- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review D

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Atomic gravitational wave interferometric sensor

Savas Dimopoulos1,*, Peter W. Graham2,†, Jason M. Hogan1,‡, Mark A. Kasevich1,§, and Surjeet Rajendran1,2,∥

  • 1Department of Physics, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, USA
  • 2SLAC, Stanford University, Menlo Park, California 94025, USA

  • *savas@stanford.edu
  • †pwgraham@stanford.edu
  • ‡hogan@stanford.edu
  • §kasevich@stanford.edu
  • ∥surjeet@stanford.edu
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 78, 122002 – Published 19 December, 2008

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.78.122002

Abstract

We propose two distinct atom interferometer gravitational wave detectors, one terrestrial and another satellite based, utilizing the core technology of the Stanford 10 m atom interferometer presently under construction. Each configuration compares two widely separated atom interferometers run using common lasers. The signal scales with the distance between the interferometers, which can be large since only the light travels over this distance, not the atoms. The terrestrial experiment with two ∼10  m atom interferometers separated by a ∼1  km baseline can operate with strain sensitivity ∼10−19Hz in the 1 Hz–10 Hz band, inaccessible to LIGO, and can detect gravitational waves from solar mass binaries out to megaparsec distances. The satellite experiment with two atom interferometers separated by a ∼1000  km baseline can probe the same frequency spectrum as LISA with comparable strain sensitivity ∼10−20Hz. The use of ballistic atoms (instead of mirrors) as inertial test masses improves systematics coming from vibrations and acceleration noise, and significantly reduces spacecraft control requirements. We analyze the backgrounds in this configuration and discuss methods for controlling them to the required levels.

View figure in article

Comments & Replies

Comment on “Atomic gravitational wave interferometric sensor”

Peter L. Bender
Phys. Rev. D 84, 028101 (2011)

Reply to “Comment on ‘Atomic gravitational wave interferometric sensor’ ”

Savas Dimopoulos, Peter W. Graham, Jason M. Hogan, Mark A. Kasevich, and Surjeet Rajendran
Phys. Rev. D 84, 028102 (2011)

Article Text

References (86)

  1. B. F. Schutz, Classical Quantum Gravity 16, A131 (1999).
  2. C. Cutler and K. S. Thorne, arXiv:gr-qc/0204090.
  3. B. F. Schutz, Nature (London) 323, 310 (1986).
  4. S. Dimopoulos, P. W. Graham, J. M. Hogan, M. A. Kasevich, and S. Rajendran, arXiv:0712.1250.
  5. P. Astone et al., Classical Quantum Gravity 23, S169 (2006).
  6. J. P. Zendri et al., Classical Quantum Gravity 19, 1925 (2002).
  7. R. Ballantini et al., arXiv:gr-qc/0502054.
  8. W. H. Oskay et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 020801 (2006).
  9. T. L. Gustavson, P. Bouyer, and M. A. Kasevich, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 2046 (1997).
  10. M. J. Snadden, J. M. McGuirk, P. Bouyer, K. G. Haritos, and M. A. Kasevich. Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 971 (1998).
  11. A. Peters, K. Y. Chung, and S. Chu, Metrologia 38, 25 (2001).
  12. C. Pethick and H. Smith, Bose-Einstein Condensation in Dilute Gases (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2002).
  13. S. Dimopoulos, P. W. Graham, J. M. Hogan, and M. A. Kasevich, Phys. Rev. D 78, 042003 (2008).
  14. J. H. Denschlag et al., J. Phys. B 35, 3095 (2002).
  15. M. Kasevich and S. Chu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 181 (1991).
  16. G. Santarelli et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 4619 (1999); J. McGuirk et al., Opt. Lett. 26, 364 (2001); S. Bize et al., J. Phys. B 38, S449 (2005).
  17. H. J. Metcalf and P. Straten, Laser Cooling and Trapping (Springer, New York, 1999).

  18. Such a cut may be implemented using a Doppler-sensitive two-photon transition. This technique results in a narrow velocity distribution along the longitudinal direction without reducing the velocity width in the directions transverse to the cut. Ensembles such as these which are only cold along a single dimension can still be useful for suppressing certain systematics (e.g. gravity gradients). See Secs. IV B and V B for specific velocity width requirements.

  19. D. Leibfried et al., Science 304, 1476 (2004).
  20. A. K. Tuchman et al., Phys. Rev. A 74, 053821 (2006).
  21. J. M. McGuirk et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 4498 (2000).
  22. H. Mueller, S.-w. Chiow, Q. Long, S. Herrmann, and S. Chu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 180405 (2008).
  23. S. Dimopoulos, P. W. Graham, J. M. Hogan, and M. A. Kasevich, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 111102 (2007).
  24. G. M. Tino and F. Vetrano, Classical Quantum Gravity 24, 2167 (2007).
  25. U. D. Rapol, A. Wasan, and V. Natarajan, Phys. Rev. A 64, 023402 (2001).
  26. D. A. Steck, Rubidium 87 D Line Data (http://steck.us/alkalidata).

  27. Note that the passive laser is turned on well before the control laser is pulsed, and then we are only referring to the part of the passive laser pulse which triggers the atomic transitions.

  28. For example, a sequential Raman process with reduced phase noise might be realizable in a similar manner if the light travel time L is set equal to twice the Rabi period and both lasers alternate between the two frequencies needed to run the Raman process with no intervening time.

  29. P. Cheinet, B. Canuel, F. Pereira Dos Santos, A. Gauguet, F. Leduc, and A. Landragin, arXiv:physics/0510197.
  30. A. D. Ludlow et al., Opt. Lett. 32, 641 (2007).
  31. P. R. Saulson, Phys. Rev. D 30, 732 (1984).
  32. S. A. Hughes and K. S. Thorne, Phys. Rev. D 58, 122002 (1998).
  33. J. E. Fix, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 62, 1753 (1972).
  34. B. Dubetsky and M. A. Kasevich, Phys. Rev. A 74, 023615 (2006).
  35. T. Bitter et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 309, 521 (1991).
  36. Atom Interferometry, edited by P. R. Berman (Academic Press, New York, 1997).
  37. J. P. Gardner et al., The James Webb Space Telescope White Paper (http://www.stsci.edu/jwst/science/SRD.pdf)
  38. C. R. Sandy, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/7042/18960/00877925.pdf?arnumber=877925.
  39. S. Rosin and I. I. Rabi, Phys. Rev. 48, 373 (1935).
  40. L. F. Burlaga, Sol. Phys. 7, 54 (1969).
  41. J. Jacobson, G. Bjork, and Y. Yamamoto, Appl. Phys. B 60, 187 (1995).
  42. http://www.srl.caltech.edu/lisa/documents/FTR.pdf.
  43. W. J. Bencze, Y. M. Xiao, D. N. Hipkins, G. F. Franklin, and B. W. Parkinson, Decision and Control, Proc. of the 35th IEEE 1, 480 (1996).
  44. J. W. Sari and N. F. Ness, Sol. Phys. 8, 155 (1969).
  45. S. Bize, Y. Sortais, M. S. Santos, C. Mandache, A. Clairon, and C. Salomon, Europhys. Lett. 45, 558 (1999).
  46. G. Rottman, Space Sci. Rev. 125, 39 (2006).
  47. P. Bender et al., LISA Pre-Phase A Report, http://maxim.gsfc.nasa.gov/documents/Mission_Concept_Work/ISAL_January_2002_SST/Astrometry/LISA-prephaseA.pdf.
  48. D. A. Shaddock, M. Tinto, F. B. Estabrook, and J. W. Armstrong, Phys. Rev. D 68, 061303 (2003).
  49. N. J. Cornish and R. W. Hellings, Classical Quantum Gravity 20, 4851 (2003).
  50. M. Maggiore, Phys. Rep. 331, 283 (2000).
  51. R. D. Blandford and K. S. Thorne, Applications of Classical Physics, 2005 (unpublished, see http://www.pma.caltech.edu/Courses/ph136/yr2006/text.html).
  52. A. J. Farmer and E. S. Phinney, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 346, 1197 (2003).
  53. A. A. Starobinsky, Pis’ma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 30, 719 (1979) [JETP Lett. 30, 682 (1979)].
  54. B. Allen and S. Koranda, Phys. Rev. D 50, 3713 (1994).
  55. J. Garcia-Bellido, D. G. Figueroa, and A. Sastre, Phys. Rev. D 77, 043517 (2008).
  56. J. F. Dufaux, A. Bergman, G. N. Felder, L. Kofman, and J. P. Uzan, Phys. Rev. D 76, 123517 (2007).
  57. R. Easther, J. T. Giblin, and E. A. Lim, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 221301 (2007).
  58. M. Gasperini and G. Veneziano, Phys. Rep. 373, 1 (2003).
  59. M. S. Turner and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 3080 (1990).
  60. M. Kamionkowski, A. Kosowsky, and M. S. Turner, Phys. Rev. D 49, 2837 (1994).
  61. C. Caprini, R. Durrer, and G. Servant, Phys. Rev. D 77, 124015 (2008).
  62. C. Grojean and G. Servant, Phys. Rev. D 75, 043507 (2007).
  63. R. Apreda, M. Maggiore, A. Nicolis, and A. Riotto, Nucl. Phys. B 631, 342 (2002).
  64. L. Randall and G. Servant, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2007) 054.
  65. J. Polchinski, arXiv:0707.0888
  66. C. J. Hogan, arXiv:astro-ph/9809364.
  67. C. J. Hogan, Phys. Rev. D 62, 121302 (2000).
  68. C. J. Hogan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 2044 (2000).
  69. http://www.ligo.caltech.edu/.
  70. S. L. Larson, W. A. Hiscock, and R. W. Hellings, Phys. Rev. D 62, 062001 (2000).
  71. B. Abbott et al. (LIGO Collaboration), Astrophys. J. 659, 918 (2007).
  72. N. Christensen, Phys. Rev. D 46, 5250 (1992).
  73. E. E. Flanagan, Phys. Rev. D 48, 2389 (1993).
  74. B. Allen and J. D. Romano, Phys. Rev. D 59, 102001 (1999).
  75. M. R. DePies and C. J. Hogan, Phys. Rev. D 75, 125006 (2007).
  76. R. Y. Chiao and A. D. Speliotopoulos, J. Mod. Opt. 51, 861 (2004).
  77. S. Foffa, A. Gasparini, M. Papucci, and R. Sturani, Phys. Rev. D 73, 022001 (2006).
  78. A. Roura, D. R. Brill, B. L. Hu, and C. W. Misner, Phys. Rev. D 73, 084018 (2006).
  79. B. Lamine, M. T. Jaekel, and S. Reynaud, Eur. Phys. J. D 20, 165 (2002).
  80. P. Delva, M. C. Angonin, and P. T. Proxy, Phys. Lett. A 357, 249 (2006).
  81. P. Wolf et al., arXiv:0711.0304.

  82. Thanks to Bob Wagoner for pointing this out.

  83. A. W. Adams and J. S. Bloom, arXiv:astro-ph/0405266.
  84. N. Seto and A. Cooray, Phys. Rev. D 70, 063512 (2004).
  85. B. Allen, arXiv:gr-qc/9604033.
  86. T. L. Smith, E. Pierpaoli, and M. Kamionkowski, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 021301 (2006).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 78, 122002– Published 19 December, 2008
  • Received 28 August 2008

© 2008 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation