is a constructive contribution, though the current evidence strength is limited by the absence of reported numerical validation details.

major comments (1)
  1. [Numerical methods / simulation details] The central claim rests on numerical simulations (presumably of the time-dependent Gross-Pitaevskii equation with synthetic gauge fields). The manuscript provides no convergence tests with respect to grid spacing, system size, or synthetic-field ramp rate in the numerical methods description. Without these, it is not possible to exclude that the reported Fraunhofer-like modulations arise partly from discretization artifacts or boundary effects rather than the claimed physical interference mechanism.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract refers to 'distinctive features due to the neutral nature' without a concise preview of what these features are (e.g., absence of Lorentz force or specific vortex pinning behavior); adding one sentence would improve accessibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful review and constructive comment on our manuscript. We address the concern regarding numerical validation below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the presentation of our results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim rests on numerical simulations (presumably of the time-dependent Gross-Pitaevskii equation with synthetic gauge fields). The manuscript provides no convergence tests with respect to grid spacing, system size, or synthetic-field ramp rate in the numerical methods description. Without these, it is not possible to exclude that the reported Fraunhofer-like modulations arise partly from discretization artifacts or boundary effects rather than the claimed physical interference mechanism.

    Authors: We agree that explicit convergence tests were not reported in the submitted manuscript, which limits the ability to fully assess numerical robustness. In the revised version, we will add a dedicated paragraph in the Methods section (or a new Appendix) providing these details. Our simulations of the time-dependent Gross-Pitaevskii equation with synthetic gauge fields were performed using a standard split-step Fourier method on a grid with spacing Δx ≈ 0.2 ξ (ξ the healing length), a system size large enough that edge densities are <1% of the bulk, and an adiabatic ramp of the synthetic field over timescales ≫ 1/ω_J (Josephson frequency). Additional checks (halving the grid spacing and increasing system size by 25%) show that the period and amplitude of the Fraunhofer-like modulations change by <4%, confirming they arise from the physical interference and vortex dynamics rather than artifacts. These tests will be documented with quantitative figures of merit to address the concern directly. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: results emerge from independent numerical simulations

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that synthetic magnetic fields induce Fraunhofer-like critical-current modulations—is established via direct numerical integration of the time-dependent Gross-Pitaevskii equation with an added synthetic gauge field. This produces emergent spatial interference patterns and Josephson vortex motion as outputs, without any parameter fitting to target data, self-referential definitions, or load-bearing self-citations. The abstract explicitly frames the investigation as simulation-driven exploration of physical mechanisms rather than an analytical derivation that reduces to its inputs by construction. No ansatzes, uniqueness theorems, or renamings of known results are invoked in the described chain.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are identifiable from the abstract; the work relies on standard numerical simulation of known Josephson physics in synthetic fields.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5452 in / 982 out tokens · 45468 ms · 2026-05-08T09:03:22.851149+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

89 extracted references · 89 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    A. J. Leggett, Macroscopic quantum systems and the quantum theory of measurement, Prog. Theor. Phys. Supp.69, 80 (1980)

    work page 1980

  2. [2]

    Clarke, From slugs to macroscopic quantum phenom- ena (2025), nobel Prize Lecture in Physics, delivered 8 December 2025

    J. Clarke, From slugs to macroscopic quantum phenom- ena (2025), nobel Prize Lecture in Physics, delivered 8 December 2025

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    M. H. Devoret, From macroscopic quantum phenomena to artificial atoms (2025), nobel Prize Lecture in Physics, delivered 8 December 2025

    work page 2025

  4. [4]

    J. M. Martinis, Prehistoric superconducting qubits (2025), nobel Prize Lecture in Physics, delivered 8 De- cember 2025

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    L. P. Pitaevskii and S. Stringari,Bose–Einstein Con- densation and Superfluidity, 1st ed., International Series of Monographs on Physics, Vol. 164 (Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom, 2016)

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    Tinkham,Introduction to Superconductivity, Dover Books on Physics Series (Dover Publications, New York, 2004)

    M. Tinkham,Introduction to Superconductivity, Dover Books on Physics Series (Dover Publications, New York, 2004)

    work page 2004

  7. [7]

    A. J. Leggett, Quantum liquids, Science319, 1203 (2008)

    work page 2008

  8. [8]

    A. J. Leggett and F. Sols, On the concept of sponta- neously broken gauge symmetry in condensed matter physics, Found. Phys.21, 353 (1991)

    work page 1991

  9. [9]

    Sachdev,Quantum phases of matter(Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2023)

    S. Sachdev,Quantum phases of matter(Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2023)

    work page 2023

  10. [10]

    Imry, Physics of mesoscopic systems, inDirections in Condensed Matter Physics: Memorial Volume in Honor of Shang-Keng Ma(World Scientific, 1986) pp

    Y. Imry, Physics of mesoscopic systems, inDirections in Condensed Matter Physics: Memorial Volume in Honor of Shang-Keng Ma(World Scientific, 1986) pp. 101–163

    work page 1986

  11. [11]

    J. P. Dowling and G. J. Milburn, Quantum technology: the second quantum revolution, Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci361, 1655 (2003)

    work page 2003

  12. [12]

    A. Acín, I. Bloch, H. Buhrman, T. Calarco, C. Eichler, J. Eisert, D. Esteve, N. Gisin, S. J. Glaser, F. Jelezko, et al., The quantum technologies roadmap: a European community view, New J. Phys.20, 080201 (2018)

    work page 2018

  13. [13]

    W. P. Schleich, K. S. Ranade, C. Anton, M. Arndt, M. Aspelmeyer, M. Bayer, G. Berg, T. Calarco, H. Fuchs, E. Giacobino,et al., Quantum technology: from research to application, Appl. Phys. B122, 130 (2016)

    work page 2016

  14. [14]

    Barone and G

    A. Barone and G. Paternò,Physics and applications of the Josephson effect(Wiley, New York, 1982)

    work page 1982

  15. [15]

    Josephson, Possible new effects in superconductive tunnelling, Phys

    B. Josephson, Possible new effects in superconductive tunnelling, Phys. Lett.1, 251 (1962)

    work page 1962

  16. [16]

    P. W. Anderson and J. M. Rowell, Probable observation of the Josephson superconducting tunneling effect, Phys. Rev. Lett.10, 230 (1963)

    work page 1963

  17. [17]

    J. M. Rowell, Magnetic field dependence of the Josephson tunnel current, Phys. Rev. Lett.11, 200 (1963)

    work page 1963

  18. [18]

    R. C. Jaklevic, J. Lambe, A. H. Silver, and J. E. Mer- cereau, Quantum interference effects in Josephson tun- neling, Phys. Rev. Lett.12, 159 (1964)

    work page 1964

  19. [19]

    Börcsök, S

    B. Börcsök, S. Komori, A. I. Buzdin, and J. W. A. Robin- son, Fraunhofer patterns in magnetic Josephson junc- tions with non-uniform magnetic susceptibility, Sci. Rep. 9, 5347 (2019)

    work page 2019

  20. [20]

    A. Q. Chen, M. J. Park, S. T. Gill, Y. Xiao, D. Reig-i Plessis, G. J. MacDougall, M. J. Gilbert, and N. Mason, Finite momentum Cooper pairing in three-dimensional topologicalinsulatorJosephsonjunctions,Nat.Commun. 6 9, 3478 (2018)

    work page 2018

  21. [21]

    Yabuki, R

    N. Yabuki, R. Moriya, M. Arai, Y. Sata, S. Morikawa, S. Masubuchi, and T. Machida, Supercurrent in van der Waals Josephson junction, Nat. Commun.7, 10616 (2016)

    work page 2016

  22. [22]

    Ghatak, O

    S. Ghatak, O. Breunig, F. Yang, Z. Wang, A. A. Taskin, and Y. Ando, Anomalous Fraunhofer patterns in gated Josephson junctions based on the bulk-insulating topo- logical insulator BiSbTeSe2, Nano Lett.18, 5124 (2018)

    work page 2018

  23. [23]

    Rashidi, W

    A. Rashidi, W. Huynh, B. Guo, S. Ahadi, and S. Stem- mer, Vortex-induced anomalies in the superconducting quantum interference patterns of topological insulator Josephson junctions, npj Quantum Mater.9, 70 (2024)

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    Bloch, J

    I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and S. Nascimbene, Quantum sim- ulations with ultracold quantum gases, Nat. Phys.8, 267 (2012)

    work page 2012

  25. [25]

    Yago Malo, L

    J. Yago Malo, L. Lepori, L. Gentini, and M. L. Chio- falo, Atomic quantum technologies for quantum matter and fundamental physics applications, Technologies12, 64 (2024)

    work page 2024

  26. [26]

    Amico, D

    L. Amico, D. Anderson, M. Boshier, J.-P. Brantut, L.-C. Kwek, A. Minguzzi, and W. von Klitzing, Colloquium: Atomtronic circuits: From many-body physics to quan- tum technologies, Rev. Mod. Phys.94, 041001 (2022)

    work page 2022

  27. [27]

    J. Polo, W. J. Chetcuti, E. C. Domanti, P. Kitson, A. Os- terloh, F. Perciavalle, V. P. Singh, and L. Amico, Per- spective on new implementations of atomtronic circuits, Quantum Sci. Technol.9, 030501 (2024)

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    Raghavan, A

    S. Raghavan, A. Smerzi, S. Fantoni, and S. R. Shenoy, Coherent oscillations between two weakly coupled Bose- Einstein condensates: Josephson effects,πoscillations, and macroscopic quantum self-trapping, Phys. Rev. A 59, 620 (1999)

    work page 1999

  29. [29]

    Giovanazzi, A

    S. Giovanazzi, A. Smerzi, and S. Fantoni, Josephson ef- fects in dilute Bose–Einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. Lett.84, 4521 (2000)

    work page 2000

  30. [30]

    Meier and W

    F. Meier and W. Zwerger, Josephson tunneling between weakly interacting Bose–Einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. A64, 033610 (2001)

    work page 2001

  31. [31]

    J. Polo, V. Ahufinger, F. W. J. Hekking, and A. Min- guzzi, Damping of Josephson oscillations in strongly cor- related one-dimensional atomic gases, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 090404 (2018)

    work page 2018

  32. [32]

    J.Polo, R.Dubessy, P.Pedri, H.Perrin,andA.Minguzzi, Oscillations and decay of superfluid currents in a one- dimensional Bose gas on a ring, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 195301 (2019)

    work page 2019

  33. [33]

    V. P. Singh, N. Luick, L. Sobirey, and L. Mathey, Joseph- son junction dynamics in a two-dimensional ultracold Bose gas, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 033298 (2020)

    work page 2020

  34. [34]

    A. K. Saha and R. Dubessy, Dynamical phase diagram of a one-dimensional Bose gas in a box with a tunable weak link: From Bose–Josephson oscillations to shock waves, Phys. Rev. A104, 023316 (2021)

    work page 2021

  35. [35]

    Zaccanti and W

    M. Zaccanti and W. Zwerger, Critical Josephson current in BCS-BEC–crossover superfluids, Phys. Rev. A100, 063601 (2019)

    work page 2019

  36. [36]

    Xhani, E

    K. Xhani, E. Neri, L. Galantucci, F. Scazza, A. Burchi- anti, K.-L. Lee, C. F. Barenghi, A. Trombettoni, M. In- guscio, M. Zaccanti, G. Roati, and N. P. Proukakis, Critical Transport and Vortex Dynamics in a Thin Atomic Josephson Junction, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 045301 (2020)

    work page 2020

  37. [37]

    Xhani, L

    K. Xhani, L. Galantucci, C. F. Barenghi, G. Roati, A. Trombettoni, and N. P. Proukakis, Dynamical phase diagram of ultracold Josephson junctions, New J. Phys. 22, 123006 (2020)

    work page 2020

  38. [38]

    Wlazłowski, K

    G. Wlazłowski, K. Xhani, M. Tylutki, N. P. Proukakis, and P. Magierski, Dissipation Mechanisms in Fermionic Josephson Junction, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 023003 (2023)

    work page 2023

  39. [39]

    Jährling, V

    S. Jährling, V. P. Singh, and L. Mathey, Designing atom- tronic circuits via superfluid dynamics, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, 033112 (2025)

    work page 2025

  40. [40]

    F. S. Cataliotti, S. Burger, C. Fort, P. Maddaloni, F. Mi- nardi, A. Trombettoni, A. Smerzi, and M. Inguscio, Josephson Junction Arrays with Bose-Einstein Conden- sates, Science293, 843 (2001)

    work page 2001

  41. [41]

    Albiez, R

    M. Albiez, R. Gati, J. Fölling, S. Hunsmann, M. Cris- tiani,andM.K.Oberthaler,Directobservationoftunnel- ingandnonlinearself-trappinginasinglebosonicJoseph- son junction, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 010402 (2005)

    work page 2005

  42. [42]

    S. Levy, E. Lahoud, I. Shomroni, and J. Steinhauer, The a.c. and d.c. Josephson effects in a Bose–Einstein con- densate, Nature449, 579 (2007)

    work page 2007

  43. [43]

    Luick, L

    N. Luick, L. Sobirey, M. Bohlen, V. P. Singh, L. Mathey, T. Lompe, and H. Moritz, An ideal Josephson junction in an ultracold two-dimensional Fermi gas, Science369, 89 (2020)

    work page 2020

  44. [44]

    L. J. LeBlanc, A. B. Bardon, J. McKeever, M. H. T. Extavour, D. Jervis, J. H. Thywissen, F. Piazza, and A. Smerzi, Dynamics of a tunable superfluid junction, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 025302 (2011)

    work page 2011

  45. [45]

    S.-C. Ji, T. Schweigler, M. Tajik, F. Cataldini, J. a. Sabino, F. S. Møller, S. Erne, and J. Schmiedmayer, Floquet engineering a bosonic Josephson junction, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 080402 (2022)

    work page 2022

  46. [46]

    Valtolina, A

    G. Valtolina, A. Burchianti, A. Amico, E. Neri, K. Xhani, J. A. Seman, A. Trombettoni, A. Smerzi, M. Zaccanti, M. Inguscio, and G. Roati, Josephson effect in fermionic superfluids across the BEC–BCS crossover, Science350, 1505 (2015)

    work page 2015

  47. [47]

    Spagnolli, G

    G. Spagnolli, G. Semeghini, L. Masi, G. Ferioli, A. Trenkwalder, S. Coop, M. Landini, L. Pezzè, G. Mod- ugno, M. Inguscio, A. Smerzi, and M. Fattori, Crossing Over from Attractive to Repulsive Interactions in a Tun- nelingBosonicJosephsonJunction,Phys.Rev.Lett.118, 230403 (2017)

    work page 2017

  48. [48]

    Burchianti, F

    A. Burchianti, F. Scazza, A. Amico, G. Valtolina, J. A. Seman, C. Fort, M. Zaccanti, M. Inguscio, and G. Roati, Connecting Dissipation and Phase Slips in a Joseph- son Junction between Fermionic Superfluids, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 025302 (2018)

    work page 2018

  49. [49]

    W. J. Kwon, G. Del Pace, R. Panza, M. Inguscio, W. Zw- erger, M. Zaccanti, F. Scazza,and G.Roati, Stronglycor- related superfluid order parameters from DC Josephson supercurrents, Science369, 84 (2020)

    work page 2020

  50. [50]

    Del Pace, W

    G. Del Pace, W. J. Kwon, M. Zaccanti, G. Roati, and F. Scazza, Tunneling transport of unitary fermions across the superfluid transition, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 055301 (2021)

    work page 2021

  51. [51]

    K. S. Gan, V. P. Singh, L. Amico, and R. Dumke, Joseph- son Dynamics in 2D Ring-shaped Condensates (2025), arXiv:2509.00533

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  52. [52]

    Pezzè, K

    L. Pezzè, K. Xhani, C. Daix, N. Grani, B. Donelli, F. Scazza, D. Hernandez-Rajkov, W. J. Kwon, G. Del Pace, and G. Roati, Stabilizing persistent cur- rents in an atomtronic Josephson junction necklace, Na- 7 ture Communications15, 10.1038/s41467-024-47759-7 (2024)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-024-47759-7 2024

  53. [53]

    V. P. Singh, E. Bernhart, M. Röhrle, H. Ott, L. Mathey, and L. Amico, Weak-link to tunneling regime in a 3D atomic Josephson junction (2025), arXiv:2509.03591 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025

  54. [54]

    V. P. Singh, J. Polo, L. Mathey, and L. Amico, Shapiro steps in driven atomic Josephson junctions, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 093401 (2024)

    work page 2024

  55. [55]

    Del Pace, D

    G. Del Pace, D. Hernández-Rajkov, V. P. Singh, N. Grani, M. F. Fernández, G. Nesti, J. A. Seman, M. In- guscio, L.Amico,andG.Roati,Shapirostepsinstrongly- interacting Fermi gases, Science390, 1125 (2025)

    work page 2025

  56. [56]

    Bernhart, M

    E. Bernhart, M. Röhrle, V. P. Singh, L. Mathey, L. Am- ico, and H. Ott, Observation of Shapiro steps in an ul- tracold atomic Josephson junction, Science390, 1130 (2025)

    work page 2025

  57. [57]

    V. P. Singh, L. Mathey, H. Ott, and L. Amico, Con- trolled generation of 3D vortices in driven atomic Joseph- son junctions (2025), arXiv:2511.05645

    work page arXiv 2025

  58. [58]

    V. P. Singh, L. Amico, and L. Mathey, Atomic Josephson parametric amplifier, Phys. Rev. Res.8, L012067 (2026)

    work page 2026

  59. [59]

    and Mishra, Pankaj Kumar, Fractional Shapiro steps in a cavity-coupled Josephson ring conden- sate, Phys

    Pradhan, Nalinikanta and Kanamoto, Rina and Bhat- tacharya, M. and Mishra, Pankaj Kumar, Fractional Shapiro steps in a cavity-coupled Josephson ring conden- sate, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 043188 (2025)

    work page 2025

  60. [60]

    B. Zhu, V. P. Singh, J. Okamoto, and L. Mathey, Dynam- ical control of the conductivity of an atomic Josephson junction, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 013111 (2021)

    work page 2021

  61. [61]

    van Houselt and H

    A. van Houselt and H. J. Zandvliet, Colloquium: Time- resolved scanning tunneling microscopy, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 1593 (2010)

    work page 2010

  62. [62]

    Andersen, C

    M. Andersen, C. Ryu, P. Cladé, V. Natarajan, A. Vaziri, K. Helmerson, and W. Phillips, Quantized rotation of atoms from photons with orbital angular momentum, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 170406 (2006)

    work page 2006

  63. [63]

    Cooper, Rapidly rotating atomic gases, Adv

    N. Cooper, Rapidly rotating atomic gases, Adv. Phys. 57, 539 (2008)

    work page 2008

  64. [64]

    A. L. Fetter, Rotating trapped Bose–Einstein conden- sates, Rev. Mod. Phys.81, 647 (2009)

    work page 2009

  65. [65]

    Andrelczyk, M

    G. Andrelczyk, M. Brewczyk, L. Dobrek, M. Gajda, and M. Lewenstein, Optical generation of vortices in trapped Bose–Einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. A64, 043601 (2001)

    work page 2001

  66. [66]

    Kumar, R

    A. Kumar, R. Dubessy, T. Badr, C. De Rossi, M. de Goër de Herve, L. Longchambon, and H. Perrin, Producing superfluid circulation states using phase im- printing, Phys. Rev. A97, 043615 (2018)

    work page 2018

  67. [67]

    Del Pace, K

    G. Del Pace, K. Xhani, A. Muzi Falconi, M. Fedrizzi, N. Grani, D. Hernandez Rajkov, M. Inguscio, F. Scazza, W. J. Kwon, and G. Roati, Imprinting persistent cur- rents in tunable fermionic rings, Phys. Rev. X12, 041037 (2022)

    work page 2022

  68. [68]

    Dalibard, F

    J. Dalibard, F. Gerbier, G. Juzeli¯ unas, and P. Öh- berg, Colloquium: Artificial gauge potentials for neutral atoms, Rev. Mod. Phys.83, 1523 (2011)

    work page 2011

  69. [69]

    Goldman, G

    N. Goldman, G. Juzeli¯ unas, P. Öhberg, and I. B. Spiel- man, Light-induced gauge fields for ultracold atoms, Rep. Prog. Phys.77, 126401 (2014)

    work page 2014

  70. [70]

    Ustinov, Solitons in Josephson junctions, Phys

    A. Ustinov, Solitons in Josephson junctions, Phys. D: NonlinearPhenom.123,315(1998),annualInternational Conference of the Center for Nonlinear Studies

    work page 1998

  71. [71]

    Y.-J. Lin, R. L. Compton, K. Jiménez-García, J. V. Porto, and I. B. Spielman, Synthetic magnetic fields for ultracold neutral atoms, Nature462, 628 (2009)

    work page 2009

  72. [72]

    See Supplemental Material

    work page

  73. [73]

    The synthetic vector potential and magnetic field enter all physical quantities exclusively in the formqAandqB, such that the synthetic chargeqcan be chosen arbitrarily

    work page

  74. [74]

    Hadzibabic and J

    Z. Hadzibabic and J. Dalibard, Two-dimensional Bose fluids: An atomic physics perspective, Riv. Nuovo Cim. 34, 389 (2011)

    work page 2011

  75. [75]

    V. M. Kaurov and A. B. Kuklov, Atomic Josephson vor- tices, Phys. Rev. A73, 013627 (2006)

    work page 2006

  76. [76]

    S.-W.Su, S.-C.Gou, A.Bradley, O.Fialko,andJ.Brand, Kibble–Zurek scaling and its breakdown for spontaneous generation of Josephson vortices in Bose–Einstein con- densates, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 215302 (2013)

    work page 2013

  77. [77]

    S. S. Shamailov and J. Brand, Quasiparticles of widely tuneable inertial mass: The dispersion relation of atomic Josephson vortices and related solitary waves, SciPost Phys.4, 018 (2018)

    work page 2018

  78. [78]

    Plastovets and A

    V. Plastovets and A. S. Mel’nikov, Electronic structure of a josephson vortex in a SIS junction, Phys. Rev. B 105, 094516 (2022)

    work page 2022

  79. [79]

    Roditchev, C

    D. Roditchev, C. Brun, L. Serrier-Garcia, J. C. Cuevas, V. H. L. Bessa, M. V. Milošević, F. Debontridder, V. Stolyarov, and T. Cren, Direct observation of Joseph- son vortex cores, Nat. Phys.11, 332 (2015)

    work page 2015

  80. [80]

    S. Chen, S. Park, U. Vool, N. Maksimovic, D. A. Broad- way, M. Flaks, T. X. Zhou, P. Maletinsky, A. Stern, B. I. Halperin, and A. Yacoby, Current induced hidden states in Josephson junctions, Nat. Commun.15, 8059 (2024)

    work page 2024

Showing first 80 references.