- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Letters

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Mass-Independent Scheme to Test the Quantumness of a Massive Object

Debarshi Das1,*, Dipankar Home2, Hendrik Ulbricht3, and Sougato Bose1

  • 1Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, England, United Kingdom
  • 2Center for Astroparticle Physics and Space Science (CAPSS), Bose Institute, Kolkata 700 091, India
  • 3School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, England, United Kingdom

  • *debarshi.das@ucl.ac.uk
PDF

Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 030202 – Published 16 January, 2024

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.030202

Abstract

The search for empirical schemes to evidence the nonclassicality of large masses is a central quest of current research. However, practical schemes to witness the irreducible quantumness of an arbitrarily large mass are still lacking. To this end, we incorporate crucial modifications to the standard tools for probing the quantum violation of the pivotal classical notion of macrorealism (MR): while usual tests use the same measurement arrangement at successive times, here we use two different measurement arrangements. This yields a striking result: a mass-independent violation of MR is possible for harmonic oscillator systems. In fact, our adaptation enables probing quantum violations for literally any mass, momentum, and frequency. Moreover, coarse-grained position measurements at an accuracy much worse than the standard quantum limit, as well as knowing the relevant parameters only to this precision, without requiring them to be tuned, suffice for our proposal. These should drastically simplify the experimental effort in testing the nonclassicality of massive objects ranging from atomic ions to macroscopic mirrors in LIGO.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (52)

  1. A. J. Leggett, Testing the limits of quantum mechanics: Motivation, state of play, prospects, J. Phys. Condens. Matter 14, R415 (2002).
  2. G. C. Ghirardi, A. Rimini, and T. Weber, Unified dynamics for microscopic and macroscopic systems, Phys. Rev. D 34, 470 (1986).
  3. P. Pearle, Combining stochastic dynamical state-vector reduction with spontaneous localization, Phys. Rev. A 39, 2277 (1989).
  4. A. Bassi, K. Lochan, S. Satin, T. P. Singh, and H. Ulbricht, Models of wave-function collapse, underlying theories, and experimental tests, Rev. Mod. Phys. 85, 471 (2013).
  5. S. Bose, A. Mazumdar, G. W. Morley, H. Ulbricht, M. Toros, M. Paternostro, A. A. Geraci, P. F. Barker, M. S. Kim, and G. Milburn, Spin entanglement witness for quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 240401 (2017).
  6. C. Marletto and V. Vedral, Gravitationally induced entanglement between two massive particles is sufficient evidence of quantum effects in gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 240402 (2017).
  7. R. J. Marshman, A. Mazumdar, and S. Bose, Locality and entanglement in table-top testing of the quantum nature of linearized gravity, Phys. Rev. A 101, 052110 (2020).
  8. S. Bose, A. Mazumdar, M. Schut, and M. Toros, Mechanism for the quantum natured gravitons to entangle masses, Phys. Rev. D 105, 106028 (2022).
  9. M. Christodoulou and C. Rovelli, On the possibility of laboratory evidence for quantum superposition of geometries, Phys. Lett. B 792, 64 (2019).
  10. M. Christodoulou, A. D. Biagio, M. Aspelmeyer, C. Brukner, C. Rovelli, and R. Howl, Locally mediated entanglement through gravity from first principles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 100202 (2023).
  11. S. Bose, D. Home, and S. Mal, Nonclassicality of the harmonic-oscillator coherent state persisting up to the macroscopic domain, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 210402 (2018).
  12. J. J. Halliwell, A. Bhatnagar, E. Ireland, H. Nadeem, and V. Wimalaweera, Leggett-Garg tests for macrorealism: Interference experiments and the simple harmonic oscillator, Phys. Rev. A 103, 032218 (2021).
  13. A. J. Leggett and A. Garg, Quantum mechanics versus macroscopic realism: Is the flux there when nobody looks?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 857 (1985).
  14. J. Kofler and C. Brukner, Condition for macroscopic realism beyond the Leggett-Garg inequalities, Phys. Rev. A 87, 052115 (2013).
  15. A. J. Leggett, Realism and the physical world, Rep. Prog. Phys. 71, 022001 (2008).
  16. G. C. Knee, K. Kakuyanagi, M.-C. Yeh, Y. Matsuzaki, H. Toida, H. Yamaguchi, S. Saito, A. J. Leggett, and W. J. Munro, A strict experimental test of macroscopic realism in a superconducting flux qubit, Nat. Commun. 7, 13253 (2016).
  17. J. J. Halliwell, Comparing conditions for macrorealism: Leggett-Garg inequalities versus no-signaling in time, Phys. Rev. A 96, 012121 (2017).
  18. G. C. Knee, M. Marcus, L. D. Smith, and A. Datta, Subtleties of witnessing quantum coherence in nonisolated systems, Phys. Rev. A 98, 052328 (2018).
  19. C. Emary, N. Lambert, and F. Nori, Leggett-Garg inequalities, Rep. Prog. Phys. 77, 016001 (2014).
  20. J. A. Formaggio, D. I. Kaiser, M. M. Murskyj, and T. E. Weiss, Violation of the Leggett-Garg inequality in neutrino oscillations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 050402 (2016).
  21. K. Joarder, D. Saha, D. Home, and U. Sinha, Loophole-free interferometric test of macrorealism using heralded single photons, PRX Quantum 3, 010307 (2022).
  22. C. Robens, W. Alt, D. Meschede, C. Emary, and A. Alberti, Ideal negative measurements in quantum walks disprove theories based on classical trajectories, Phys. Rev. X 5, 011003 (2015).
  23. G. C. Knee, S. Simmons, E. M. Gauger, J. J. Morton, H. Riemann, N. V. Abrosimov, P. Becker, H.-J. Pohl, K. M. Itoh, M. L. Thewalt, G. A. D. Briggs, and S. C. Benjamin, Violation of a Leggett-Garg inequality with ideal non-invasive measurements, Nat. Commun. 3, 606 (2012).
  24. S. Gerlich, S. Eibenberger, M. Tomandl, S. Nimmrichter, K. Hornberger, P. J. Fagan, J. Tüxen, M. Mayor, and M. Arndt, Quantum interference of large organic molecules, Nat. Commun. 2, 263 (2011).
  25. Y. Y. Fein, P. Geyer, P. Zwick, F. Kialka, S. Pedalino, M. Mayor, S. Gerlich, and M. Arndt, Quantum superposition of molecules beyond 25 kDa, Nat. Phys. 15, 1242 (2019).
  26. J. J. Halliwell, Leggett-Garg inequalities and no-signaling in time: A quasiprobability approach, Phys. Rev. A 93, 022123 (2016).
  27. D. Saha, S. Mal, P. K. Panigrahi, and D. Home, Wigner’s form of the Leggett-Garg inequality, the no-signaling-in-time condition, and unsharp measurements, Phys. Rev. A 91, 032117 (2015).
  28. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.030202 for the derivation of two-time LGI using two different observables, the derivations of the observable probabilities in the context of the scenario considered by us, justification behind choosing the particular location of x=β2, practical challenge with a large mass, required measurement precision.
  29. J. Bateman, S. Nimmrichter, K. Hornberger, and H. Ulbricht, Near-field interferometry of a free-falling nanoparticle from a point-like source, Nat. Commun. 5, 4788 (2014).
  30. P. Z. G. Fonseca, E. B. Aranas, J. Millen, T. S. Monteiro, and P. F. Barker, Nonlinear dynamics and strong cavity cooling of levitated nanoparticles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 173602 (2016).
  31. J. Millen, P. Z. G. Fonseca, T. Mavrogordatos, T. S. Monteiro, and P. F. Barker, Cavity cooling a single charged levitated nanosphere, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 123602 (2015).
  32. Y. Leng, R. Li, X. Kong, H. Xie, D. Zheng, P. Yin, F. Xiong, T. Wu, C.-K. Duan, Y. Du, Z.-q. Yin, P. Huang, and J. Du, Mechanical dissipation below 1  μHz with a cryogenic diamagnetic levitated micro-oscillator, Phys. Rev. Appl. 15, 024061 (2021).
  33. D. Zheng, Y. Leng, X. Kong, R. Li, Z. Wang, X. Luo, J. Zhao, C.-K. Duan, P. Huang, J. Du, M. Carlesso, and A. Bassi, Room temperature test of the continuous spontaneous localization model using a levitated micro-oscillator, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 013057 (2020).
  34. Y. Leng, R. Li, X. Kong, H. Xie, D. Zheng, P. Yin, F. Xiong, T. Wu, C.-K. Duan, Y. Du, Z. Yin, P. Huang, and J. Du, Mechanical dissipation below 1  μHz with a cryogenic diamagnetic levitated micro-oscillator, Phys. Rev. Appl. 15, 024061 (2021).
  35. C. Whittle, E. D. Hall, S. Dwyer, N. Mavalvala, V. Sudhir, R. Abbott, A. Ananyeva, C. Austin, L. Barsotti, J. Betzwieser et al., Approaching the motional ground state of a 10-kg object, Science 372, 1333 (2021).
  36. V. B. Braginsky and F. Ya. Khalili, Quantum Measurements (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1992).
  37. C. M. Caves, K. S. Thorne, R. W. P. Drever, V. D. Sandberg, and M. Zimmermann, On the measurement of a weak classical force coupled to a quantum-mechanical oscillator: I. Issues of principle, Rev. Mod. Phys. 52, 341 (1980).
  38. A. Buikema et al., Sensitivity and performance of the Advanced LIGO detectors in the third observing run, Phys. Rev. D 102, 062003 (2020).
  39. H. Yu, L. McCuller, M. Tse et al., Quantum correlations between light and the kilogram-mass mirrors of LIGO, Nature (London) 583, 43 (2020).
  40. C. Gonzalez-Ballestero, M. Aspelmeyer, L. Novotny, R. Quidant, and O. Romero-Isart, Levitodynamics: Levitation and control of microscopic objects in vacuum, Science 374, 6564 (2021).
  41. N. Matsumoto, S. B. Catano-Lopez, M. Sugawara, S. Suzuki, N. Abe, K. Komori, Y. Michimura, Y. Aso, and K. Edamatsu, Demonstration of displacement sensing of a mg-scale pendulum for mm- and mg-scale gravity measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 071101 (2019).
  42. N. Matsumoto and N. Yamamoto, Conditional mechanical squeezing of a macroscopic pendulum near quantum regimes, arXiv:2008.10848.
  43. J. Gieseler, B. Deutsch, R. Quidant, and L. Novotny, Subkelvin parametric feedback cooling of a laser-trapped nanoparticle, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 103603 (2012).
  44. A. C. Doherty and K. Jacobs, Feedback control of quantum systems using continuous state estimation, Phys. Rev. A 60, 2700 (1999).
  45. L. S. Walker, G. R. M. Robb, and A. J. Daley, Measurement and feedback for cooling heavy levitated particles in low-frequency traps, Phys. Rev. A 100, 063819 (2019).
  46. A. Vinante, A. Pontin, M. Rashid, M. Toroš, P. F. Barker, and H. Ulbricht, Testing collapse models with levitated nanoparticles: Detection challenge, Phys. Rev. A 100, 012119 (2019).
  47. L. Magrini, P. Rosenzweig, C. Bach, A. Deutschmann-Olek, S. G. Hofer, S. Hong, N. Kiesel, A. Kugi, and M. Aspelmeyer, Real-time optimal quantum control of mechanical motion at room temperature, Nature (London) 595, 373 (2021).
  48. F. Tebbenjohanns, M. Luisa Mattana, M. Rossi, M. Frimmer, and L. Novotny, Quantum control of a nanoparticle optically levitated in cryogenic free space, Nature (London) 595, 378 (2021).
  49. J. Vovrosh, M. Rashid, D. Hempston, J. Bateman, M. Paternostro, and H. Ulbricht, Parametric feedback cooling of levitated optomechanics in a parabolic mirror trap, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 34, 1421 (2017).
  50. R. W. Taylor and V. Sandoghdar, Interferometric scattering microscopy: Seeing single nanoparticles and molecules via Rayleigh scattering, Nano Lett. 19, 4827 (2019).
  51. G. Cerchiari, L. Dania, D. S. Bykov, R. Blatt, and T. E. Northup, Position measurement of a dipolar scatterer via self-homodyne detection, Phys. Rev. A 104, 053523 (2021).
  52. C. Mawby and J. J. Halliwell, Leggett-Garg violations for continuous variable systems with Gaussian states, Phys. Rev. A 107, 032216 (2023).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 030202– Published 16 January, 2024
  • Received 18 April 2023
  • Accepted 30 November 2023
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation