Quantum Mechanical Noises in Gravitational Wave Detectors

Similar documents
Quantum-noise reduction techniques in a gravitational-wave detector

Frequency dependent squeezing for quantum noise reduction in second generation Gravitational Wave detectors. Eleonora Capocasa

QND for advanced GW detectors

Study of a quantum nondemolition interferometer using ponderomotive squeezing

Interferometry beyond the Standard Quantum Limit using a Sagnac Speedmeter Stefan Hild

Optical Interferometry for Gravitational Wave Detection

Advanced interferometry, quantum optics and optomechanics in gravitational wave detectors

Enhancing sensitivity of gravitational wave antennas, such as LIGO, via light-atom interaction

Squeezed Light for Gravitational Wave Interferometers

What can LIGO detect? Abstract

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON

arxiv: v1 [gr-qc] 6 Jan 2017

Verification of conditional quantum state in GW detectors. LSC-VIRGO Meeting, QND workshop Hannover, October 26, 2006

Practical speed meter designs for quantum nondemolition gravitational-wave interferometers

Interferometry beyond the Quantum Limit: From Squeezed Vacuum, Stiff Photons and Other Ways to Trick Heisenberg. Stefan Hild

Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen entanglement t of massive mirrors

Chapter 2 Quantum Theory of Gravitational-Wave Detectors

New directions for terrestrial detectors

The Quantum Limit and Beyond in Gravitational Wave Detectors

Towards Sagnac speed meter interferometers for gravitational wave detection

Scaling law in signal recycled laser-interferometer gravitational-wave detectors

Development of ground based laser interferometers for the detection of gravitational waves

Squeezed Light Techniques for Gravitational Wave Detection

Phasor Calculations in LIGO

Nonclassical Interferometry

Status of LIGO. David Shoemaker LISA Symposium 13 July 2004 LIGO-G M

A Guide to Experiments in Quantum Optics

Day 3: Ultracold atoms from a qubit perspective

Conversion of conventional gravitational-wave interferometers into QND interferometers by modifying their input and/or output optics

How to listen to the Universe?

Gravitational Waves. Physics, Technology, Astronomy and Opportunities. Unnikrishnan. C. S. Tata Institute of Fundamental Research Mumbai

MESOSCOPIC QUANTUM OPTICS

Gravitational wave cosmology Lecture 2. Daniel Holz The University of Chicago

The gravitational wave detector VIRGO

Light Sources and Interferometer Topologies - Introduction -

Explorations of Planck-scale Noise in Noncommutative Holographic Spacetime 1

Present and Future. Nergis Mavalvala October 09, 2002

Multimode Entanglement in. Continuous Variables

Squeezed states of light - generation and applications

How to measure a distance of one thousandth of the proton diameter? The detection of gravitational waves

Interferometric. Gravitational Wav. Detectors. \p World Scientific. Fundamentals of. Peter R. Sawlson. Syracuse University, USA.

Gravitational wave detection. K.A. Strain

The Status of Enhanced LIGO.

LIGO Status and Advanced LIGO Plans. Barry C Barish OSTP 1-Dec-04

Practical speed meter designs for QND gravitational-wave interferometers

File name: Supplementary Information Description: Supplementary Figures, Supplementary Notes and Supplementary References

I. Introduction. What s the problem? Standard quantum limit (SQL) for force detection. The right wrong story III. Beating the SQL.

How did physicists detect Gravitational Waves? Some tools that revealed the GW event. C. Kurtsiefer, Physics enrichment camp NUS

Quantum enhanced magnetometer and squeezed state of light tunable filter

Optomechanics and spin dynamics of cold atoms in a cavity

Advanced Workshop on Nanomechanics September Quantum Measurement in an Optomechanical System

GEO 600: Advanced Techniques in Operation

QUANTUM NOISE REDUCTION FOR GRAVITATIONAL WAVE DETECTORS: DEVELOPING REALISTIC INTERFEROMETER SCHEMES. Mengyao Wang

Optical Techniques for Gravitational-Wave Detection

Optical Coatings and Thermal Noise in Precision Measurements

Gravitational Wave Astronomy Suggested readings: Camp and Cornish, Ann Rev Nucl Part Sci 2004 Schutz, gr-qc/ Kip Thorne WEB course

Quantum optics and squeezed states of light

Next Generation Interferometers

Quantum optics. Marian O. Scully Texas A&M University and Max-Planck-Institut für Quantenoptik. M. Suhail Zubairy Quaid-i-Azam University

VESF School 2009: FUTURE INTERFEROMETERS

The status of VIRGO. To cite this version: HAL Id: in2p

An Overview of Advanced LIGO Interferometry

Arbitrary precision in multipath interferometry

The Advanced LIGO detectors at the beginning of the new gravitational wave era

Gravitational-Wave Detectors

Detection of gravitational waves. Miquel Nofrarias Institut de Ciències de l Espai (IEEC-CSIC)

Squeezed Light and Quantum Imaging with Four-Wave Mixing in Hot Atoms

arxiv:gr-qc/ v1 15 Jan 2003

Dynamics of star clusters containing stellar mass black holes: 1. Introduction to Gravitational Waves

Where are the Fringes? (in a real system) Div. of Amplitude - Wedged Plates. Fringe Localisation Double Slit. Fringe Localisation Grating

Figure 1: An example of the stretching and contracting of space-time caused by a gravitational wave.

LIGO: On the Threshold of Gravitational-wave Astronomy

Innovative Technologies for the Gravitational-Wave Detectors LIGO and Virgo

Advanced LIGO the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory The Next Gravitational-Wave Observatory

Discovery of Gravita/onal Waves

Nonequilibrium issues in macroscopic experiments

Luz e Átomos. como ferramentas para Informação. Quântica. Quântica Ótica. Marcelo Martinelli. Lab. de Manipulação Coerente de Átomos e Luz

Optomechanical Physics in the Design of Gravitational Wave Detectors. Yiqiu Ma

Quantum Noise in Mirror-Field Systems: Beating the Standard Quantum IARD2010 Limit 1 / 23

Gravitational Wave Astronomy

Overview Ground-based Interferometers. Barry Barish Caltech Amaldi-6 20-June-05

Mode Invisibility Technique A Quantum Non-Demolition Measurement for Light. Marvellous Onuma-Kalu

LIGO s Detection of Gravitational Waves from Two Black Holes

Large-scale Cryogenic Gravitational wave Telescope (LCGT) TAMA/CLIO/LCGT Collaboration Kazuaki KURODA

Coherent states, beam splitters and photons

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Quantum Optical Communication

Dynamical Casimir effect in superconducting circuits

arxiv: v2 [gr-qc] 11 Sep 2014

Radiation pressure effects in interferometric measurements

Gravitational wave data analysis

Squeezing manipulation with atoms

0.5 atoms improve the clock signal of 10,000 atoms

Advanced LIGO, Advanced VIRGO and KAGRA: Precision Measurement for Astronomy. Stefan Ballmer For the LVC Miami 2012 Dec 18, 2012 LIGO-G

Doing Atomic Physics with Electrical Circuits: Strong Coupling Cavity QED

Gravitational Waves. Kostas Kokkotas. Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen & Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. June 17, 07 Zakopane 1

Status and Plans for Future Generations of Ground-based Interferometric Gravitational-Wave Antennas

Gravitational Wave Detection from the Ground Up

Status and Prospects for LIGO

Beyond Heisenberg uncertainty principle in the negative mass reference frame. Eugene Polzik Niels Bohr Institute Copenhagen

arxiv:quant-ph/ v1 25 Nov 2003

Transcription:

Quantum Mechanical Noises in Gravitational Wave Detectors Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics (Albert Einstein Institute) Germany

Introduction Test masses in GW interferometers are Macroscopic Objects, but measurement precision is extremely high. M=40kg, X=10-20 m Quantum Fluctuations of test masses becomes important This can be solved by designing the optical configuration carefully - applying techniques of non-linear optics Measurement back-action due to state reduction an important issue 2

Laser Light Quantum mechanics in GW interferometers pendulum Fabry-Perot Cavity pendulum phase shift (modulation) Shot Noise: Phase fluctuation, inversely proportional to: photon number # of round trips Local Mirror L km X=Lh Far Mirror phasor diagram This is just one arm, interferometer brings two arms together GW interferometers use light to measure relative motions of mirrors Need to measure position repeatedly in order to detect h(t), but [ˆxH (t 1 ), ˆx H (t 2 ) ] = i h t 2 t 1 M 0 Quantum mechanics does not allow us to do so!... at least not perfectly 3

The Standard Quantum Limit A Standard Quantum Limit was formulated by Braginsky in the 1960s Heisenberg Uncertainty Relation [ x(t 1 )] [ x(t 2 )] (t 2 t 1 ) M t 1 t 2 wavefunction widths of test mass t 1 : right after 1st measurement t 2 : right before 2nd measurement Standard Quantum Limit 4

The Standard Quantum Limit A Standard Quantum Limit was formulated by Braginsky in the 1960s Heisenberg Uncertainty Relation [ x(t 1 )] [ x(t 2 )] (t 2 t 1 ) M t 1 t 2 Laser Light Fabry-Perot Cavity wavefunction widths of test mass t 1 : right after 1st measurement t 2 : right before 2nd measurement Photon number fluctuation also causing noisy force Radiation-Pressure Noise X=Lh Standard Quantum Limit Increasing Photon Number... Lowers Shot Noise Raises Rad. Pres. Noise 5

Michelson Interferometer Common mode: provide strong carrier light in the arms Differential mode: GW-induced motion drives differential phaseshift 6

Shot & Radiation-Pressure Noises Rad. Pres. Noise Grows Shot Noise Drops Standard Quantum Limit Conventional Interferometer : - Shot & Rad. Pres. Noises uncorrelated. [Add powers] - Rad. Pres. Noise dominates at lower freq. s; Shot Noise at higher freq. s - Total Noise never surpasses the Standard Quantum Limit L = 4 km, M = 40 kg and γ = 100 Hz γ : optical bandwidth of arm cavity 7

Standard Quantum Limit The Standard Quantum Limit is indeed right beyond Advanced LIGO (LIGO-II), with 40kg test mass. If we want to improve by another factor of 10 in LIGO-III, or EGO, either - use 4000kg mirrors - or surpass the SQL - or some combination The Standard Quantum Limit can be surpassed, and ways of doing so will be of great interest for 3rdgeneration detectors! Figure from Cutler & Thorne 8

Surpassing the SQL Braginsky (1970s): Measure an observable that commutes at different times??? x t 1 +0 p t 2-0 Quantum Demolition Position eigenstates do not stay eigenstates during evolution --- being demolished continuously Quantum Non-Demolition Measure Quantities whose eigenstates stay eigenstates, e.g, momentum of free mass But the measurement here is only postulated in reality, they are executed by photons, which are quantized Quantum Electrodynamics Required 9

Classical Electrodynamics: Quadratures At a certain position, optical fields near central frequency! 0 (1015 Hz) E(t) = (t) cos! 0 t + (t) sin! 0 t,2 (t) slowly changing (~100Hz), called quadrature fields Large monochromatic field E cos! t (Local Oscillator) superimposed: 0 0 E tot (t) = [E 0 + (t)] cos! 0 t + (t) sin! 0 t E 0 [1 + (t)/e 0 ] cos [! 0 t - (t)/e 0 ] (t) amplitude modulation; (t) phase modulation (t)! (t) For a different Local Oscillator: E 0 cos (! 0 t - î) E 0 (t)cos î + (t) sin î amplitude modulation - (t) sin î + (t) cosî phase modulation Homodyne Detection: detecting the î quadrature by superimposing the above Local Oscillator and photodetection! E 0 (t) (t) 10

Quantum Mechanics of the Light: QED Commutation Relations: [ E1 (t), (t ) ] = [ (t), (t ) ] = 0, individual quadrature, QND also applies to E φ [ E1 (t), (t ) ] = i hδ(t t ) orthogonal quadratures not simultaneously measurable Homodyne Detection is QND measurement Individual Quadrature can be measured without further noise Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle for cross-quadrature measurement S E1 (Ω)S E2 (Ω) S 2 (Ω) h 2 Minimum Uncertainty States: - Vacuum state - Squeezed state - amplitude squeezed state - phase squeezed state Vacuum State Amplitude-Squeezed Phase-Squeezed State State 11

Quantum Noise in GW Detectors I 1/2 X coherent state amplitude fluctuation I 1/2 [I 1/2 /(M! 2 )] Mirror: Light: phase fluctuation Mẍ = IE in 1 (t) x = E1 out (t) = E1 in (t) E2 out (t) = E2 in (t) + Ix(t) x free [ x 0 + p ] 0t M + G(t) t = E2 in (t) + I t dt M 0 0 From Optical Fields + dt E in 1 (t) I M t 0 + [ I t dt 0 dt E in 1 (t ) x 0 + p ] 0t M + G(t) From Free Test Mass 12

Quantum Noise in GW Detectors I 1/2 X coherent state amplitude fluctuation I 1/2 [I 1/2 /(M! 2 )] Mirror: Light: phase fluctuation Mẍ = IE in 1 (t) x = E1 out (t) = E1 in (t) E2 out (t) = E2 in (t) + Ix(t) x free [ x 0 + p ] 0t M + G(t) t = E2 in (t) + I t dt M 0 0 From Optical Fields + dt E in 1 (t) I M t 0 + [ I t dt 0 dt E in 1 (t ) x 0 + p ] 0t M + G(t) From Free Test Mass 13

Quantum Noise in GW Detectors I 1/2 X coherent state amplitude fluctuation I 1/2 [I 1/2 /(M! 2 )] Mirror: Light: phase fluctuation Mẍ = IE in 1 (t) x = E1 out (t) = E1 in (t) E2 out (t) = E2 in (t) + Ix(t) x free [ x 0 + p ] 0t M + G(t) t = E2 in (t) + I t dt M 0 0 From Optical Fields + dt E in 1 (t) I M t 0 + [ I t dt 0 dt E in 1 (t ) x 0 + p ] 0t M + G(t) From Free Test Mass Optical-Field Commutator cancels Test-Mass Commutator Optical Fields and Test-Mass Position together form a QND observable! This includes all noises -- no extra noise dictated by Quantum Mechanics. 14

SQL derived from Quantum Measurement Theory The output fields E1 out (t) = E1 in (t) E2 out (t) = E2 in (t) + Ix(t) t = E2 in (t) + I t dt M 0 0 From Optical Fields In Frequency domain, if we measure out dt E in 1 (t) + [ I DC {}}{ x 0 + p 0t M +G(t) ] From Free Test Mass Noise Spectrum Uncertainty Principle S x = 1 I S Shot + I M 2 Ω 4 S Rad. Press. + 2 MΩ 2 S Correlation S E1 (Ω)S E2 (Ω) S 2 (Ω) h 2 15

SQL derived from Quantum Measurement Theory The output fields E1 out (t) = E1 in (t) E2 out (t) = E2 in (t) + Ix(t) t = E2 in (t) + I t dt M 0 0 From Optical Fields In Frequency domain, if we measure out dt E in 1 (t) + [ I DC {}}{ x 0 + p 0t M +G(t) ] From Free Test Mass Noise Spectrum Uncertainty Principle In Absence of Correlations... (e.g., vacuum input state) S x = 1 I S Shot + I M 2 Ω 4 S Rad. Press. + 2 MΩ 2 S Correlation S E1 (Ω)S E2 (Ω) S 2 (Ω) h 2 ( ) ( ) 1 I S x 2 I S M 2 Ω 4 S 2 h MΩ 2 SSQL x 16

Surpassing the SQL in a Michelson interferometer The Standard Quantum Limit only exists for specific readout scheme and input state SQL can be circumvented when either of the above are modified E1 out = E1 in E out 2 = E in 2 I MΩ 2 Ein 1 + IG - modification of input state: frequency dependent squeezing - modification of readout scheme: frequency dependent detection amplitude fluctuation phase fluctuation I 1/2 X x free I 1/2 [I 1/2 /(M! 2 )] 17

Surpassing the SQL in a Michelson interferometer The Standard Quantum Limit only exists for specific readout scheme and input state SQL can be circumvented when either of the above are modified E1 out = E1 in E out 2 = E in 2 I MΩ 2 Ein 1 + IG - modification of input state: frequency dependent squeezing - modification of readout scheme: frequency dependent detection amplitude fluctuation phase fluctuation I 1/2 X x free I 1/2 [I 1/2 /(M! 2 )] 18

Surpassing the SQL in a Michelson interferometer The Standard Quantum Limit only exists for specific readout scheme and input state SQL can be circumvented when either of the above are modified E1 out = E1 in E out 2 = E in 2 I MΩ 2 Ein 1 + IG - modification of input state: frequency dependent squeezing - modification of readout scheme: frequency dependent detection Both require frequency dependent rotation of quadratures, which can be realized by detuned Fabry-Perot Cavities. [Kimble et al., 2001; Appendix of Purdue & Chen, 2002] Bandwidth of typical filter cavities ~ 100Hz; loss has to be lower than squeeze factor. [Kimble et al., 2001] amplitude fluctuation phase fluctuation I 1/2 X x free I 1/2 [I 1/2 /(M! 2 )] 19

Surpassing the SQL in a Michelson interferometer Filter Cavity II Arm Cavity Filter Cavity II Arm Cavity Arm Cavity Arm Cavity Laser Laser Squeezed Vacuum Circulator Filter Cavity I Squeezed Vacuum Circulator Filter Cavity I Photodetector Homodyne detector frequency dependent input squeezed state frequency dependent homodyne detection (variational measurement) [Kimble et al., 2001] 20

Surpassing the SQL in a Michelson interferometer 1 10-22 1 10-23 1 10-24 10 db Variational: Lossless 1 10-25 10 20 50 100 200 500 1000 f (Hz) Í = 2éÂ100 Hz Ic = 800 kw 10dB squeezing 20 ppm loss/round trip, 2 filters, each 4 km total loss ~ 1% 21

Other interferometer configurations: Speed Meters Cavity 1 beam L beam R Laser + + + Laser East Arm Extraction Mirror Cavity 2 BS Sloshing Mirror Photodetection φ R φ L Photodetection extra mirror Michelson Speed Meter Sagnac Interferometer Braginsky & Khalili, 90s; Purdue & Chen, 02 Chen, 02; Danilishin, 03 They are equivalent, with optical responses characterized by Á and Í 22

Classical Speed Meters Speed Meter [for f<á ]: transfer function ~ f, i.e., suppressed at low frequencies Sensitivity traces the SQL: Equal amount of Shot Noise and Radiation-Pressure Noise Michelson Rad Pres. Noise Speed Meter Both Noises Michelson Shot Noise Speed Meters: Á = 2éÂ130 Hz Í = 2éÂ100 Hz Conventional: Í = 2éÂ100 Hz Ic = 800 kw 23

E1 out = E1 in E out 2 = E in 2 + Quantum Noise of Speed Meters I V BA {}}{ [ I ] M Ein 1 +V G V total Speed-Meter input-output relation for f<á Low frequencies: ordinary homodyne detection & squeezed state with fixed squeeze angle will be optimal. [But this will not be the usual phase quadrature.] High frequencies: optimal detection quadrature will be phase quadrature again. Á = 2éÂ173 Hz Í = 2éÂ200 Hz Ic = 800 kw 10dB squeezing 20 ppm loss/round trip 2 filters, each 4 km total loss ~ 1% Much less affected by losses!! 24

Vela Spindown Upper Limit 10-22 10-23 BH/BH inspiral 100Mpc; NS/NS Inspiral 20Mpc "=10-9 "=10-7 Crab Spindown Upper Limit A: speed meter, wideband B: position meter with filters C: speed meter, broadband 1/2-1/2 ~ h(f) = S, Hz h BH/BH Inspiral 400Mpc; NS/NS Inspiral 80Mpc NS/NS Inspiral 300Mpc; BH/BH Inspiral, z=0.4 NB LIGO-II LIGO-I Sco X-1 Known Pulsar!=10-6, r=10kpc NS/NS SNR improvement A B C 5.1 6.3 7.5 "=10-11 WB LIGO-II LMXBs!=10-7 r=10kpc NS/NS Range (z) Vol. Increase 0.33 [104] 0.41 [181] 0.49 [280] 10-24 BH/BH (10+10) Range (z) Vol. Increase 1.4 [15] 2.0 [26] 2.4 [33] 10 20 50 100 200 500 1000 frequency, Hz Ic = 800 kw; 10dB squeezing; 20 ppm loss/round trip; 2 filters: each 4 km; total loss ~ 1% 25

Summary Test masses in GW interferometers are Macroscopic Objects, but measurement precision is extremely high. M=40kg, X=10-20 m The Standard Quantum Limit Quantum Fluctuations of test masses becomes important; Measurement back-action due to state reduction an important issue: The Standard Quantum Limit In GW Interferometers, measurement back-action/state reduction is implemented by Radiation-Pressure Noise This can be solved by designing the optical configuration carefully - applying techniques of non-linear optics 26

Quantization of Gravity? Gravitational waves we look for have very high number of gravitons Measurement back action (grav. l radiation reaction of mirrors) negligible. - GW-induced motion generates secondary wave: measurement back action. But this is weak!! - We estimate (quadrupole radiation) incident GW GW-induced motion secondary GW Proposal of Roger Penrose, Gravity-Induced Wavefunction Reduction (see his books) 27