4.8 Article

Overcoming the Standard Quantum Limit in Gravitational Wave Detectors Using Spin Systems with a Negative Effective Mass

Journal

PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS
Volume 121, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.031101

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. European Research Council grant INTERFACE
  2. ARO [W911NF]
  3. EUREKA program
  4. John Templeton Foundation
  5. Russian Foundation for Basic Research [16-52-10069, 16-52-12031]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Quantum backaction (QBA) of a measurement limits the precision of observation of the motion of a free mass. This profound effect, dubbed the Heisenberg microscope in the early days of quantum mechanics, leads to the standard quantum limit (SQL) stemming from the balance between the measurement sensitivity and the QBA. We consider the measurement of motion of a free mass performed in a quantum reference frame with an effective negative mass which is not limited by QBA. As a result, the disturbance on the motion of a free mass can be measured beyond the SQL. QBA-limited detection of motion for a free mass is extremely challenging, but there are devices where this effect is expected to play an essential role, namely, gravitational wave detectors (GWDs) such as LIGO and Virgo. Recent reports on the observations of gravitational waves have opened new horizons in cosmology and astrophysics. We present a general idea and a detailed numerical analysis for QBA-evading measurement of the gravitational wave effect on the GWD mirrors, which can be considered free masses under relevant conditions. The measurement is performed by two entangled beams of light, probing the GWD and an auxiliary atomic spin ensemble, respectively. The latter plays the role of a free negative mass. We show that under realistic conditions the sensitivity of the GWD in m/root Hz can be increased by 6 dB over the entire frequency band of interest.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available