4.5 Article

Broadening frequency range of a ferromagnetic axion haloscope with strongly coupled cavity-magnon polaritons

期刊

PHYSICS OF THE DARK UNIVERSE
卷 25, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.dark.2019.100306

关键词

-

资金

  1. Australian Research Council [DP190100071, CE170100009]
  2. Australian Government's Research Training Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With the axion being a prime candidate for dark matter, there has been some recent interest in direct detection through a so called 'Ferromagnetic haloscope.' Such devices exploit the coupling between axions and electrons in the form of collective spin excitations of magnetic materials with the readout through a microwave cavity. Here, we present a new, general, theoretical treatment of such experiments in a Hamiltonian formulation for strongly coupled magnons and photons, which hybridise as cavity-magnon polaritons. Such strongly coupled systems have an extended measurable dispersive regime. Thus, we extend the analysis and operation of such experiments into the dispersive regime, which allows any ferromagnetic haloscope to achieve improved bandwidth with respect to the axion mass parameter space. This experiment was implemented in a cryogenic setup, and initial search results are presented setting laboratory limits on the axion-electron coupling strength of g(aee) > 3.7 x 10(-9) in the range 33.79 mu eV < m(a) < 33.94 mu eV with 95% confidence. The potential bandwidth of the Ferromagnetic haloscope was calculated to be in two bands, the first of about 1 GHz around 8.24 GHz (or 4.1 mu eV mass range around 34.1 mu eV) and the second of about 1.6 GHz around 10 GHz (6.6 mu eV mass range around 41.4 mu eV). Frequency tuning may also be easily achieved via an external magnetic field which changes the ferromagnetic resonant frequency with respect to the cavity frequency. The requirements necessary for future improvements to reach the DFSZ axion model band are discussed in the paper. (C) 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据