Phasor Calculations in LIGO

Similar documents
An Overview of Advanced LIGO Interferometry

The technology behind LIGO: how to measure displacements of meters

The Status of Enhanced LIGO.

Advanced LIGO Optical Configuration and Prototyping Effort

Quantum Mechanical Noises in Gravitational Wave Detectors

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

Non-linear Optics II (Modulators & Harmonic Generation)

Squeezed Light for Gravitational Wave Interferometers

Squeezed Light Techniques for Gravitational Wave Detection

An introduction to signal extraction in interferometric gravitational wave detectors

ECE 484 Semiconductor Lasers

Interference. Part-2. Gambar: Museum Victoria Australia

Some Topics in Optics

GEO 600: Advanced Techniques in Operation

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

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

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON

Optical Coatings in LIGO

Spectroscopic Instruments

Group Velocity and Phase Velocity

Study of a quantum nondemolition interferometer using ponderomotive squeezing

Physics of LIGO Lecture 3

An Adaptive Optics system for the automatic control of laser beam jitters in air

Searching for Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background with LIGO

GROUND NOISE STUDIES USING THE TAMA300 GRAVITATIONAL-WAVE DETECTOR AND RELATED HIGHLY-SENSITIVE INSTRUMENTS

OPTICS and related TOPICS

34. Even more Interference Effects

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

CHAPTER FIVE. Optical Resonators Containing Amplifying Media

NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS. for the degree

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

Chapter 8 Optical Interferometry

Optical Techniques for Gravitational-Wave Detection

LIGO s Thermal Noise Interferometer: Progress and Status

arxiv: v1 [physics.optics] 13 Apr 2010

Waves Part 3B: Interference

Acoustooptic Devices. Chapter 10 Physics 208, Electro-optics Peter Beyersdorf. Document info ch 10. 1

Chapter 2 Basic Optics

Optical Interferometry for Gravitational Wave Detection

Double Slit is VERY IMPORTANT because it is evidence of waves. Only waves interfere like this.

All-reflective coupling of two optical cavities with 3-port diffraction gratings

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

Chapter 2 Quantum Theory of Gravitational-Wave Detectors

3.1 The Plane Mirror Resonator 3.2 The Spherical Mirror Resonator 3.3 Gaussian modes and resonance frequencies 3.4 The Unstable Resonator

QND for advanced GW detectors

Quantum physics and the beam splitter mystery

Interferometers. PART 1: Michelson Interferometer The Michelson interferometer is one of the most useful of all optical instru

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

PS210 - Optical Techniques. Section VI

Waves Part 3: Superposition

Edward S. Rogers Sr. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ECE318S Fundamentals of Optics. Final Exam. April 16, 2007.

Nonclassical Interferometry

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

Gravitational Waves & Precision Measurements

arxiv: v1 [gr-qc] 6 Jan 2017

Advanced LIGO Optical Configuration, Prototyping, and Modeling

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

Constructive vs. destructive interference; Coherent vs. incoherent interference

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

Planck Scale Physics in the Laboratory. Craig Hogan University of Chicago and Fermilab

3 LIGO: The Basic Idea

EM waves and interference. Review of EM wave equation and plane waves Energy and intensity in EM waves Interference

Ground-based GW detectors: status of experiments and collaborations

The Quest to Detect Gravitational Waves

PH 222-3A Spring 2010

Gravitational Wave Detection by Interferometry (Ground and Space)

UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Previously Published Works

Interference. Reminder: Exam 2 and Review quiz, more details on the course website

Chapter 35. Interference

The laser oscillator. Atoms and light. Fabry-Perot interferometer. Quiz

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

Gauss Modes. Paul Fulda

Light Sources and Interferometer Topologies - Introduction -

Gravitational Waves and LIGO

The laser oscillator. Atoms and light. Fabry-Perot interferometer. Quiz

The science of light. P. Ewart

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

Advanced LIGO Status Report

Fundamental Physics with Atomic Interferometry

How to stay in shape: Overcoming beam and mirror. distortions in advanced. gravitational wave interferometers

Brillouin-Light-Scattering Spectroscopy

Coherent states, beam splitters and photons

After ~ 40 years of effort, no one has detected a GW! Why? Noise levels in detectors exceed expected

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

Low-loss Grating for Coupling to a High-Finesse Cavity

6WDWXVRI/,*2. Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory. Nergis Mavalvala MIT IAU214, August 2002 LIGO-G D

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

Stimulated Rapid Adiabatic Passage of Metastable Helium: Principle and Operation

Lab 2: Mach Zender Interferometer Overview

arxiv:gr-qc/ v2 13 Jan 2004

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Physics 8.03 Practice Final Exam 3

Multi-mode quantum noise model for advanced gravitational wave detectors

New directions for terrestrial detectors

1. Consider the biconvex thick lens shown in the figure below, made from transparent material with index n and thickness L.

OPTI510R: Photonics. Khanh Kieu College of Optical Sciences, University of Arizona Meinel building R.626

Quantum optics and squeezed states of light

LASERS. Amplifiers: Broad-band communications (avoid down-conversion)

4 Classical Coherence Theory

Elimination of Clock Jitter Noise in Spaceborn Laser Interferometers

Progress in Gravitational Wave Detection: Interferometers

Transcription:

Phasor Calculations in LIGO Physics 208, Electro-optics Peter Beyersdorf Document info Case study 1, 1

LIGO interferometer Power Recycled Fabry-Perot Michelson interferometer 10m modecleaner filters noise from light 4 km Fabry-Perot arm cavities increase the effective length of the arms Michelson arm lengths are set so that output port is dark Power recycling mirror resonantly enhances the power in the interferometer Case study 1, 2

Interferometer Control Requirements Signal a beam whose phase sensitive to the length to be controlled Local Oscillator a beam whose phase is insensitive to that length. Detection of the phase between signal and local oscillator Transmission of cavity P.D.H. input spectrum Pound-Drever-Hall method X ΕΟΜ Case study 1, 3

Mode Cleaner Triangular modecleaner has a perimeter p=20 m, unit reflectivity end mirror and equal, lossless input/output couplers. Illuminated with a steady wave of wavelength λ. The fields transmitting (E t ) reflecting from (E r ) and circulating in (E c ) the cavity are proportional to the input field (E in ) with the relations giving E c = te in + ( r) 2 e ikp E c E c = te in,, and,, and 1 r 2 e ikp E t = t2 e ikl E in 1 r 2 e ikp E r for kp=2πn E c = E in, E t = e ikl E in, and E r = 0 t E t = te ikl E c i.e. it has 100% transmission l r,t r,t E in E c E t r=1 E r = re in rte ik(p l) E c E r = r (1 t2 e ik(p l) ) E 1 r 2 e ikp in Case study 1, 4

Mode Cleaner Transmission Plot of the transmission spectrum for a Fabry-Perot cavity for various values of t 1 E t /E in 0.5 t 2 =0.9 t 2 =0.8.5-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1. 0-4 0.001 0.01 0.1 x=p/λ=pf/c t 2 =0.1 log-log plot of transmission 0.1 Cavity acts like a low-pass filter for laser noise with 0.01 cavity pole at δf/2 0.001 Case study 1,

Modecleaner 1 10 100 1000 1!10 4 1!10 5 1!1 0.1 0.5 0.01 10 7-1.5!10 7-1!10 7-5!10 6 0 5!10 6 1!10 7 1.5!10 7 2!1 0.001 Finesse=550 (T=0.006), #FSR=15 MHz,# δf=27 khz Modecleaner control sidebands must not be at integer multiples of 15 MHz so that they reflect from the modecleaner All other control sidebands must be at integer multiples of 15 MHz to pass through mode-cleaner Laser noise above f 13 khz is blocked by the modecleaner Case study 1, 6

Fabry-Perot Arm Cavities Consider a Fabry-Perot cavity with identical, lossless mirrors, illuminated with a steady wave of wavelength λ. The fields transmitting (E t ) reflecting from (E r ) and circulating in (E c ) the cavity are proportional to the input field (E in ) with the relations giving for 2kL=2πn and r 2 =1 E in E c E t E r,, and The power builds up by a factor of 2/(1-r 1 ) r 1,t 1 L r 2,t 2 E c = t 1 E in + ( r 1 )( r 2 )e 2ikL E c E r = r 1 E in r 1 t 1 e 2ikL E c E t = t 2 e ikl E c t 1 E in E c =, 1 r 1 r 2 e, and 2ikL E t = t 1t 2 e ikl E in E r = r 1 t2 1 r 2e 2ikL E 1 r 1 r 2 e 2ikL 1 r 1 r 2 e 2ikL in E c 2 E, t E, and r = 0 = 1 E in 1 r 1 E in E in Case study 1, 7

Arm Cavities Plot of the circulating power in the LIGO arm cavities 1 100 10 0.5 10 100 1000 1!1 0.1 0 0.01 Finesse=110 (T=0.06), # FSR=37.5 khz,#δf=340 Hz Arm cavity power build-up is 66x Signal response is constant below about 100 Hz High frequency signals do not build up in the arms Case study 1, 8

Signal Generation The phase accumulated in a round trip in the presence of a strain h(t) is φ(t) = ω 0 t φ(t) = ω 0 t t 2L/c t 2L/c 2L φ(t) = ω 0 c + h ω 0 0 ω (1 + h(t)) dt (1 + h 0 cos ωt) dt for h(t)=h 0 cos(ωt) [ ( sin ωt sin ωt ω 2L c )] E in E c E t E r r 1,t 1 r 2,t 2 L so the field in the arm cavity after a round trip is or E c e iω 0t+φ(t) = te in e iω 0t + re c e iω 0(t+ 2L c ) [ ω 0 1 + ih 0 ω E c e iω 0t+φ = te in e iω 0t + re iω 0(t+ 2L c ) [ 1 + h 0 ω 0 2ω [ sin ωt sin ( ωt ω 2L c )]] [ e iωt e iωt e iωt iω 2L c + e iωt+iω 2L c ]] Case study 1, 9

Signal Generation E c e iω 0t+φ = te in e iω 0t + re iω 0(t+ 2L c ) [ 1 + h 0 ω 0 2ω E c e iω 0t+φ(t) = te in + re c e iω 0(t+ 2L c ) [ 1 + h 0 ω 0 2ω Which is more instructive in the form E c e iω 0t+φ(t) = te in e iω 0t + re c e iω 0 2L c When the carrier resonates in the arm cavity (2ω 0 L/c=n π) E c = te in 1 r this gives [ e iωt e iωt e iωt iω 2L c + e iωt+iω 2L c ( [e iωt e iω L c sin ω L ) ( + e iωt e iω L c sin ω L )]] c c [ e iω 0t + h 0 ω 0 2ω sin (ω L c E c (±ω) ( E in (ω 0 ) = rt ) 1 r ]] ) [ ]] e i(ω 0 +ω)t e iω L c + e i(ω 0 ω)t e iω L c k 0 L h 0 (ω 2 sinc L ) c So the effect of a gravitational wave is to couple light into the arm cavity with a frequency dependent input coupling t(ω) E c (ω)/e 0 1!10-4 1!10-5 1!10-6 1!10-7 10 100 1000 1!10 4 1!10 5 1!1 Case study 1, 10

Signal from Arm Cavities Calculating the signal that is transmitted from the arm cavities requires the use of the cavity transmission E t = t 1t 2 e ikl E in 1 r 1 r 2 e 2ikL t(ω) = E c (±ω) ( E in (ω 0 ) = rt ) 1 r with t 2 t(ω), the effective input coupling from a gravitational wave, and k c/(ω 0 +ω) 1!10 13 k 0 L h 0 (ω 2 sinc L ) c 1!10 12 Et(ω)/(Einh0) 1!10 11 1!10 10 1!10 9 1!10 8 1 10 100 1000 1!10 4 1!10 5 1!1 f=ω/2π (Hz) Case study 1, 11

Michelson Interferometer Imbalanced arm lengths l x l y Biased to a dark fringe Δφ out =2πn+π l y E out = t bs ( r bs )e 2ikl y [E r + E t (ω)] + t bs (r bs )e 2ikl x [E r E t (ω)] l x with a 50-50 beamsplitter t bs =r bs =1/ 2 E out = 1 ( e 2ikl x [E r E t (ω)] e 2ikl y [E r + E t (ω)] ) 2 with l + =(l x +l y )/2 and l - =(l x -l y )/2 E out = 1 2 e2ikl + ( e 2ikl [E r E t (ω)] e 2ikl [E r + E t (ω)] ) E out = e 2ik 0l + [ie r sin(2ik 0 l ) cos(2ikl )E t (ω)] Case study 1, 12

Michelson Interferometer E out = e 2ik 0l + [ie r sin(2ik 0 l ) cos(2ikl )E t (ω)] We want RF sidebands at 15 MHz transmitted to the output for heterodyne detection so with l y k 0 ω 0 + ω 15 MHz c we need 2l 2π15 10 6 c = nπ + π 2 l x for 100% transmission. For n=0 this gives l - =2.5 m. In practice l - 1m, resulting in about 60% transmission of the sideband fields. Note for the audio frequency signal sidebands the transmission is virtually 100% since 2l ω audio c π Case study 1, 13

Recycling Cavity Michelson interferometer reflects virtually all of the laser power (Since interference at output port is destructive for the carrier) We can treat the Michelson interferometer as a high reflectivity mirror r m2 +a=1 for the carrier frequency where a is the total round-trip power loss in the interferometer Power recycling mirror and Michelson mirror form a resonant cavity for the carrier Case study 1, 14

Recycling Cavity Field inside recycling cavity is given by expression for the circulating field in a Fabry- Perot cavity E c = t 1 E in 1 r 1 r m e 2ikL 10 rm=1 on resonance this gives E c = t 1E in 1 r 1 r m which is maximized for r 1 =r m 7.5 5 2.5 rm=0.8 rm=0.9 giving a maximum power buildup of P bs = 1 P laser 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 r 2 = 1 a Case study 1, 15

Recycling Cavity Note that since the signal sidebands exit the interferometer at the output port they do not see the power recycling mirror. This mirror has no effect on the interferometer response other than to increase the circulating power Case study 1, 16

Sensitivity With a laser power of 10 W and power loss in the interferometer of a=0.04, the power at the beamsplitter is 250 W. Shot noise from 250W of laser power at 1064 nm is φ sn = 1 N = ω0 P t 2.7 10 11 rad/ Hz h(ω) = φ sn Since# E noise # # = E# bs φ # sn # and# E# signal # = # E# t (ω)e # bs # h 0, E t (ω) is the strain sensitivity, the value of h 0 that lets E signal =E noise!10-21 h(ω) [1/ Hz]!10-22!10-23!10-24 f=ω/2π [Hz] Case study 1, 17

Sensitivity Case study 1, 18

Summary Phasor notation can be used to calculate response of cavities and interferometers in a systematic fashion Complex optical systems can be modeled by determining the behavior of each subsystem independently and linking them together LIGO s peak sensitivity is about 10-22 / Hz at 100 Hz, and matches the results from these simple calculations Case study 1, 19