Gravitational-wave Detection with Interferometers

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Gravitational Wave Astronomy Dr. Giles Hammond Institute for Gravitational Research SUPA, University of Glasgow Universität Jena, August 2010.
Advertisements

Gravitational Wave Astronomy Dr. Giles Hammond Institute for Gravitational Research SUPA, University of Glasgow Universität Jena, August 2010.
Dennis Ugolini, Trinity University Bite of Science Session, TEP 2014 February 13, 2014 Catching the Gravitational Waves.
Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Detectors: Advancing toward a Global Network Stan Whitcomb LIGO/Caltech ICGC, Goa, 18 December 2011 LIGO-G v1.
LIGO-G PLIGO Laboratory 1 Advanced LIGO The Next Generation Philip Lindquist, Caltech XXXVIII Moriond Conference Gravitational Waves and Experimental.
1 Science Opportunities for Australia Advanced LIGO Barry Barish Director, LIGO Canberra, Australia 16-Sept-03 LIGO-G M.
LIGO Status and Advanced LIGO Plans Barry C Barish OSTP 1-Dec-04.
1 Observing the Most Violent Events in the Universe Virgo Barry Barish Director, LIGO Virgo Inauguration 23-July-03 Cascina 2003.
Overview Ground-based Interferometers Barry Barish Caltech Amaldi-6 20-June-05.
Gravitational-waves: Sources and detection
The LIGO Project ( Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory) Rick Savage – Scientist LIGO Hanford Observatory.
Generation of squeezed states using radiation pressure effects David Ottaway – for Nergis Mavalvala Australia-Italy Workshop October 2005.
Gravitational Wave Detectors: new eyes for physics and astronomy Gabriela González Department of Physics and Astronomy Louisiana State University.
G R 1 Ground-based GW interferometers in the LISA epoch David Shoemaker MIT LIGO 20 July 02.
The Astrophysics of Gravitational Wave Sources Conference Summary: Ground-Based Detectors ( Hz) Kimberly New, LANL.
Advanced LIGO: our future in gravitational astronomy K.A. Strain for the LIGO Science Collaboration NAM 2008 LIGO-G K.
LIGO- G M Status of LIGO David Shoemaker LISA Symposium 13 July 2004.
Status of LIGO Data Analysis Gabriela González Department of Physics and Astronomy Louisiana State University for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration Dec.
LIGO- G D Status of LIGO Stan Whitcomb ACIGA Workshop 21 April 2004.
Koji Arai – LIGO Laboratory / Caltech LIGO-G v1.
Gravitational Wave Detection Using Precision Interferometry Gregory Harry Massachusetts Institute of Technology - On Behalf of the LIGO Science Collaboration.
Advanced interferometers for astronomical observations Lee Samuel Finn Center for Gravitational Wave Physics, Penn State.
LIGO-G D Searching for Gravitational Waves with LIGO (Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory) Stan Whitcomb LIGO/Caltech National.
The status of VIRGO Edwige Tournefier (LAPP-Annecy ) for the VIRGO Collaboration HEP2005, 21st- 27th July 2005 The VIRGO experiment and detection of.
DECIGO – Japanese Space Gravitational Wave Detector International Workshop on GPS Meteorology January 17, Tsukuba Center for Institutes Seiji Kawamura*
ADVANCED LIGO SCIENCE Kip S. Thorne CaRT, California Institute of Technology NSF Advanced R&D Panel - 29 January 2001.
G R LIGO Laboratory1 The Future - How to make a next generation LIGO David Shoemaker, MIT AAAS Annual Meeting 17 February 2003.
Initial and Advanced LIGO Status Gregory Harry LIGO/MIT March 24, 2006 March 24, th Eastern Gravity Meeting G R.
LIGO-G M Scientific Operation of LIGO Gary H Sanders LIGO Laboratory California Institute of Technology APS Meeting APR03, Philadelphia Gravitational-Wave.
The LIGO gravitational wave observatories : Recent results and future plans Gregory Harry Massachusetts Institute of Technology - on behalf of the LIGO.
LIGO G M Intro to LIGO Seismic Isolation Pre-bid meeting Gary Sanders LIGO/Caltech Stanford, April 29, 2003.
LIGO-G M Press Conference Scientific Operation of LIGO Gary H Sanders Caltech (on behalf of a large team) APS April Meeting Philadelphia 6-April-03.
LIGO G PLIGO Laboratory 1 Advanced LIGO The Next Generation Philip Lindquist, Caltech XXXVIII Moriond Conference Gravitational Waves and Experimental.
G R 1 Advanced LIGO as an element of a network of astrophysical detectors – gravitational and otherwise David Shoemaker MIT LIGO 9 September.
APS Meeting April 2003 LIGO-G Z 1 Sources and Science with LIGO Data Jolien Creighton University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee On Behalf of the LIGO.
Gravitational Waves What are they? How can they be detected?
Searches for Gravitational Waves Barry Barish Caltech IPA London – Aug 2014 “Merging Neutron Stars“ (Price & Rosswog)
Advanced Gravitational-wave Detector Technologies
The search for those elusive gravitational waves
Detection of Gravitational Waves with Interferometers
Critical Technology Giant leaps Near-term steps Non-IFO methods
Current and future ground-based gravitational-wave detectors
The Search for Gravitational Waves with Advanced LIGO
The US Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory
Ground based Gravitational Wave Interferometers
Status of Interferometers and Data Analysis
Is there a future for LIGO underground?
Generation of squeezed states using radiation pressure effects
LIGO detectors: past, present and future
GW150914: The first direct detection of gravitational waves
Nergis Mavalvala MIT IAU214, August 2002
Spokesperson, LIGO Scientific Collaboration
Detecting Gravitational-waves with Interferometers
Quantum Noise in Gravitational Wave Interferometers
Quantum Noise in Gravitational-wave Detectors
Quantum effects in Gravitational-wave Interferometers
Detection of gravitational waves with interferometers
Gravitational-wave Detection with Interferometers
Gravitational-wave Detection with Interferometers
Detection of Gravitational Waves with Interferometers
Gravitational wave detection and the quantum limit
David Shoemaker AAAS Conference 17 February 2003
Status of LIGO Patrick J. Sutton LIGO-Caltech
“Traditional” treatment of quantum noise
The Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory
Detection of gravitational waves
Update on Status of LIGO
Detection of Gravitational Waves with Interferometers
LIGO Interferometry CLEO/QELS Joint Symposium on Gravitational Wave Detection, Baltimore, May 24, 2005 Daniel Sigg.
Advanced Optical Sensing
Presentation transcript:

Gravitational-wave Detection with Interferometers Present and Future Nergis Mavalvala October 09, 2002

Interferometric Detectors Worldwide TAMA LIGO LISA LIGO VIRGO GEO

Global network of detectors GEO VIRGO LIGO TAMA AIGO LIGO LISA

Gravitational Waves General relativity predicts transverse space-time distortions propagating at speed of light In TT gauge and weak field approximation, Einstein field equations  wave equation Conservation laws Conservation of energy  no monopole radiation Conservation of momentum  no dipole radiation Lowest moment of field  quadrupole (spin 2) Radiated by aspherical astrophysical objects Radiated by “dark” mass distributions  black holes, dark matter

Astrophysics with GWs vs. E&M Very different information, mostly mutually exclusive Difficult to predict GW sources based on E&M observations E&M GW Space as medium for field Spacetime itself Accelerating charge  incoherent superpositions of atoms, molecules Accelerating aspherical mass  coherent motions of huge masses Wavelength small compared to sources  images Wavelength large compared to sources  no spatial resolution Absorbed, scattered, dispersed by matter Very small interaction; matter is transparent 10 MHz and up 10 kHz and down Detectors have small solid angle acceptance Detectors have large solid angle acceptance

Astrophysical sources of GWs Coalescing compact binaries Classes of objects: NS-NS, NS-BH, BH-BH Physics regimes: Inspiral, merger, ringdown Other periodic sources Spinning neutron stars  numerically hard problem Burst events Supernovae  asymmetric collapse Stochastic background Primordial Big Bang (t = 10-43 sec) Continuum of sources The Unexpected Coalescing compact binaries  chirp sources NS-NS  far away; long periods; final inspiral gives GW chirp NS-BH  tidal disruption of NS by BH; merger  GRB triggers Inspiral  accurate predition with PPN proportional to (v/c)^11 Merger  nonlinear dynamics of highly curved spacetime Ringdown  ringdown of modes of coalesced object Periodic sources Spinning NS  axisymmetry unknown Galactic pulsars in SN remnant gases  non-axisymmetry unknown LMXBs  mass accretion from companion Is accretion spin-up balanced by GW spin-down? Issues  axisymmetric distortion from radiation reaction force Supernovae Collapse  Dynamics not understood. If instability makes star into tumblong bar, then GWs Core convection  detect via correlations with neutrinos GWs neutrinos photons now

Strength of GWs: e.g. Neutron Star Binary Gravitational wave amplitude (strain) For a binary neutron star pair M R Quadrupole formalism is accurate to order of magnitude for most sources. Involves computing wave generation and radiation reaction from Einstein eqn. Weak internal gravity and stresses  nearly Newtonian source Kepler’s third law of planetary motion: period^2 = 4*pi^2*radius^3/(G*Msun) Distances  1 parsec = 3.26 l.y. = 3e18 cm r ~ 10^23 m ~ 10 Mpc (center of Virgo cluster) Distance of earth to center of galaxy ~ 30000 l.y. ~ 10 kpc h ~10-21 r

GWs meet Interferometers Laser interferometer Suspend mirrors on pendulums  “free” mass Optimal antenna length a L ~ l/4 ~ 105 meter DL = h L Delta_L = h * L 10^-16 m = 10^-21 * 10^5 m

Practical Interferometer For more practical lengths (L ~ 1 km) a “fold” interferometer to increase phase sensitivity Df = 2 k DL  N (2 k DL); N ~ 100 N a number of times the photons hit the mirror Light storage devices a optical cavities Dark fringe operation a lower shot noise GW sensitivity  P a increase power on beamsplitter Power recycling Most of the light is reflected back toward the laser  “recycle” light back into interferometer Price to pay: multiple resonant cavities whose lengths must be controlled to ~ 10-8 l Arm cavity  increase strain-to-phase conversion (phi = N * dL) Power recycling  improves shot noise limited phase sensitivity

Power-recycled Interferometer Optical resonance: requires test masses to be held in position to 10-10-10-13 meter “Locking the interferometer” end test mass Light bounces back and forth along arms ~100 times  30 kW Light is “recycled” ~50 times  300 W input test mass Laser + optical field conditioning 6W single mode signal

LIGO WA 3 k m ( ± 1 s ) 4 km 2 km LA 4 km

Initial LIGO Sensitivity Goal Strain sensitivity < 3x10-23 1/Hz1/2 at 200 Hz Displacement Noise Seismic motion Thermal Noise Radiation Pressure Sensing Noise Photon Shot Noise Residual Gas Facilities limits much lower

Limiting Noise Sources: Seismic Noise Motion of the earth few mm rms at low frequencies Passive seismic isolation ‘stacks’ amplify at mechanical resonances but get f-2 isolation per stage above 10 Hz

Limiting Noise Sources: Thermal Noise Suspended mirror in equilibrium with 293 K heat bath a kBT of energy per mode Fluctuation-dissipation theorem: Dissipative system will experience thermally driven fluctuations of its mechanical modes: Z(f) is impedance (loss) Low mechanical loss (high Quality factor) Suspension  no bends or ‘kinks’ in pendulum wire Test mass  no material defects in fused silica FRICTION

Limiting Noise Sources: Quantum Noise Shot Noise Uncertainty in number of photons detected a Higher input power Pbs a need low optical losses (Tunable) interferometer response  Tifo depends on light storage time of GW signal in the interferometer Radiation Pressure Noise Photons impart momentum to cavity mirrors Fluctuations in the number of photons a Lower input power, Pbs  Optimal input power for a chosen (fixed) Tifo Shot noise: Laser light is Poisson distributed  sigma_N = sqrt(N) dE dt >= hbar  d(N hbar omega) >= hbar  dN dphi >= 1 Radiation Pressure noise: Pressure fluctuations are anti-correlated between cavities

Core Optics 25 cm diameter, 10 kg fused silica optics Polished substrates Micro-roughness  < 10 ppm scatter Optical coatings < 2 ppm scatter < 1 ppm absorption Metrology  Surface uniformity ~1 nm rms

Displacement Sensitivity (Preliminary S1, Sept. 2002)

Evolution of strain sensitivity Major improvements Front-end electronics (ADC) noise  whiten signal Laser frequency noise  common-mode servo Output electronics (DAC) noise  whiten signal Sensing electronics noise  increase light level

LIGO I Instrument Status: What works All three interferometers locked for hours at a time in power-recycled configuration a Grec ~ 25 – 45 Lock acquisition is done using sys id methods a MTTL ~ 1 – 2 minute Optical parameters consistent with lab metrology a mirror losses < 70 ppm Mechanical (internal) modes of test masses excited a 104 < Q < 107 End-to-end simulation program Data analysis pipelines and algorithms

LIGO I Instrument Status: What doesn’t (yet) Large factor to be gained in strain sensitivity Laser input power 1 – 5 W but all light power not detected (PD saturations) a alignment control system Coupling to environment, e.g. Earthquakes Trains twice a day at Livingston Anthropogenic noise seismic pre-isolation system Electronics improvements

The Task Ahead Engineering runs Science runs Characterize and improve detector sensitivity and reliability Exercise data analysis system end-to-end pipeline Science runs Upper limits (E7 and beyond) Scientific searches (S1 was 08/23/02 to 09/07/02) Coincidence with GEO and TAMA Commissioning remaining subsystems Factor of 100 (above 400 Hz) to 100000 (at 40 Hz) improvement needed to reach design sensitivity LIGO II R&D already underway

The next-generation detector Advanced LIGO (aka LIGO II) Now being designed by the LIGO Scientific Collaboration Goal: Quantum-noise-limited interferometer Factor of ten increase in sensitivity Factor of 1000 in event rate. One day > entire 2-year initial data run Schedule: Begin installation: 2006 Begin data run: 2008

A Quantum Limited Interferometer Facility limits Gravity gradients Residual gas (scattered light) Advanced LIGO Seismic noise 4010 Hz Thermal noise 1/15 Optical noise 1/10 Beyond Adv LIGO Thermal noise: cooling of test masses Quantum noise: quantum non-demolition LIGO I LIGO II Seismic Suspension thermal Test mass thermal Quantum

How will we get there? Seismic noise Thermal noise Quantum noise Active isolation system Mirror suspended as fourth (!!) stage of quadruple pendulum Thermal noise Suspension: fused quartz; ribbons Test mass: higher mechanical Q material, e.g. sapphire Quantum noise Input laser power: increase to ~200 W Optimize interferometer response, Tifo: signal recycling

Optimizing the optical response: Signal Tuning Power Recycling Signal r(l).e i f (l) l Cavity forms compound output coupler with complex reflectivity. Peak response tuned by changing position of SRM Reflects GW photons back into interferometer to accrue more phase

Advance LIGO Sensitivity: Improved and Tunable Thorne… SQL  Heisenberg microscope analog If photon measures TM’s position too well, it’s own angular momentum will become uncertain.

Implications for source detection NS-NS Inpiral Optimized detector response NS-BH Merger NS can be tidally disrupted by BH Frequency of onset of tidal disruption depends on its radius and equation of state a broadband detector BH-BH binaries Merger phase  non-linear dynamics of highly curved space time a broadband detector Supernovae Stellar core collapse  neutron star birth If NS born with slow spin period (< 10 msec) hydrodynamic instabilities a GWs ~10 min ~3 sec 20 Mpc 300 Mpc

Source detection Spinning neutron stars Stochastic background Galactic pulsars: non-axisymmetry uncertain Low mass X-ray binaries: If accretion spin-up balanced by GW spin- down, then X-ray luminosity  GW strength Does accretion induce non-axisymmetry? Stochastic background Can cross-correlate detectors (but antenna separation between WA, LA, Europe a dead band) W(f ~ 100 Hz) = 3 x 10-9 (standard inflation  10-15) (primordial nucleosynthesis d 10-5) (exotic string theories  10-5) Signal strengths for 20 days of integration Sco X-1 Thorne GW energy / closure energy

Detection of candidate sources Thorne

When gravitational waves are detected… Tests of general relativity Waves  direct evidence for time-dependent metric Black hole signatures  test of strong field gravity Polarization of the waves  spin of graviton Propagation velocity  mass of graviton Astrophysical processes Inner dynamics of processes hidden from EM astronomy Cores of supernovae Dynamics of neutron stars  large scale nuclear matter The earliest moments of the Big Bang  Planck epoch Astrophysics…

New Instrument, New Field, the Unexpected…