Neutron Star Extreme Matter Observatory: A kilohertz-band gravitational-wave detector in the global network

Ackley, K.; Adya, V. B.; Agrawal, Poojan; Altin, P. A.; Ashton, G.; Bailes, M.; Baltinas, E.; Barbuio, A.; Beniwal, D.; Blair, C. D.; Blair, D. G.; Bolingbroke, G. N.; Bossilkov, V.; Boublil, Shachar; Brown, D. D.; Burridge, B. J.; Bustillo, J. Calderón; Cameron, J.; Cao, H.; Carlin, J. B.; Chang, Seo-Won; Charlton, P.; Chatterjee, C.; Chattopadhyay, Debatri; Chen, X.; Chi, Jiawei; Chow, J. H.; Chu, Q.; Ciobanu, A. A.; Clarke, T. E.; Clearwater, P.; Cooke, Jeff; Coward, D. M.; Crisp, H.; Dattatri, Roshan; Deller, Adam; Dobie, Dougal; Dunn, Liam; Easter, P. J.; Eichholz, J.; Evans, Robin J.; Flynn, Chris; Foran, Garry J; Forsyth, P. W. F.; Gai, Y.; Galaudage, S.; Galloway, D. K.; Gendre, B.; Goncharov, B.; Goode, Simon; Gozzard, David; Grace, B.; Graham, Alister W.; Heger, Alexander; Vivanco, F. Hernandez; Hirai, Ryosuke; Holland, N. A.; Holmes, Z. J.; Howard, Eric; Howell, E. J.; Howitt, George; Hübner, M. T.; Hurley, Jarrod R.; Ingram, C.; JaberianHamedan, V.; Jenner, K.; Li, Ju; Kapasi, D. P.; Kaur, Tejinder; Kijbunchoo, N.; Kovalam, M.; Choudhary, Rahul; Lasky, P. D.; Lau, Mike Y. M.; Leung, James K.; Liu, J.; Loh, Ka-Heng; Mailvagan, A.; Mandel, Ilya; McCann, J. J.; McClelland, D. E.; McKenzie, Kirk; McManus, D. J.; McRae, T.; Melatos, A.; Meyers, P. M.; Middleton, H.; Miles, Matthew T.; Millhouse, M.; Mong, Y. L.; Mueller, Bernhard; Münch, J.; Musiov, J.; Muusse, S.; Nathan, Rowina S.; Naveh, Yoav; Neijssel, Coenraad J.; Neil, B. F.; Ng, S.; Oloworaran, Victor; Ottaway, D. J.; Page, M. A.; Pan, Juntao; Pathak, M.; Payne, E.; Powell, J.; Pritchard, Joshua; Puckridge, E.; Raidani, Arihant; Rallabhandi, V.; Reardon, D. J.; Riley, Jeff; Roberts, Luke F.; Romero-Shaw, I. M.; Roocke, T. J.; Rowell, G.; Sahu, Nandini; Sarin, N.; Sarre, L. K.; Sattari, H.; Schiworski, M. G.; Scott, S. M.; Sengar, Rahul; Shaddock, D. A.; Shannon, R. M.; Shi, Jia; Sibley, Paul G.; Slagmolen, B. J. J.; Slaven-Blair, T. J.; Smith, R. J. E.; Spollard, James T.; Steed, L.; Strang, Lucy; Sun, Hui; Sunderland, Andrew; Suvorova, Sofia; Talbot, C.; Thrane, E.; Töyrä, D.; Trahanas, Parris E.; Vajpeyi, A.; Heijningen, J. V. van; Vargas, A. F.; Veitch, P. J.; Vigna-Gómez, Alejandro; Wade, A. R.; Walker, Karen Z.; Wang, Z.; Ward, R. L.; Ward, Kirsten; Webb, Sara; Wen, L.; Wette, K.; Wilcox, Reinhold; Winterflood, John; Wolf, Christian; Wu, B. B.; Yap, M. J.; You, Zhi-Qiang; Yu, Hang; Zhang, Jiapu; Zhang, J.; Zhao, C.; Zhu, X. J.

doi:10.1017/pasa.2020.39

Cited by 187 publications

(103 citation statements)

References 107 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

102

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, scattering to specific HOM can be reduced by actuating on those modes using, for example, a high-spatial frequency corrector [17]. Finally, surface deformation (and therefore amplitude scattering) are minimized for different optic materials; for example, the proposed use of cryogenic silicon in future interferometers [18,19] has the benefit of an, effectively, zero coefficient of thermal expansion.…”

Section: Considerations For Working With Point Absorbers In the Futurementioning

confidence: 99%

Point absorbers in Advanced LIGO

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Small, highly absorbing points are randomly present on the surfaces of the main interferometer optics in Advanced LIGO. The resulting nano-meter scale thermo-elastic deformations and substrate lenses from these micron-scale absorbers significantly reduces the sensitivity of the interferometer directly though a reduction in the power-recycling gain and indirect interactions with the feedback control system. We review the expected surface deformation from point absorbers and provide a pedagogical description of the impact on power build-up in second generation gravitational wave detectors (dual-recycled Fabry-Perot Michelson interferometers). This analysis predicts that the power-dependent reduction in interferometer performance will significantly degrade maximum stored power by up to 50% and hence, limit GW sensitivity, but suggests system wide corrections that can be implemented in current and future GW detectors. This is particularly pressing given that future GW detectors call for an order of magnitude more stored power than currently used in Advanced LIGO in Observing Run 3. We briefly review strategies to mitigate the effects of point absorbers in current and future GW wave detectors to maximize the success of these enterprises.

show abstract

Section: Considerations For Working With Point Absorbers In the Futurementioning

confidence: 99%

Point absorbers in Advanced LIGO

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, the Neutron star Extreme Matter Observatory (NEMO, reF. 235 ) has been proposed in Australia as a 4-km observatory targeting neutron star GW astrophysics, aiming to have sensitivity comparable with ET and CE at frequencies above 2 kHz.…”

Section: Observatory Network Configurationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gravitational-wave physics and astronomy in the 2020s and 2030s

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The past five years have witnessed a revolution in astronomy. The direct detection of gravitational waves (GW) emitted from the binary black hole (BBH) merger GW150914 (Fig. 1) by the Advanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) detector 1 on September 14, 2015 (reF. 2 ) was a watershed event, not only in demonstrating that GWs could be directly detected but more fundamentally in revealing new insights into these exotic objects and the Universe itself. On August 17, 2017, the Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo 3 detectors jointly detected GW170817, the merger of a binary neutron star (BNS) system 4 , an equally momentous event leading to the observation of electromagnetic (EM) radiation emitted across the entire spectrum through one of the most intense astronomical observing campaigns ever undertaken 5 .Coming nearly 100 years after Albert Einstein first predicted their existence 6 , but doubted that they could ever be measured, the first direct GW detections have undoubtedly opened a new window on the Universe. The scientific insights emerging from these detections have already revolutionized multiple domains of physics and astrophysics, yet, they are 'the tip of the iceberg' , representing only a small fraction of the future potential of GW astronomy. As is the case for the Universe seen through EM waves, different classes of astrophysical sources emit GWs across a broad spectrum ranging over more than 20 orders of magnitude, and require different detectors for the range of frequencies of interest (Fig. 2).In this Roadmap, we present the perspectives of the Gravitational Wave International Committee (GWIC, https://gwic.ligo.org) on the emerging field of GW astronomy and physics in the coming decades. The GWIC was formed in 1997 to facilitate international collaboration and cooperation in the construction, operation and use of the major GW detection facilities worldwide. Its primary goals are: to promote international cooperation in all phases of construction and scientific exploitation of GW detectors, to coordinate and support long-range planning for new instruments or existing instrument upgrades, and to promote the development of GW detection as an astronomical tool, exploiting especially the potential for multi-messenger astrophysics. Our intention in this Roadmap is to present a survey of the science opportunities and to highlight the future detectors that will be needed to realize those opportunities. The recent remarkable discoveries in GW astronomy have spurred the GWIC to re-examine and update the GWIC roadmap originally published a decade ago 7 .We first present an overview of GWs, the methods used to detect them and some scientific highlights from the past five years. Next, we provide a detailed survey

show abstract

“…Finally, the generation of neutrino masses can arise through a B −L breaking transition [68,[73][74][75][76][77]. In each case, an observed signal not only sheds light on our cosmic history, but on a range of energy scales spanning from sub-GeV to the PeV scale [78] (even higher scales have been proposed, though technology needs to improve to make the sensitivity cosmologically relevant [79] with the possible exception of NEMO [80]).…”

Section: Jhep06(2021)164mentioning

confidence: 99%

The benefits of diligence: how precise are predicted gravitational wave spectra in models with phase transitions?

Guo

Sinha

Vagie

et al. 2021

J. High Energ. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Models of particle physics that feature phase transitions typically provide predictions for stochastic gravitational wave signals at future detectors and such predictions are used to delineate portions of the model parameter space that can be constrained. The question is: how precise are such predictions? Uncertainties enter in the calculation of the macroscopic thermal parameters and the dynamics of the phase transition itself. We calculate such uncertainties with increasing levels of sophistication in treating the phase transition dynamics. Currently, the highest level of diligence corresponds to careful treatments of the source lifetime; mean bubble separation; going beyond the bag model approximation in solving the hydrodynamics equations and explicitly calculating the fraction of energy in the fluid from these equations rather than using a fit; and including fits for the energy lost to vorticity modes and reheating effects. The lowest level of diligence incorporates none of these effects. We compute the percolation and nucleation temperatures, the mean bubble separation, the fluid velocity, and ultimately the gravitational wave spectrum corresponding to the level of highest diligence for three explicit examples: SMEFT, a dark sector Higgs model, and the real singlet-extended Standard Model (xSM). In each model, we contrast different levels of diligence in the calculation and find that the difference in the final predicted signal can be several orders of magnitude. Our results indicate that calculating the gravitational wave spectrum for particle physics models and deducing precise constraints on the parameter space of such models continues to remain very much a work in progress and warrants care.

show abstract

Neutron Star Extreme Matter Observatory: A kilohertz-band gravitational-wave detector in the global network

Cited by 187 publications

References 107 publications

Point absorbers in Advanced LIGO

Point absorbers in Advanced LIGO

Gravitational-wave physics and astronomy in the 2020s and 2030s

The benefits of diligence: how precise are predicted gravitational wave spectra in models with phase transitions?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About