\section{Introduction}
An important aspect of solar activity are the grand minima periods during which
the activity level is strongly reduced. The best example of this is the
Maunder minimum during 1645--1715 (Eddy 1976; Ribes \& Nesme-Ribes 1993).
It is important not only to the Solar Physics Community but also to the Space Weather and Earth Climate
Community as it may be correlated to the Little Ice Age. It is not an artifact of few observations, but a
real phenomenon \cite{hoyt}. There are evidences that solar-like stars also show Maunder-like minima
\cite{baliu}. The Maunder minimum episode may be divided into two periods: one from
1645 to 1670 and another from 1670 to 1715. During the first period, the sunspot number was almost zero
in both the hemispheres, whereas during the second period, a few sunspots appeared in the southern
hemisphere. So there was a strong north--south asymmetry of sunspot number in the last phase of the
Maunder minimum (Ribes \& Nesme-Ribes 1993; Sokoloff \& Nesme-Ribes 1994). Another important feature
is the sudden initiation, but slow recovery \cite{usos00}.
From the study of the cosmogenic isotope $^{10}$Be in polar ice core,
Beer et al. (1998) suggested that the usual 11~year period of solar activity (Schwabe cycle)
continued during the Maunder minimum, although the overall activity level was weaker.
However, from the study of $^{14}$C data in tree rings, Miyahara et al. (2004)
found the same cyclic behavior but with a period of 13--15 years instead of the regular 11~year
period (see also Miyahara et al. 2010).

Flux transport dynamo models developed by several authors (Wang et al. 1991;
Choudhuri et al. 1995; Durney 1995; Dikpati \& Charbonneau 1999;
K\"uker et al. 2001; Nandy \& Choudhuri 2002; Chatterjee et al. 2004; Guerrero \& Mu\~noz 2004;
Mu\~noz-Jaramillo et al. 2009; Hotta \& Yokoyama 2010a) are the most
promising models for studying the solar cycle.
It explains many important features of the regular
solar cycle including 11~year periodicity, equatorial migration of the
sunspot belt, poleward migration of large-scale field and parity, etc.
It also reproduces many irregular features of the solar cycle
(Charbonneau \& Dikpati 2000; Choudhuri \& Karak 2009;
Karak \& Choudhuri 2010a, 2010b). The flux transport dynamo model
consists of the following processes.
A strong toroidal component of the magnetic field is generated
in the tachocline due to the strong differential rotation \cite{parker1955}.
When this toroidal magnetic field rises above the stable layer,
the magnetic buoyancy acts on it causing it to rise to the
surface to form sunspots. These sunspots decay to give rise to
the poloidal component of the magnetic field through the Babcock--Leighton mechanism
(Babcock 1961; Leighton 1969), which then gets advected (also diffused)
to the pole by the meridional circulation.
This field ultimately reaches the tachocline where it again
gets stretched to give rise to the toroidal field and the cycle
completes. In this process, the poloidal field is produced from the
decay of the tilted bipolar sunspots. These tilts are due to the Coriolis force acting
on the rising flux tubes (D'Silva \& Choudhuri 1993). In addition, when these flux tubes rise
through the convection zone, they are subjected to the convective buffeting
(Longcope \& Choudhuri 2002).
This gives rise to a scatter in the tilt angles around the mean given by Joy's law
\cite{wang}. We therefore believe that the Babcock--Leighton process is not a
deterministic process. As a result, the polar field changes randomly as its
production is governed by the random process \cite{ccj}. Following this idea,
Choudhuri \& Karak (2009) have proposed that at the beginning of the
Maunder minimum, the polar field fell to a very low value.
With this assumption, they have succeeded in reproducing a Maunder
minimum using a flux transport dynamo model.
Some authors (Choudhuri 1992; G\'omez \& Mininni 2006; Wilmot-Smith et al. 2005;
Brandenburg \& Spiegel 2008; Moss et al. 2008; Usoskin et al. 2009)
are also able to reproduce Maunder-like grand minima by introducing stochastic
fluctuations or nonlinearity in dynamo parameters. By introducing stochastic fluctuations
in the flux transport dynamo simulations, Charbonneau et al. (2004) are
able to reproduce intermittencies which resemble the Maunder minimum.
On the other hand, Beer et al. (1998) proposed the nonlinearity to be the cause
of such irregularities of the solar cycle.

Another vital source of irregularity in the flux transport dynamo model is the meridional
circulation which plays a major role in transporting the magnetic fields.
It determines not only the period
but also the amplitude of the solar cycle (Wang et al. 1991; Dikpati \& Charbonneau 1999;
Hathaway et al. 2003; Yeates et al. 2008).
It also varies stochastically with time, giving randomness in the solar activity. Recently
several authors (Hathaway 1996; Haber et al. 2002; Basu \& Antia 2003;
Gizon \& Rempel 2008; Hathaway \& Rightmire 2010) have
reported its value in the upper
part of the convection zone and found strong temporal variation of its
amplitude. Javaraiah \& Ulrich (2006) studied group sunspot data during cycles 12--23
and found a cycle-to-cycle variation of mean meridional motion of sunspot groups (a proxy
of the meridional flow). Several other indirect studies (Wang et al. 2002; Hathaway et al.
2003; Georgieva \& Kirov 2010) have found the evidences of the fluctuations of the meridional
circulation. Moreover, using a low order model constructed
from the sunspot number as the proxy of the toroidal field, Passos \& Lopes (2008) have
suggested that the last $11$ magnetic cycles can be modeled using variable meridional
circulation speed only. Using similar a model, Passos \& Lopes (2009)
have also concluded that the stochastic fluctuations in the $\alpha$-effect cannot
trigger a grand minimum, rather they argued that the strong decrease of meridional
circulation can do so.

The motivation of this work is to find out and understand the influence
of the meridional circulation on both cycle-to-cycle amplitude variation
of the the solar cycle and producing grand minima. Therefore, first, we try to model the periods of
the last $23$ sunspot cycles just by varying the amplitude of
\mc\ to see its effect on the amplitude of the solar cycle.
We have shown the results from
a diffusion-dominated flux transport dynamo model (e.g., Chatterjee et al. 2004). By the
term ``diffusion-dominated'' we mean that the diffusivity of the poloidal field in the whole
convection zone is high enough ($\sim 10^{12}$--$10^{13}$ cm$^2$ s$^{-1}$; see also
Jiang et al. 2007 and Yeates et al. 2008 for details). However, we discuss the
result from advection-dominated flux transport dynamo model (e.g.,
Dikpati \& Charbonneau 1999) as well. By the term ``advection-dominated'' we mean
that the diffusivity of the poloidal field in the whole convection zone is low ($\sim
10^{10}$--$10^{11}$ cm$^2$ s$^{-1}$). In this model, therefore, the diffusivity
is not so important in transporting the fields. In a high-diffusivity model,
we have found that most of the cycle amplitudes get modeled up to some extent when
we try to model the periods of the last $23$ cycles just by varying the
amplitude of \mc\ only. Therefore, we conclude that a major part of the
fluctuations of the amplitude of the solar cycle may come from the fluctuations
in meridional circulation. However, we do get a completely different result,
if the dynamo is in the advection-dominated regime. The physics of getting
these two completely different results from these two models can be
understood based on the Yeates et al. (2008) study what we mention in the
appropriate place.

Next, we also study the importance of meridional circulation in producing
a Maunder-like grand minimum in both the high-diffusivity model and the
low-diffusivity model. We propose that at the beginning of the Maunder minimum,
the amplitude of meridional circulation dropped to a low value and then
after a few years it increased again to the original value. With this
assumption, we have checked the possibility of producing (or not producing)
a Maunder-like grand minimum in both the models. In the next step,
we have also included the fluctuations of polar field to capture the
fluctuations in the \bl\ process along with
that of \mc\ to model such kind of grand minimum.
\section{MODEL}
The evolution of poloidal and toroidal components of the magnetic field
in the flux transport dynamo models is governed, respectively, by the
following two equations:
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial A}{\partial t} + \frac{1}{s}({\bf v}.\nabla)(s A)
= \eta_{p} \left( \nabla^2 - \frac{1}{s^2} \right) A + \alpha B,
\end{equation}
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\partial B}{\partial t}
+ \frac{1}{r} \left[ \frac{\partial}{\partial r}
(r v_r B) + \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta}(v_{\theta} B) \right]
= \eta_{t} \left( \nabla^2 - \frac{1}{s^2} \right) B \nonumber \\
+ s({\bf B}_p.{\bf \nabla})\Omega + \frac{1}{r}\frac{d\eta_t}{dr}\frac{\partial{(rB)}}{\partial{r}},~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\end{eqnarray}\\
where $A(r, \theta)$ and $B (r, \theta)$, respectively, correspond to the
poloidal and toroidal components and $s = r \sin \theta$.
Here ${\bf v}$ is the velocity of the meridional flow, $\alpha$ is the coefficient
which describes the generation of the poloidal field near the solar surface from
the decay of bipolar sunspots, $\Omega$ is the internal angular velocity of
the Sun, and $\eta_p$, $\eta_t$ are the turbulent diffusivities for the poloidal
and toroidal fields.

To study the evolution of the magnetic fields, we have to
solve above two equations with the given parameters.
Recently this problem has been extensively studied by
two different groups (Dikpati \& Charbonneau 1999 and
Chatterjee et al. 2004). Dikpati \& Charbonneau (1999)
(also Dikpati et al. 2004) use a very low value
($10^{10}$--$10^{11}$ cm$^2$ s$^{-1}$) of the diffusivity
of the poloidal field in the convection zone, whereas
Chatterjee et al. (2004) (also Jiang et al. 2007) use
very high value ($10^{12}$--$10^{13}$ cm$^2$~s$^{-1}$).
Although both the models can explain
some important features of the solar cycle (e.g., 11~year periodicity,
equatorward propagation of the sunspot belt) (Dikpati \& Charbonneau 1999;
Chatterjee et al. 2004), in many cases, they give completely
different results (Chatterjee et al. 2004; Jiang et al. 2007;
Yeates et al. 2008; Karak \& Choudhuri 2010b). Therefore,
we are curious to see the importance of meridional circulation
in modeling both the solar cycle and the Maunder-like grand minimum in these
two models separately. To do this, we first use the high-diffusivity model
of Chatterjee et al. (2004) with the same profiles of
$\alpha$ coefficient, differential rotation, meridional circulation
and diffusivity as given in the ``standard model'' of Chatterjee et al. (2004). We do not
repeat them here. However, Karak \& Choudhuri (2010b) have changed
some parameters of this model which are listed in Table~2 of their paper.
In the present work, we use these parameters except we take $\Gamma$ =
$3.025\times10^{8}$ m and the surface value of \mc\ $v_0$ = $22$ m~s$^{-1}$.
With these parameters the period of the solar cycle comes out to be around 11~year.
In all the analyses, only the amplitude of \mc\ is varied while all other
parameters of the model are held fixed.
A related question at this stage may arise that any change in
the \mc\ may be accompanied by the change in the differential rotation.
Since the present understanding of these two is very primitive and
our aim is to understand the effect of the fluctuation of \mc\ on the
solar cycle, we have taken differential rotation to be constant in all the analyses.

For the low-diffusivity calculations, if we decrease the diffusivity
to a very low value ($\sim 10^{10}$ cm$^2$ s$^{-1}$) in the previous
model, we do not get an oscillatory solution.
Therefore, we have tried to use the Dikpati et al. (2004)
model, but we (and also Jiang et al. 2007; Hotta \& Yokoyama 2010a;
Karak \& Choudhuri 2010b) are not able to reproduce their results. Finally,
we use the Dikpati \& Charbonneau (1999) model with the same parameters as listed in
their `reference solution' except for the value of $u_0$.
To get an 11~year period in their model, we use $u_0$ = $14.5$ m~s$^{-1}$ rather than
$10$ m~s$^{-1}$ what they have reported in their ``reference solution''. An important
point to note is that the maximum amplitude of meridional circulation at the
surface (what Chatterjee et al. 2004 call $v_0$ in their model) is much less
than this $u_0$.

\section{METHODOLOGY}
First, we model the last $23$ cycles by fitting the periods with variable
meridional circulation in a high-diffusivity model. We have done this in
the following way. It is known that the \mc\ acts as a clock to regulate
the period of the solar cycle (Wang et al. 1991; Dikpati \& Charbonneau 1999;
Hathaway et al. 2003).
Stronger \mc\ gives a shorter period and vice versa. It is found that in the
flux transport dynamo model, the period of the solar cycle roughly scales as
the inverse of the \mc\ amplitude. Therefore, we first calculate the
dependency of period ($T$) on $v_0$ by running the
model at different values of $v_0$ and we find a relation
$T = 97.48v_0^{-0.696}$ (when $19\le v_0\le 30$).
Then from the observed periods of the last $23$ cycles we can calculate the corresponding $v_0$
from the above relation. The dashed line in Fig.~\ref{fit23}(a) shows this variation.
However, these values of $v_0$ do not reproduce the observed periods properly; therefore, we
fit them by trial and error methods. We did not try to match the periods of each
cycle accurately which is a little bit difficult. We change $v_0$ abruptly between two cycles
and not during a cycle. In addition, we do not change $v_0$ if the
period difference between two successive cycles is less than
$5\%$ of the average period. The solid line in Fig.~\ref{fit23}(a) shows the variation of $v_0$
used to model the periods of the cycles.

Now, we repeat the same analysis in a low-diffusivity model too.
In this model, the dependency of the period on $u_0$ is given by
Eq.~(12) of Dikpati \& Charbonneau (1999). From the observed periods
we calculate $u_0$ according to this relation and we show this
variation by the dashed line in Fig~\ref{fitlow}(a). Then we
fit the periods of the last $23$ cycles by trial and error in the same
way as we have done earlier.

Next, to reproduce the Maunder minimum, we decrease $v_0$ rapidly to
a very low value in both the hemispheres. We have done this in the
decaying phase of the last sunspot cycle before the Maunder minimum.
Then we keep $v_0$ at a low value for around 1 year and then we again
increase it slowly to the usual value but at different rates in two
hemispheres. In northern hemisphere, $v_0$ is increased at a slightly
lower rate than southern hemisphere. Note that we have varied only $v_0$
and no other parameters of the model.

In the next step, we have included the effect of the fluctuations in
the \bl\ process of generating the poloidal field along with the fluctuations of
meridional circulation. As the \bl\ process involves randomness, the
poloidal field at the end of a
cycle will be different from the average field obtained in the mean
field model. Choudhuri et al. (2007) have proposed that the
cumulative effect of the fluctuations of the \bl\ process can be taken
into account just by multiplying a random factor $\gamma$ with the
poloidal fields above $0.8 \Rs$ at every minimum of the solar cycle.
The poloidal fields below $0.8 \Rs$ are left unchanged as it is
believed that these are from the earlier cycles.
We follow the same algorithm here. Hence, we decreased the poloidal
field by a factor $\gamma$ along with $v_0$. We run the model for
different values of $\gamma$ from 0 to 1 at each value of $v_0$
from a very low value to the average value. Then we find out the
critical values of $v_0$ and the corresponding
$\gamma$ factor for which we get a Maunder-like minimum.

We have also checked whether a strong fluctuation of \mc\ can produce
a Maunder-like grand minimum in the low-diffusivity model.
To do this, we have decreased $u_0$ at the same ratio
as we have done earlier in the high-diffusivity model. However,
here we do not include the effect of fluctuations of the polar
field along with the fluctuations of meridional circulation as we
have done earlier.

\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.00\textwidth]{fit23.eps}
\caption{(a) Variation of amplitudes of \mc\ $v_0$ (in m~s$^{-1}$) with time
(in yr). Dashed line is calculated from the relation $T = 97.48v_0^{-0.696}$
by putting the periods of the last $23$ cycles data. The solid line is the
variation of $v_0$ used to match the theoretical periods with the
observed periods. (b) Variation of theoretical sunspot number (dashed
line) and observed sunspot number (solid line) with time. Both
sunspot numbers are smoothed by a Gaussian filter of FWHM = $1$~year.
In addition, the theoretical sunspot number is scaled by a factor
to match the observed value. (c) Scatter diagram showing
the theoretical and observed periods (in yr).
(d) Scatter diagram showing peak theoretical sunspot number and peak observed
sunspot number. The linear correlation coefficients and the corresponding
significance levels are shown in panels (c) and (d).}
\label{fit23}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.00\textwidth]{fitlow.eps}
\caption{Same as Fig.~\ref{fit23}, but from the low-diffusivity model. Here
the dashed line in panel (a) shows the variation of $u_0$ calculated from Eq.~(12)
of Dikpati \& Charbonneau (1999) by putting the observed periods of the last $23$ cycles.}
\label{fitlow}
\end{figure*}
\section{RESULTS}
\subsection{Modeling last $23$ cycles}
First, we discuss the results of fitting the periods of last
the $23$ cycles by varying $v_0$ in the high-diffusivity model. The
results are shown in Fig.~\ref{fit23}. It may be noted that
we have not tried to match the periods exactly. In order to show
how good the theoretical periods have been matched with that
of the observed periods, we have shown the scatter
diagram between them in Fig.~\ref{fit23}(c) (linear corr. coeff. = $0.90$).
The solid line in Fig.~\ref{fit23}(a) shows the variation of $v_0$
required to fit the periods of
the last $23$ cycles. As this $v_0$ determines the period of the solar cycle,
this may be taken as an indicative of how $v_0$ had varied over the last few centuries.
It appears from the same figure that during cycles 1--10, the meridional
circulation had large variation with a timescale of around $15$~years. On the other hand,
during cycles 11--22, the meridional circulation had relatively smaller variation
with a timescale of around $45$~years. With the limited data we have, we cannot say
whether the behavior of cycles 1--10 is more typical in the long run or the behavior
of cycles 11--22 is more typical. Looking at Fig.~\ref{fit23}(a), we can only surmise
that the meridional circulation probably has long-time variations having large
coherence time. Indeed, Karak \& Choudhuri (2010b) have also assumed longer coherence
time of the meridional circulation while studying the Waldmeier effect.
So just by fitting the periods of the last $23$
cycles data we get some idea about both the amplitude variation and the timescale
of meridional circulation over the last few centuries. Next, in Fig.~\ref{fit23}(b),
we show the theoretical sunspot series (eruptions) by the dashed line along
with the observed sunspot series by the solid line. The theoretical
sunspot series has been multiplied
by a factor to match the observed value. It is very interesting to see that the amplitude
of the theoretical sunspot cycle has a similar trend as that of the observed sunspot cycle.
In order to see the correlation between the amplitudes of peak theoretical sunspot number and
that of observed sunspot number, we have shown the scatter diagram between
them in Fig.~\ref{fit23}(d). We have found a significant correlation between these two
(having linear Pearson's corr. coeff. = $0.75$ with a significance level of $99.9\%$).
This suggests that a major part of the fluctuations of the amplitude of the solar cycle
may come from the fluctuations of meridional circulation. This is a very important
result of this analysis.

It is also interesting to see the results from the low-diffusivity model.
We show the results of this analysis in Fig~\ref{fitlow}. The solid
line in Fig~\ref{fitlow}(a) shows the variation of $u_0$ over the
last $23$ cycles required to fit the periods of the cycles.
It may be noted that in this model the value of $u_0$
required to get an 11 year period is $14.5$ m~s$^{-1}$.
Although the amplitude of \mc\ at the surface (what in the previous model is
$v_0$) is different than $u_0$, this $u_0$ variation
in Fig~\ref{fitlow}(a) is similar to the previous result from
the high-diffusivity model. Therefore, the low-diffusivity model
also gives a similar result of the amplitude variation and the
timescale variation of meridional circulation.
Now let us see how the amplitude of the sunspot cycle responds
with the amplitude of meridional circulation. In this
model, the magnetic energy density of the toroidal field ($B^2$)
at latitude $15$$^{\circ}$ at the base of the convection zone is a
measure of the sunspot number (Dikpati \& Charbonneau 1999)
which we also have followed. In Fig.~\ref{fitlow}(b), we have
shown the theoretical sunspot number by the dashed line along
with the observed sunspot number by the solid line. We see
from this figure that the amplitudes
of this theoretical sunspot number are not matching with
the observed amplitudes. Rather we have found a weak inverse
correlation between these two amplitudes (linear corr. coeff. = $-0.13$).

Now we explain the physics behind these two completely different
results. It is well accepted that the period of the solar cycle is
strongly determined by the value of $v_0$. This is true in
both the high-diffusivity model and the low-diffusivity model. However,
the value of $v_0$ affects the amplitude of the solar cycle differently in these two
models. This can be understood on the basis of the Yeates et al. (2008) study in
the following way. We have seen that in these models, the toroidal field is
generated by the stretching of the poloidal field in the tachocline. The
production of this toroidal field is more if the poloidal field remains
in the tachocline for a longer time and vice versa. However, the poloidal field
diffuses during its transport through the convection zone. As a result, if
the diffusivity is very high, then much of the poloidal field diffuses away
and very less amount of it reaches the tachocline to induct the toroidal field.
Therefore, when we decrease the value of $v_0$ in the high-diffusivity model to match
the period of a longer cycle, the poloidal field gets more time to diffuse
during its transport through the convection zone. This ultimately leads
to a lesser generation of the toroidal field and hence the cycle becomes
weaker. On the other hand, when we increase
the value of $v_0$ to match the period of a shorter cycle, the poloidal
field does not get much time to diffuse in the convection zone. Hence, it
effectively gives rise to a stronger toroidal field and the cycle becomes stronger.
Consequently, in the high-diffusivity model, we get weaker
amplitudes for longer periods (having lower values of meridional circulation)
and vice versa. This is exactly observed in the observational data (see figure
1(C) of Charbonneau \& Dikpati 2000). However, this is not the case in the low-diffusivity model.
This is because in this model the diffusive decay of the fields is not
much important. As a result, the slower meridional circulation means that
the poloidal field remains in the tachocline for a longer time and therefore
it produces more toroidal field, giving rise to a strong cycle. Ultimately,
we get stronger amplitudes for longer periods (having lower values of meridional
circulation) and vice versa which is not observed. Therefore, we do not get
a correct correlation between the amplitudes of theoretical sunspot number and
that of observed sunspot number when only the meridional circulation is varied.

\subsection{Modeling Maunder minimum}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.00\textwidth]{mm.eps}
\caption{Results from the high-diffusivity model. (a) The solid and dashed lines
show the variations of maximum amplitudes of meridional circulation (in m~s$^{-1}$) in northern and
southern hemispheres with time. (b) The theoretical butterfly diagram. (c) The theoretical sunspot number
(this is obtained by first considering the monthly number of eruptions and then
smoothing it by taking a running average over 5 months iteratively). The dashed
and dotted lines show the sunspot numbers in southern and northern hemispheres,
whereas the solid line is the total sunspot number. (d) Variation of energy density of the toroidal field
at latitude 15$^{\circ}$ at the bottom of the convection zone.}
\label{mm}
\end{figure*}

In Fig.~\ref{mm}, we show the theoretical results covering the Maunder
minimum episode from the high-diffusivity model.
Fig.~\ref{mm}(a), shows the maximum amplitude of meridional
circulation $v_0$ varied over this period in two hemispheres.
The key point to note is that in our calculation
we have increased $v_0$ differently in two
hemispheres in the recovery phase. In northern hemisphere
(shown by the solid line in Fig.~\ref{mm}(a)), $v_0$ is increased slightly at a lower rate than
southern hemisphere (shown by the dashed line). Consideration of this north--south
asymmetry of \mc\ may be justified. It is unlikely that the
meridional circulation decreased by the same amount in both hemispheres.
Even if it did, it is very unlikely that it again increased at the same
rate. In addition, recent
observational studies \cite{haber, basu3} of surface \mc\ give
the evidence of hemispheric asymmetry of \mc\ which can lead to the
asymmetry in solar activity \cite{dikpati04}. In Fig.~\ref{mm}(b), we
show the butterfly diagram of sunspot numbers, whereas
in Fig.~\ref{mm}(c), we show the variation of total sunspot number
along with the individual sunspot numbers in two hemispheres
(see the caption of Fig.~\ref{mm}(c)). In order to facilitate comparison
with observational data, we have taken the beginning of the year to be 1635.
Note that in Figs.~\ref{mm}(b) and (c), the sunspot number at the beginning
of the Maunder minimum suddenly falls to zero value,
whereas in the recovery phase, it increases slowly. In addition, the
north--south asymmetry of sunspot number observed in the
last phase of the Maunder minimum is remarkably reproduced. In order to compare
our results with the observational results, the readers may compare our
Fig.~\ref{mm}(b) with figure 1(a) of Sokoloff \& Nesme-Ribes (1994)
and Fig.~\ref{mm}(c) with figure 1 of Usoskin et al. (2000).
We also show the energy density of the toroidal field calculated
at latitude 15$^{\circ}$ at the bottom of the convection zone in Fig.~\ref{mm}(d).
Here, the rapid decrease of the $v_0$ to a critical value ($10$~m~s$^{-1}$) from its
average value ($22$ m~s$^{-1}$) triggers a Maunder minimum. However,
this critical value depends on the value of the diffusivity
(and also on the alpha coefficient) as it determines the growth
rate \cite{karak}. Indeed, we do not know the exact value of
diffusivity in the convection zone; we only have some idea of
its order of magnitude estimate. Therefore, if we take a slightly
higher (lower) value of diffusivity, then we can
reproduce the Maunder minimum even at a higher (lower) critical value of $v_0$.

\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{wind.eps}
\caption{Theoretically calculated average radial magnetic field (absolute
value in arbitrary units) in the solar wind.}
\label{wind}
\end{figure*}

Similar to Choudhuri \& Karak (2009), we calculate
the magnetic field in the solar wind at a
distance where it becomes radial. Fig.~\ref{wind} shows this as a
function of time. This clearly shows the periodic
behavior with a period slightly longer than the usual $11$~year period. This periodic variation explains the observed
oscillation in cosmogenic isotope data.

The cosmogenic isotope study suggests that there were around $27$ grand minima in last 11,000 years having
different duration \cite{usos07}. Now in our simulation, the length of a grand minimum
has been determined by the time for which the value of meridional circulation remains at a low value
and the rate at which meridional circulation is increased after the grand minimum
has started. In this way, we are able
to reproduce any grand minimum of any length.

\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.00\textwidth]{mc.eps}
\caption{Profile of amplitude of meridional circulation which produce
the Maunder minimum similar to Fig.~\ref{mm}(b). The format is identical to Fig.~\ref{mm}(a).}
\label{mc}
\end{figure*}

We have no knowledge of how \mc\ varied during the
Maunder minimum. In the above calculation, at the beginning of
the Maunder minimum, we have decreased $v_0$ rapidly to a low
value, whereas in the recovery phase, we increased it rather
slowly. However, our results are completely
independent of the way how we increase $v_0$ in the recovery phase.
For example, the variation of $v_0$ in Fig.~\ref{mc} reproduces
an exactly similar Maunder minimum what we have evinced in Fig.~\ref{mm}(b).
Here we underscore that if the \mc\ falls very slowly to a low
value, then we do not get the sudden fall of sunspot number at
the beginning of the Maunder minimum.
However, if we are to believe the observational results of
Usoskin et al. (2000), then it says that at the beginning
of the Maunder minimum, solar activity decreased abruptly,
but built up gradually. This strongly suggests that
the toroidal field decreased suddenly below a certain value
which triggered the Maunder minimum and then
it took sometime to regain its usual value. If this sudden
fall of the toroidal field is due to the reduction of meridional circulation,
then it probably indicates that the meridional circulation dropped rapidly to a very
low value at the beginning. However, it does not indicate anything
about the rate of recovery of meridional circulation.

Let us now discuss the physics of getting the Maunder minimum in this model.
The meridional circulation affects the generation not
only of the toroidal field but also that of the poloidal field (Wang \& Sheeley 2003;
Baumann et al. 2004). Poloidal field generated at the surface through the
decay of sunspots is advected by meridional circulation (and also diffuses) toward the
pole where it cancels the opposite polarity field of the previous cycle to
give rise to a large-scale polar field for the new cycle (Stenflo 1972;
Wang et al. 1989; Dikpati et al. 2004). At the maximum
phase of the solar cycle, lots of sunspot eruptions go on at the surface
and at the same time, these sunspots decay in a short
timescale to generate the poloidal field. Now at this time,
if the amplitude of meridional circulation decreases strongly,
then the poloidal field which is being generated at
the surface at low latitude is not able to move toward
the pole to cancel the opposite polarity field of the previous
cycle rather a part of it diffuses away
toward the opposite hemisphere to cancel out the opposite polarity field.
Therefore, it is not able to generate a large amount of the polar field for
the next cycle. Naturally, the decrease of meridional circulation
causes a weaker polar field (see also Wang \& Sheeley 2003 and Baumann et al. 2004
for details). This weaker polar field gives a weaker toroidal field (Choudhuri et al. 2007).
In addition, according to the discussion of the previous section the lower value of
meridional circulation means more time for the diffusive decay of the poloidal
field during its transport through the convection zone, leading to less
generation of the toroidal field in the tachocline. This weak toroidal field
is insufficient to produce sunspot eruptions (D'Silva \& Choudhuri 1993;
Fan et al. 1993; Caligari et al. 1995) and therefore triggers a grand minimum.
However, when the amplitude of meridional circulation is increased again,
the poloidal field does not get much time to diffuse and therefore the generation
of the toroidal field is more. At some point, the toroidal field exceeds the
critical value of producing sunspots eruption. In this way, it recovers from
the grand minimum state.

The flux tube simulations (Choudhuri 1989; D'Silva \& Choudhuri 1993; Fan et al. 1993)
suggest that the initial magnetic field inside the flux tube has to be of order $10^5$ G
and the sunspot eruption takes place only when the toroidal field
reaches this value. In this model also, the sunspot eruptions take place
if the value of the toroidal field exceeds this critical value (Nandy \& Choudhuri 2001;
Chatterjee et al. 2004). During the Maunder minimum the toroidal field
at the base of the convection zone was below this value and there was
no eruption. However, the weak solar cycles continued during this period. Note that in the
absence of sunspot eruptions, the usual Babcock--Leighton process does not work. However, the
toroidal field advects (and also diffuses) toward the upper part of the convection zone
by the upward meridional circulation. In this case, the $\alpha$ coefficient in our equation acts like
a traditional mean field $\alpha$ \cite{parker1955}. In modeling the distribution of a large-scale
solar magnetic field, Choudhuri \& Dikpati (1999) have shown that the poloidal field has
two sources---the Babcock--Leighton
mechanism and a $\alpha$-effect working on a weaker subsurface toroidal field. During
the Maunder minimum---when there was no sunspot---the dynamo continued due to the $\alpha$-effect
operating on the weaker toroidal field. Also the $\alpha$-effects operating in the
tachocline (Dikpati \& Gilman 2001; Bonanno et al. 2002, and references therein)
or the alpha effect arising due to the buoyancy instability at the base of the
convection zone \cite{ferri} may play a role in this episode. In this
calculation, however, we do not consider these $\alpha$-effects.

\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.50\textwidth]{gv.eps}
\caption{Parameter space of amplitude of the \mc\ ($v_0$) and the poloidal field
reduction factor ($\gamma$). The line shows the values of these parameters
which give Maunder-like grand minima.
}
\label{gv}
\end{figure}

Now we include the effect of fluctuations of the polar field along
with the fluctuations of meridional circulation in this model. We have seen
earlier that the strong decrease of $v_0$ can lead to a grand minimum. However,
in that case, its value had to be reduced to a significantly low value which may be
a bit surprising. We have mentioned that the polar field fluctuates randomly as its
generation mechanism---the \bl\ process involves randomness. Therefore, it is
important to include these fluctuations along with the fluctuations of
meridional circulation in modeling grand minima. We find that if
we decrease the polar field by a factor of $\gamma$, then even at a
moderately lower value of $v_0$, we are able to reproduce Maunder-like grand minima.
We have repeated our calculation at different values of $v_0$ and $\gamma$ and
found that for each value of $v_0$ there is a corresponding value of
$\gamma$ which can give a Maunder-like grand minimum. These values are shown
by the line in Fig.~\ref{gv}. The values lower than these $\gamma$'s give
grand minima longer than the Maunder minimum (like Sp\"orer minimum), whereas larger
values give grand minima shorter than the Maunder minimum. These
two regions are indicated in Fig.~\ref{gv}. We mention that
Choudhuri \& Karak (2009) have reproduced
the Maunder minimum just by decreasing the poloidal field to $0.2$ (actually $\gamma_N$
= $0.0$ and $\gamma_S$ = $0.4$) of its original value keeping $v_0$ unchanged.
However, in the present calculations, we have to reduce $v_0$ to around $13.5$ m~s$^{-1}$
along with the poloidal field reduction to $0.2$. This is because in those
calculations we had reduced the toroidal field slightly along with the
change of the poloidal field to compensate for the overlap between cycles.
Here we have not done this kind of questionable change of toroidal
field. Additionally, here the values of $\alpha$ and $\eta_p$
are different than those calculations giving a different dynamo growth rate.
\begin{figure*
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.00\textwidth]{maundlow.eps}
\caption{Results from the low-diffusivity model. Upper panel shows the amplitude of
meridional circulation ($u_0$ in m~s$^{-1}$) varied during Maunder minimum. The
lower panel shows the variation of sunspot number ($B^2$) during this episode. The dashed
line indicates the value of average sunspot number before Maunder minimum.}
\label{maundlow}
\end{figure*}

Now let us discuss the results of the low-diffusivity model briefly. In this
model, lesser circulation speed means that the poloidal field
gets more time to produce the toroidal field in the tachocline. Thus smaller $v_0$ gives
more toroidal field and finally stronger cycle. Consequently, if the dynamo is in
the advection-dominated regime, it does not produce any grand minimum rather it produces
stronger cycles. This is exactly what we find in our simulation. The results are
shown in Fig.~\ref{maundlow}. In this figure, panel (a) shows the variation of $u_0$ during
the Maunder minimum episode, whereas panel (b) shows the theoretical sunspot number
with time. We see that the sunspot number has rather increased when the
meridional circulation is decreased rapidly from its
average value ($14.5$ m~s$^{-1}$) to a very low value ($6.6$ m~s$^{-1}$). However,
for one cycle (around 1680--1690 and also around 1725--1735) after two cycles
of the strong reduction of $u_0$ we get a reduction of sunspot number. This is due
to the decrease of the polar field during the low value of $v_0$ as explained earlier.
It may be noted that in this model, the decrease
of the polar field affects the sunspot cycle of two cycles later (see figure 9 of
Jiang et al. 2007). We may point out that if we increase $u_0$ to
a very high value for several years, then we may get a Maunder-like minimum
in this model. However, in this case, the cycle periods will be
unrealistically short and no observation during the Maunder minimum validates this.

\section{CONCLUSION}
We have studied the importance of meridional circulation on the period and the
amplitude of solar cycle and also on the Maunder-like grand minimum in two
different regimes of a flux transport dynamo model, namely, advection-dominated
and diffusion-dominated. First, we have approximately modeled the periods of
the last $23$ solar cycles by varying $v_0$ alone. From this study, we get some
idea about both the amplitude variation and the time scale of the \mc\ over
the last few centuries. Moreover, we have seen that
when we match the periods of these cycles by varying $v_0$ in
the high-diffusivity model, most of the cycle amplitudes also get
modeled up to some extent. Therefore, we conclude that
a major part of the fluctuations of solar cycle amplitude
may come from the \mc\ fluctuations. In the low-diffusivity
model, the cycle amplitudes do not get modeled at all
when we repeat the same analysis.

We have also shown the possibility of producing (or not producing)
a Maunder-like minimum in two models by varying the
meridional circulation speed. To do this, we have assumed that
at the beginning of the Maunder minimum the amplitude of meridional circulation
largely reduced and then after a few years it increased again.
It may be noted that this is not an ad hoc assumption. There are several
independent arguments which support our assumption. First,
Wang \& Sheeley (2003) used the flux transport model to simulate the evolution of the Sun's magnetic
dipole moment, polar fields, and open flux under Maunder minimum conditions
and suggested that the poleward surface flow speed was reduced from $20$ m~s$^{-1}$ to $10$ m~s$^{-1}$ during that time.
Second, the flux transport dynamo model predicts
an inverse correlation between the meridional circulation speed and the cycle period (Wang et al. 1991;
Dikpati \& Charbonneau 1999). On the other hand, from the study of $^{14}$C data during the Maunder minimum,
Miyahara et al. (2004) (also Miyahara et al. 2010)
reported that the periods of the solar cycle were longer
compared to the usual 11~year period.
Now, if the flow speed determines the solar cycle
period, then it indicates that the meridional circulation speed during
the Maunder minimum was lower than the usual value.
Third, while simulating Sun's large-scale magnetic
field during cycles 13--22, Wang et al. (2002) have shown that the regular polarity reversal
is obtained only if the flow speed is assumed to be correlated
with the cycle amplitude (see also Hathaway et al. 2003).
On the other hand, Yeates et al. (2008) have shown that the cycle amplitude is positively correlated
with the speed of meridional circulation in the diffusion-dominated regime.
Now, both Beer et al. (1998) and Miyahara et al. (2004)
found that the amplitudes of solar cycle were weaker during
the Maunder minimum. Therefore, if flow speed determines the cycle amplitude, then it
probably indicates that the meridional circulation during
the Maunder minimum was weaker than the usual one. Last, using the low order
dynamo model, Passos \& Lopes (2009) suggest that the stochastic fluctuations
in the $\alpha$-effect cannot trigger a grand minimum rather they argued that the
decrease in the amplitude of the meridional flow can do so.

We have no idea why the meridional circulation dropped to a very low value.
Therefore, our assumption may be a bit questionable
at the present understanding. However, this assumption enables us to reproduce most of
the important features of the Maunder minimum remarkably well. It may be noted that
to produce a Maunder-like minimum in our model, we did not have to decrease $v_0$
to an unrealistically low value ($10$~m~s$^{-1}$ is required here).

We emphasize that we can reproduce these results
only if the dynamo is in the diffusion-dominated regime.
However, recently several independent works on the parity
(Chatterjee et al. 2004; Hotta \& Yokoyama 2010b),
the hemispheric coupling (Chatterjee \& Choudhuri 2006; Goel \& Choudhuri 2009),
the correlation between the polar field at the minimum and the sunspot number in
the next cycle (Jiang et al. 2007),
the correct value of the polar field (Hotta \& Yokoyama 2010a), the correlation between the
flow speed and the cycle amplitude (Wang et al. 2002; Hathaway et al. 2003;
Yeates et al. 2008) and the Waldmeier effect (Karak \& Choudhuri 2010b)
suggest that the solar dynamo is working in the diffusion-dominated regime and
not in the advection-dominated regime. In addition, from the low-order time-delay
dynamo model, Wilmot-Smith et al. (2006) have shown that the irregular activity
and the Maunder-like events are more readily excited in the diffusion-dominated
regime and not in the advection-dominated regime.

However, we are not pointing out that the decrease of meridional circulation is the
``only'' possibility to produce grand minima, but the abrupt decrease of the polar field
due to fluctuations in the Babcock--Leighton process may be a valid possibility
\cite{karak}. As the measurement of either the meridional circulation or the polar
field during the Maunder minimum is unavailable, we do not know
which possibility is correct. In this paper, we have adequately shown
that a large fluctuation of meridional circulation alone can lead to a
grand minimum.

\noindent{\it Acknowledgments:}
It is my pleasure to thank Arnab Rai Choudhuri for encouraging
me to write this paper and also for helping me during the preparation
of the paper by giving constructive suggestions. I also thank
Dibyendu Nandy, Piyali Chatterjee, Jie Jiang, and Dipankar Banerjee for the fruitful discussions.
Financial supports from J. C. Bose Fellowship of Arnab Rai Choudhuri (project no. SR/S2/JCB-61/2009)
and CSIR, India are acknowledged.


\section{Introduction}

The strong interaction in free space between a single quantum of light and an individual
two-level quantum system is a fundamental physical process.
The first observation of the partial extinction of a light beam by a single
ion dates back to 1987 \cite{wineland1987}.
Nevertheless, the topic is of broad ongoing interest and there is a
wealth of recent papers related to it, covering experiments
\cite{vamivakas2007,wrigge2008,tey2008-np} as well as theoretical and
conceptual works
\cite{vanenk2001,vanenk2004,sondermann2007,pinotsi2008,tey2008-a,zumofen2008p,stobinska2009}.

The terms \emph{extinction} applies to two qualitatively
different situations:
A strongly focused, coherent, low intensity continuous wave (cw) light
beam on resonance with the two-level quantum system -- which we
exemplarily assume to be an atom here -- can be scattered by the atom.
The probability to find it in the excited state remains small during the whole interaction procedure.
This case is treated in Refs.~\cite{vamivakas2007,wrigge2008,tey2008-np,tey2008-a,zumofen2008p}.
Carrying this scenario to extremes, it is predicted that a cw beam focused from half the solid angle onto the atom is completely reflected back into the half space from where it originated \cite{zumofen2008p}.
In other words, the cw beam is completely extincted.
On the contrary, the field incident onto the atom may constitute of a light pulse containing only a single photon.
Now, the extreme case is that there is a distinct moment in time where the probability to find the atom in the excited state is unity and the incident photon is fully absorbed (and re-emitted after wards).
This approach is followed in Refs.~\cite{sondermann2007,pinotsi2008,stobinska2009}.

It is common to both approaches that the spatial properties (angular intensity dependence, state of polarization) of the focused light must match the atomic dipole transition in order to achieve the desired maximum effect~\cite{quabis2000,vanenk2001,vanenk2004,lindlein2007,pinotsi2008,zumofen2008p}.
However, this is not enough for the aim of unit absorption probability.
Here, the incident photon must possess the time reversed properties of a photon spontaneously emitted by the atom~\cite{quabis2000,lindlein2007,stobinska2009}.
This requirement naturally includes the conditions for the spatial profile of the photon mentioned above but also sets restrictions on the temporal and spectral properties: Since the spontaneous decay is exponential \cite{weisskopf1930}, the temporal envelope of the incident photon has to be an increasing exponential (cf. Ref. \cite{stobinska2009}) up to a point in time where it drops off rapidly.
Furthermore, since the decay occurs into the full solid angle the atom must be illuminated from all directions.

The differences and similarities between these two situations can be better envisaged by tracing an analogy to a well-known classical system, a light beam resonant to an optical cavity.
The excitation probability of the atom is then associated to the energy present in the light field internal to the optical resonator, and the conditions for the complete absorption, reflection, or transmission of the incident classical field in this situation can be used to better understand the absorption or reflection of photons by a two-level quantum system.
The analogy is of course only approximate because contrary to the atom the quantization of the field plays no role in the treatment of the classical resonator.

The atom--cavity analogy will be established as follows:
We will assume that the light incident onto the resonator is perfectly
mode matched to it.
This means that we consider all requirements on the spatial intensity
distribution and polarization pattern to be fulfilled.
Then, the discussion can be focused onto spectral and temporal issues and
the amount of the solid angle covered by the incident light.
With these settings the pulsed excitation from full solid angle is
compared to a resonator that is irradiated through all its mirrors.
For the sake of simplicity, we will assume a linear resonator comprising only of two mirrors, one perfectly and one partially reflecting.
The effect of half solid angle illumination of an atom finds its counterpart in a resonator consisting of two partially reflecting mirrors with equal reflectivity illuminated only from one side.
Following the reasoning of Ref.~\cite{zumofen2008p} one can then introduce two half--spaces: One where the light directly reflected by the cavity front mirror interferes with the light leaking out of the resonator backwards through the front mirror and one which contains only light leaking out of the resonator, i.e., the light transmitted by the resonator.
When introducing the similarity between the resonator and the atom the only subtlety is the need to associate reflection by the resonator
with transmission by the atom.

In this manner, we are able to study the response of a two-level quantum system upon single photon excitation, i.e., its excitation and  the temporal properties of the scattered radiation, by analyzing the analogous response of a simple classical system.
We show that the only way to completely store all the incident pulse energy inside the resonator is to shape its temporal profile as the phase-conjugate of the  wave emitted by the freely decaying system.
We also show that for the symmetric resonator excited through only one of the two input mirrors the maximum energy storage is 50\% of the energy of the incident time-inverted pulse.
This allows us to conjecture that the two-level atom irradiated from half of the total
solid angle will likewise reach an excitation of at most 50\%.
In the continuous-wave case and limiting the effective field excitation to a single photon the totally reflecting atom is indeed equivalent to an optical resonator with equal mirrors  for which all resonant light is transmitted.

\section{Comparison of the experimental schemes}

\begin{figure}[h]
 \includegraphics[width=8cm]{LasPhys_Heugel_Fig1}
 \caption{Scheme of a simplified Fabry-P\'erot resonator made of two parallel semi-transparent mirrors. In the calculations, only mirror $M_1$ is illuminated.}
 \label{fig:Resonator}
\end{figure}

The analogy between atoms and optical resonators can be found in the limit of high finesse for the latter.
The optical resonator is designed as a Fabry-P\'erot cavity, created from two plane parallel mirrors of infinite size.
The normal mode of such a simplified resonator are plane waves, such that spatial and time domain parts of these normal modes separate according to $\vec E(\vec r,t)=U(t)\vec E_0(\vec r)$. The resonator dynamics are fully described by the time domain part $U(t)$ while only one polarization component is considered here.
This time domain part is chosen such, that the intensity is given by $I(t)=\left|U(t)\right|^2$.

The setup of such a cavity is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Resonator}.
The phase reference for all the light beams is taken at the position of mirror $M_1$.
The phase-shifts regarding reflection at the mirror surfaces are set in such a way, that the reflection of light at the outside border of each mirror gives rise to a phase shift of $\pi$.

The light beam being incident onto the cavity is $U_I$.
The cavity is only irradiated from one side.
The light being reflected by the cavity is described by the component $U_R$ and the transmitted component is $U_T$.
Inside the cavity the two components $U_C$ and $U_{CC}$ circulate.
The resonator has a fixed length $L$ so that the photon round trip time is defined as $\tau=2L/c$.
The resonator's resonances are given by $\omega_n=n\nu_{fsr}$ with $n\in\mathbb N$ and the free spectral range $\nu_{fsr}=1/\tau$.

The dynamics of the cavity being excited by incident light beams is best described in the frequency domain \cite{cesini1977}.
For constant mirror positions and due to it's linear response, the cavity acts as a linear filter on the spectrum of the incident light pulse.
The incident pulse is defined as $U_I(t)=p(t)e^{i\omega_0t}$, the spectrum of which reads as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:IncidentFieldSpectrum}
 U_I(\omega)=p(\omega-\omega_0).
\end{equation}
The reflected and transmitted fields are obtained from the product of this incident spectrum with the corresponding
filter functions, given for an arbitrary optical resonator by
\begin{equation}
  \label{eq:CavityReflection}
  C_R(\omega)= \frac{-r_1+r_2e^{-i\omega/\nu_{fsr}}}{1-r_1r_2e^{-i\omega/\nu_{fsr}}}
\end{equation}
for the reflection and by
\begin{equation}
  \label{eq:CavityTransmission}
    C_T(\omega)=
  \frac{t_1t_2e^{-i\omega/(2\nu_{fsr})}}{1-r_1r_2e^{-i\omega/\nu_{fsr}}}
\end{equation}
for the transmission. The internal field decay rate is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:DecayRate}
\Gamma=-\nu_{fsr}\ln(r_1r_2).
\end{equation}

The energy stored in the cavity is finally obtained by the expression
\begin{equation}
  \mathcal E(t)=\mathcal A
  \int\limits_{-\infty}^{t}\!\left[\left|U_I(t')\right|^2-
  \left|U_R(t')\right|^2-\left|U_T(t')\right|^2\right]\mathrm{d}t'
\end{equation}
with the cavity area $\mathcal A$.
By normalizing this quantity to the total energy of the incident field
$\mathcal{E_P}=\mathcal A\int\limits_{-\infty}^{\infty}\left|U_I(t')\right|^2\mathrm{d}t'$,
the fraction of energy $\epsilon(t)$ being stored in the cavity at time $t$ can be
simply calculated as
$\epsilon(t)=\mathcal{E}(t)/\mathcal{E_P}$.
It is useful to define the energy absorption efficiency $\epsilon_{max}=\max_{t\in\mathbb R} \epsilon(t)$.

In those cases where the quantities $U_T,U_R$ have been computed, these were obtained by taking the product of the filter functions with the incident light pulse $U_I$ in discrete Fourier space \cite{cesini1977,shakir1983,christodoulides1986,yu2001}.
The free spectral range was set to $\nu_{fsr}=10$~GHz and the reflectivity
of the coupling mirror $M_1$ to $r_1=0.9999$. We used the discrete Fourier transform
to numerically compute the frequency domain components, where the sampling
frequency was set to $5~\nu_{fsr}$ and the duration of the time window to more
than $500~\Gamma^{-1}$.

\subsection{Perfect absorption of a matching light pulse}

The case of perfect absorption of light by an atom in free space corresponds in our picture to the compression of a light pulse into a single-ended resonator ($r_2=1$).
The total absorption of the matching light pulse into the resonator can be understood as a suppression of reflection from the resonator during the time the pulse is irradiated onto mirror $M_1$.
The same picture applies to an atom which is irradiated from the full solid angle with a focused spatial pattern which matches that of the internal transition which is driven (e.g. a dipolar pattern).
There the light which is emitted from the partially excited atom destructively interferes with the light which has passed the atoms position.

\begin{figure}[h]
  \includegraphics[angle=270,totalheight=3.8cm]{LasPhys_Heugel_Fig2}
  \caption{Comparison of the interferences of light beams in the case of complete illumination of the systems.}
  \label{fig:FullSolidAngleComparison}
\end{figure}

First, the equation governing the resonator response onto arbitrary pulse shapes are rewritten to accommodate the special symmetry of such a single-ended resonator.
From the fact that there is no transmission, it can be seen that such a resonator acts as a dispersive mirror \cite{christodoulides1986}.
Only frequency dependent phase shifts are imposed on the spectrum of the incident light pulse.
We note that this property can be used for instance to passively convert phase-squeezed light into
amplitude-squeezed light, and vice-versa \cite{Galatola199195,villar07}.

The reflection filter function in Eq.~\ref{eq:CavityReflection} can therefore be described fully by its argument $\phi(\omega)\nolinebreak=\nolinebreak\arg \left\lbrace \widetilde{C_R}(\omega) \right\rbrace$.
Due to the high finesse of the cavity, $\frac{\omega-\omega_0}{\nu_{fsr}}\ll1$ holds for all relevant frequencies being involved in here. So $\phi(\omega)$ can be approximated as
\begin{equation}
 \phi(\omega)\approx\arctan \left[ - \frac{2(1-r_1)\frac{\omega-\omega_0}{\nu_{fsr}}}{(1-r_1)^2-\left(\frac{\omega-\omega_0}{\nu_{fsr}}\right)^2} \right]+\pi.
\end{equation}
This reduces the complete cavity filter function to the form of
\begin{equation}
 \widetilde{C_R}(\omega)=\frac{\Gamma - i(\omega-\omega_0)}{\Gamma + i(\omega-\omega_0)}.
\end{equation}

At this point, the application of time reversal regarding the optimal pulse becomes obvious.
Consider a pulse which grows exponentially with the rate $\Gamma$ until it suddenly stops at $t=0$.
Such a pulse
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ExponentialGrowingPulseTimeDomain}
p(t)=p_0e^{\Gamma t}H(-t)
\end{equation}
with the Heaviside step function $H(t)$ and an amplitude $p_0$ has a spectrum
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ExponentialGrowingPulseFreqDomain}
\widetilde{p}(\omega-\omega_0)=\frac{p_0}{\Gamma-i(\omega-\omega_0)}.
\end{equation}
So the spectrum of the reflected light beam is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ExponentialGrowingReflectionSpectrum}
\widetilde{U_R}(\omega)=\frac{p_0}{\Gamma+i(\omega-\omega_0)}.
\end{equation}
This reflected light beam is the time inverse of the incident light beam due to
$\widetilde{U_R}(\omega)=\widetilde{U_I}(\omega)^*$.

Going back to the time domain picture, the total concentration of the incident light pulse into the cavity becomes immediately obvious.
The reflected component reads
\begin{equation}
 \label{eq:ReflectedComponentTimeDomain}
 U_R(t)=p_0e^{(i\omega_0-\Gamma) t}H(t)
\end{equation}
so until $t=0$ no light is leaving the cavity.
This is due to a destructive interference between the light which leaves the cavity during that time, and the light which is directly reflected at mirror $M_1$ (Fig. \ref{fig:FullSolidAngleComparison}).
As $U_R(t)$ vanishes during the time the pulse is incident onto the cavity, all its energy flows into the cavity region and is confined there until $t=0$, hence perfect absorption of the pulse energy by the cavity is accomplished at $t=0$.

It has to be emphasized here that the symmetry of the source--free Maxwell equations under the time reversal transformation $t\mapsto -t$ is the basic reason for this remarkable total absorption of light energy into a generally lossy system.
By irradiating the resonator with the time reversal of that pulse which it would emit while decaying freely, this system is driven to behave in a time-reversed way.

\subsection{Perfect reflection (resp. transmission) of a narrow band faint light beam}

\begin{figure}[h]
  \includegraphics[angle=270,totalheight=3.8cm]{LasPhys_Heugel_Fig3}
  \caption{Comparison of the interference effects which lead to full transmission (resonator) or full reflection (atom) in the case of resonant excitation with faint light beams.}
  \label{fig:HalfSolidAngleComparison}
\end{figure}

The action of a symmetric double-ended cavity ($r_1=r_2$) such as in Fig. \ref{fig:Resonator} on narrow band resonant light is well known from text-books.
It can also be seen from Eq. \ref{eq:CavityReflection} that in resonance $C_R(n\nu_{fsr})=0$ for $n\in\mathbb N$.
Therefore all light is transmitted in this special case, independent of the finesse.

This remarkable effect is due to the interference of the light which is partially reflected off mirror $M_1$ and the light which leaks out through this cavity mirror from inside the resonator $\sqrt{1-r_1^2}U_{CC}$.
This interference determines the total reflected light $U_R$.
In the case of resonance, these two components are balanced with opposite signs.
Therefore, all the light energy is transmitted through the resonator.

A direct analog of this perfect transmission of resonant narrow band light through a symmetric resonator is the total reflection of a narrow band faint light beam from a single quantum emitters.
The same picture of partial destructive interference of beams can be drawn, if the atom is irradiated from one half of the full solid angle with a focused spatial pattern which matches that of the internal transition which is driven (e.g. a dipolar pattern).
The portion of incident light which passes the position of the atom interferes with the light emitted by the atom.
If this interference is fully destructive, as is the case for resonant light beams, all the incident light is reflected back from the atom.

The reason for the interchange of transmission and reflection in both cases can be seen from direction in which interference occurs.
This is visualized in Fig. \ref{fig:HalfSolidAngleComparison} where schemes of both experimental situations are shown.

\subsection{Comparison of other experimental schemes regarding the absorption efficiency}

\subsubsection{Absorption of a narrow band faint light beam into a single-ended resonator}

\begin{figure}[h]
  \resizebox{0.45\textwidth}{!}{\includegraphics[angle=270]{LasPhys_Heugel_Fig4}}
  \caption{Absorption efficiency $\epsilon_\mathrm{max}$ as a function of the
  pulse length $T$ for a rectangular pulse shape.}
  \label{fig:RectangularLaserPulse}
\end{figure}

In our simulations we approximate narrow-band light beams by pulses of rectangular shape with a sufficient duration, i.e., the spectral width of these pulses is much smaller than the width of the cavity resonance.
In order to investigate the transition from short pulses to narrow band light beams, we computed the absorption efficiency dependence on the pulse length utilizing the above introduced technique.
The results in Fig. \ref{fig:RectangularLaserPulse} indicate that only for short pulse durations a considerable fraction of energy can be stored inside the resonator.
This is due to the effect that in the beginning transient signals impose the build up of energy storage inside the resonator.
Once the steady state is reached, no more energy will be stored inside the resonator.
If the duration of the rectangular pulse is longer than this initial build-up process takes, the fraction of energy being stored inside the resonator decreases with increasing pulse durations.
For the atomic experiments with illumination from half the solid angle this means, that although perfect reflection occurs for a narrow band faint light beam, no significant excitation of the atom will be observed.

\subsubsection{Partial absorption of a matching light pulse into a symmetric double-ended resonator}

\begin{figure}[h]
  \resizebox{0.45\textwidth}{!}{\includegraphics[angle=270]{LasPhys_Heugel_Fig5}}
  \caption{Absorption efficiency $\epsilon_{max}$ as a function of the relative transmission of energy through mirror $M_2$.}
  \label{fig:AbsorptionSymmResonator}
\end{figure}

The best strategy for finding the optimum pulse shape seems to be to match the decay constant $\Gamma$ of the particular resonator.
While the resonator is irradiated, the reflection of light is canceled.
Therefore the only loss regarding  energy storage is due to light-leakage through mirror $M_2$.
The results in Fig. \ref{fig:AbsorptionSymmResonator} show that for symmetric resonators where $t_2^2/(t_1^2+t_2^2)=0.5$, the maximum of fractional energy storage in the resonator amounts to $\epsilon_{max}=0.5$.
According to the analogy between both systems, this limitation to $\epsilon_{max}=0.5$ also applies to all experiments where atoms are illuminated from only half of the full solid angle.

\section{Effect of imperfections on the total absorption of light energy by optical resonators}

\subsection{Deviations from the matching pulse shape}

We now consider how realistic pulses would modify the ideal dynamics discussed in the previous section.
The influence of various deviations from the optimal pulse shape on the achievable absorption efficiency
is investigated numerically.
The reflectivity of mirror $M_2$ has thereby been set to $r_2=1$.

\begin{figure}[h]
  \resizebox{0.45\textwidth}{!}{%
    \includegraphics[angle=270,width=8.5cm]{LasPhys_Heugel_Fig6}
  }
  \caption{The absorption efficiency $\epsilon$ as a function of the
  pulse length $T$ for a pulse shape $p(t)=p_0e^{\Gamma t}H(-t)H(t+T)$.}
  \label{fig:FinitePulses}
\end{figure}

Realistic pulses will be restricted to a finite length $T$, being written as
\begin{equation}
 \label{eq:FinitLengthPulse}
 p(t)=p_0e^{\Gamma t}H(-t)H(t+T),
\end{equation}
where $H(t)$ is the Heaviside step function.
Fig.~\ref{fig:FinitePulses} depicts the influence of finite pulse durations on the
amount of energy stored in the cavity. It becomes clear that relatively short
pulses of duration $T=4\Gamma^{-1}$ are already absorbed with an efficiency as high
as $\epsilon_\mathrm{max}=0.9997$. The reason why finite $T$ implies $\epsilon_\mathrm{max}<1$
can be explained by the partial reflection of the very initial pulse tail, which will always be reflected without
interfering destructively with the internal field, since this yet has to be built up.
But due to the exponentially growing shape of the incident pulses, this effect is
negligible if the initial step is small enough.

\begin{figure}[h]
  \resizebox{0.45\textwidth}{!}{%
    \includegraphics[angle=270,width=8.5cm]{LasPhys_Heugel_Fig7}
  }
  \caption{Absorption efficiency $\epsilon_\mathrm{max}$ as a function of the
  exponential time constant $\tau_p$ for an incident pulse shape $p(t)=p_0e^{t/\tau_p}H(-t)$.}
  \label{fig:ExpRate}
\end{figure}

Realistic pulses will also suffer from a second problem, the mismatch between
its time constant decay $\tau_p$ and the cavity lifetime $\Gamma$, breaking once more
the ideal symmetry required. The results are presented in Fig. \ref{fig:ExpRate},
where $\epsilon_\mathrm{max}$ is plotted as a function of the incident pulse
exponential time constant.
The flat maximum seen at $\tau_p=\Gamma^{-1}$ clearly shows that small deviations
of $\tau_p$ do not lead to a sharp drop in excitation efficiency, showing that
the generation of the incident pulse is robust also against this kind of error.

\subsection{Resonator losses through $r_2<1$}

\begin{figure}[h]
\resizebox{0.45\textwidth}{!}{%
  \includegraphics[angle=270,width=8.5cm]{LasPhys_Heugel_Fig8}
}
\caption{The effect of losses through mirror $M_2$ onto the absorption efficiency
  $\epsilon$ for $r_1=(0.97,0.98,0.99,0.999)$.}
\label{fig:ScanReflectivity}
\end{figure}

The simplification $r_2=1$ that has been applied so far can hardly be fulfilled in any experiment.
Therefore, the case of $r_2<1$ is investigated next.
The results in Fig. \ref{fig:ScanReflectivity} show how strong the absorption efficiency depends on the prevention of loss through mirror $M_2$.
There is a non-linear drop off in absorption efficiency if $r_2<1$.
This can be explained as follows:
While the light pulse is incident onto the cavity, the intracavity field builds up and circulates inside the cavity.
Due to the high finesse, it passes mirror $M_2$ many times.
Even small transmissions, compared to those through mirror $M_1$, accumulate and have a considerable effect.

\section{Conclusions}

We are pointing at a remarkable similarity between the interaction of light with an atom and with an optical resonator.
As discussed the similarity holds in several respects.
This may seem surprising because it links the dynamics of the linear optical resonator at any incident light power level with the dynamics of an atom interacting with up to one photon.
However, if the atom is exposed to higher photon fluxes, the similarity breaks down.
The reasons are that the atomic energy spectrum is not harmonic and that nonlinear effects become important.
Because of this similarity one has a useful test bed at hand for investigating experimental strategies for the preparation of the pulses to be employed in the atom experiment and to estimate deficiencies resulting from imperfect light fields.
We concentrated on two cases, one where the linear resonator is excited through both open ports, and the other where it is excited only through one of the two open ports.
For the atom this corresponds to the cases where the incident focused light field matches a dipole wave in the full solid angle and one where it matches the dipole wave in a limited solid angle cone $<4\pi$.
For modelling the situation with the resonator one just has to choose the corresponding reflectivities $r_1$ and $r_2$.
The interaction of the atom with $n\leq1$ photons can thus be quantitatively simulated using the resonator model.
However, this similarity does not at all cover the efficient coupling of the atom in free space at higher photon numbers where novel possibilities for non linear optics at the few photon level may become feasible \cite{Nemoto2004,stobinska2009,turchette1995}.

\begin{acknowledgements}
The authors gratefully acknowledge fruitful discussions with Magdalena Stobi\'nska.
\end{acknowledgements}