- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review X

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

Multimessenger Search for Exotic Field Emission with a Global Magnetometer Network

Sami S. Khamis1,*, Ibrahim A. Sulai2, Paul Hamilton1, S. Afach3,4,5, B. C. Buchler6, D. Budker3,4,5,7, N. L. Figueroa3,4,5, R. Folman8, D. Gavilán-Martín3,4,5 et al.

M. Givon8, Z. D. Grujić9, H. Guo10, M. P. Hedges11, D. F. Jackson Kimball12, D. Kim13,14,†, E. Klinger15, T. Kornack16, A. Kryemadhi17, N. Kukowski18, G. Łukasiewicz19,20, H. Masia-Roig3,4,5, M. Padniuk19, C. A. Palm12, S. Y. Park21,‡, X. Peng10, M. Pospelov22,23, S. Pustelny19, Y. Rosenzweig8, O. M. Ruimi24,3,4,5, P. C. Segura21,§, T. Scholtes25, Y. K. Semertzidis13,14, Y. C. Shin13, J. E. Stalnaker21, D. Tandon21,∥, A. Weis26, A. Wickenbrock3,4,5, T. Z. Wilson12,¶, T. Wu10, J. Zhang10, and Y. Zhao10

  • *Contact author: skhamis@physics.ucla.edu
  • †Present address: Mechatronics Research, Samsung Electronics, Hwaseong 18448, South Korea.
  • ‡Present address: Department of Physics, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309, USA.
  • §Present address: Department of Physics, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, USA.
  • ∥Present address: Department of Physics, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, USA.
  • Present address: Department of Physics, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois 61801, USA.
PDF

Phys. Rev. X 15, 031048 – Published 20 August, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/fsc8-6sl5

Abstract

The history of astronomy has shown that advances in sensing methods open up new windows to the Universe and often lead to unexpected discoveries. Quantum sensor networks in combination with traditional astronomical observations are emerging as a novel modality for multimessenger astronomy. Here we develop a generic analysis framework that uses a data-driven approach to model the sensitivity of a quantum sensor network to astrophysical signals as a consequence of beyond-the-standard model (BSM) physics. The analysis method evaluates correlations between sensors to search for BSM signals coincident with astrophysical triggers, such as black hole mergers, supernovae, or fast radio bursts. Complementary to astroparticle approaches that search for particlelike signals (e.g., weakly interacting massive particles), quantum sensors are sensitive to wavelike signals from exotic quantum fields. This analysis method can be applied to networks of different types of quantum sensors, such as atomic clocks, matter-wave interferometers, and nuclear clocks, which can probe many types of interactions between BSM fields and standard model particles. We use this analysis method to carry out the first direct search utilizing a terrestrial network of precision quantum sensors for BSM fields emitted during a black hole merger. Specifically, we use the global network of optical magnetometers for exotic physics (GNOME) to perform a search for exotic low-mass field (ELF) bursts generated in coincidence with a gravitational-wave signal from a binary black hole merger (GW200311_115853) detected by LIGO/Virgo on the March 11, 2020. The associated gravitational wave heralds the arrival of the ELF burst that interacts with the spins of fermions in the magnetometers. This enables GNOME to serve as a tool for multimessenger astronomy. Our search found no significant events and, consequently, we place the first lab-based limits on combinations of ELF production and coupling parameters.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Corrections

4 September, 2026

Correction: A support statement in the last sentence of the Acknowledgments contained an error and has been fixed.

Popular Summary

Astronomical observations have revealed a remarkable fact: All visible matter in the Universe—everything that makes up stars, planets, and galaxies—accounts for less than 5% of the total mass-energy content. The rest is thought to be dark matter and dark energy, whose natures remain one of the biggest open questions in physics. In this study, we explore the possibility that black hole mergers might emit short bursts of unknown particles—wavelike signals from exotic quantum fields—potentially connected to these mysterious components of the Universe.

We analyze data from a global network of magnetometers collected during a recent gravitational wave event caused by a black hole merger. If exotic particles were emitted during the merger and interacted with atomic spins, they would produce a signal similar to a weak magnetic field. By searching for correlated signals across multiple sensors, we look for signs of such interactions. Although we did not observe any effects, our analysis allows us to place the first direct laboratory-based constraints on particle emissions from black hole mergers.

This work demonstrates the potential of quantum sensor networks to serve as a tool for multimessenger astronomy and expand the search for new physics. Our method can be applied to other astrophysical events like supernovae and fast radio bursts, and extended to other quantum technologies such as atomic clocks and atom interferometers. Looking forward, precision sensor networks will play a key role in probing the unknown components of the Universe, offering new ways to investigate dark matter, dark energy, and physics beyond the standard model.

Article Text

References (69)

  1. Planck Collaboration, Planck 2018 results—VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020).
  2. E. A. Kazin et al., The WiggleZ dark energy survey: Improved distance measurements to z=1 with reconstruction of the baryonic acoustic feature, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 441, 3524 (2014).
  3. J. Ye and P. Zoller, Essay: Quantum sensing with atomic, molecular, and optical platforms for fundamental physics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 190001 (2024).
  4. 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).
  5. D. F. Jackson Kimball, D. Budker, T. E. Chupp, A. A. Geraci, S. Kolkowitz, J. T. Singh, and A. O. Sushkov, Probing fundamental physics with spin-based quantum sensors, Phys. Rev. A 108, 010101 (2023).
  6. M. S. Safronova, D. Budker, D. DeMille, Derek F. Jackson Kimball, A. Derevianko, and C. W. Clark, Search for new physics with atoms and molecules, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 025008 (2018).
  7. Paul T. O’Brien and Stephen J Smartt, Interpreting signals from astrophysical transient experiments, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 371, 20120498 (2013).
  8. D. Antypas, A. Banerjee, C. Bartram, M. Baryakhtar, J. Betz, J. J. Bollinger, C. Boutan, D. Bowring, D. Budker, D. Carney et al., New horizons: Scalar and vector ultralight dark matter, arXiv:2203.14915.
  9. J. Preskill, M. B. Wise, and F. Wilczek, Cosmology of the invisible axion, Phys. Lett. 120B, 127 (1983).
  10. L. F. Abbott and P. Sikivie, A cosmological bound on the invisible axion, Phys. Lett. 120B, 133 (1983).
  11. M. Dine and W. Fischler, The not-so-harmless axion, Phys. Lett. 120B, 137 (1983).
  12. A. Arvanitaki, S. Dimopoulos, S. Dubovsky, N. Kaloper, and J. March-Russell, String axiverse, Phys. Rev. D 81, 123530 (2010).
  13. Lotty Ackerman, Matthew R. Buckley, Sean M. Carroll, and Marc Kamionkowski, Dark matter and dark radiation, Phys. Rev. D 79, 023519 (2009).
  14. Mark Goodsell, Joerg Jaeckel, Javier Redondo, and Andreas Ringwald, Naturally light hidden photons in LARGE volume string compactifications, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2009) 027.
  15. Ann E. Nelson and Jakub Scholtz, Dark light, dark matter, and the misalignment mechanism, Phys. Rev. D 84, 103501 (2011).
  16. C. Dailey et al., Quantum sensor networks as exotic field telescopes for multi-messenger astronomy, Nat. Astron. 5, 150 (2021).

  17. Recently, a closely related search for ELFs was carried out using the rubidium clocks onboard satellites of the GPS [18]. The search described in Ref. [18] targeted a different interaction of ELFs with atoms than that probed in the present study: transient variations in fundamental constants. Analyzing GPS clock data around the GW170817 neutron star merger, the authors of Ref. [18] identify an intriguing post-trigger excess in clock noise, although elevated solar electron flux during the same period complicates interpretation. This prevented them from being able to set constraints on ELF production mechanisms or interactions with atoms.

  18. Arko P. Sen, Kalia Pfeffer, Paul Ries, Geoff Blewitt, and Andrei Derevianko, Multi-messenger astronomy in the new physics modality with GPS constellation, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2889, 012003 (2024).
  19. G. G. Raffelt, Particle physics from stars, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 49, 163 (1999).
  20. D. Baumann, H. S. Chia, and R. A. Porto, Probing ultralight bosons with binary black holes, Phys. Rev. D 99, 044001 (2019).
  21. I. I. Tkachev, Fast radio bursts and axion miniclusters, J. Exp. Theor. Phys. Lett. 101, 1 (2015).
  22. A. Arvanitaki, M. Baryakhtar, S. Dimopoulos, S. Dubovsky, and R. Lasenby, Black hole mergers and the QCD axion at Advanced LIGO, Phys. Rev. D 95, 043001 (2017).
  23. M. Baryakhtar, R. Lasenby, and M. Teo, Black hole superradiance signatures of ultralight vectors, Phys. Rev. D 96, 035019 (2017).
  24. M. Baryakhtar, M. Galanis, R. Lasenby, and O. Simon, Black hole superradiance of self-interacting scalar fields, Phys. Rev. D 103, 095019 (2021).
  25. T. Takahashi, H. Omiya, and T. Tanaka, Self-interacting axion clouds around rotating black holes in binary systems, Phys. Rev. D 110, 104038 (2024).
  26. J. C Aurrekoetxea, J. Marsden, K. Clough, and P. G. Ferreira, Self-interacting scalar dark matter around binary black holes, Phys. Rev. D 110, 083011 (2024).
  27. Joshua Eby, Satoshi Shirai, Yevgeny V. Stadnik, and Volodymyr Takhistov, Probing relativistic axions from transient astrophysical sources, Phys. Lett. B 825, 136858 (2022).
  28. A. Arvanitaki, M. Baryakhtar, and X. Huang, Discovering the QCD axion with black holes and gravitational waves, Phys. Rev. D 91, 084011 (2015).
  29. Y. Fujii and K. Maeda, The Scalar-Tensor Theory of Gravitation, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2007).
  30. G. Franciolini, L. Hui, R. Penco, L. Santoni, and E. Trincherini, Effective field theory of black hole quasinormal modes in scalar-tensor theories, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2019) 127.
  31. Virgo, LIGO Scientific Collaborations, GCN 27358, 2020.
  32. D. F. Jackson Kimball and K. van Bibber, The Search for Ultralight Bosonic Dark Matter (Springer, New York, 2022).
  33. S. Afach et al., What can a GNOME do? Search targets for the global network of optical magnetometers for exotic physics searches, Ann. Phys. (Berlin) 536, 2300083 (2023).

  34. In the present work, we focus on the direct coupling of the ELF field ϕ with fermion spins [35], but interactions with other standard model particles and fields are possible; see, e.g., Refs. [6, 32]. While GNOME magnetometers [36] and especially noble-gas comagnetometers [37] have state-of-the-art sensitivity to ϕ-spin couplings [38], other quantum sensors such as atomic clocks, cavities, and atom interferometers are better suited for detection of other types of ϕ couplings [6, 32]. One example is the search for ELF-induced transient variation of fundamental constants using the GPS atomic clock network described in Ref. [18]. Another relevant example is the ϕ-photon coupling [39], which can lead to generation of a real oscillating magnetic field as opposed to a pseudomagnetic field. In this case, the magnetometer need not be spin based, and other sensors such as superconducting quantum interference devices [40] or induction-coil magnetometers [41] can be used. Of course, the dependence of the measured signal on ϕ will depend on the details of the ϕ coupling and the sensor characteristics: For example, as discussed in Refs. [16, 42], a scalar ϕ coupling that generates a signal detectable with atomic clocks does not have the directionality characteristic of the ϕ-spin coupling considered here.

  35. Lei Cong et al., Spin-dependent exotic interactions, Rev. Mod. Phys. 97, 025005 (2025).
  36. S. Afach et al., Characterization of the global network of optical magnetometers to search for exotic physics (GNOME), Phys. Dark Universe 22, 162 (2018).
  37. M. Padniuk, E. Klinger, G. Lukasiewicz, D. Gavilan-Martin, T. Liu, S. Pustelny, D. F. JacksonKimball, D. Budker, and A. Wickenbrock, Universal determination of comagnetometer response to spin couplings, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 013339 (2024).
  38. Derek F. Jackson Kimball, D. Budker, T. E. Chupp, A. A. Geraci, S. Kolkowitz, J. T. Singh, and A. O. Sushkov, Probing fundamental physics with spin-based quantum sensors, Phys. Rev. A 108, 010101 (2023).
  39. Pierre Sikivie, Experimental tests of the “invisible”’ axion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 51, 1415 (1983).
  40. L. Brouwer et al., Proposal for a definitive search for GUT-scale QCD axions, Phys. Rev. D 106, 112003 (2022).
  41. Ibrahim A. Sulai et al., Hunt for magnetic signatures of hidden-photon and axion dark matter in the wilderness, Phys. Rev. D 108, 096026 (2023).
  42. Jason Arakawa, Muhammad H. Zaheer, Volodymyr Takhistov, Marianna S. Safronova, and Joshua Eby, Multimessenger astronomy beyond the standard model: New window from quantum sensors, arXiv:2502.08716.
  43. S. Pustelny et al., The global network of optical magnetometers for exotic physics (GNOME): A novel scheme to search for physics beyond the standard model, Ann. Phys. (Berlin) 525, 659 (2013).
  44. S. Afach et al., Search for topological defect dark matter with a global network of optical magnetometers, Nat. Phys. 17, 1396 (2021).
  45. D. Jackson Kimball, J. Dudley, Y. Li, S. Thulasi, S. Pustelny, D. Budker, and M. Zolotorev, Magnetic shielding and exotic spin-dependent interactions, Phys. Rev. D 94, 082005 (2016).
  46. S. S. Khamis, I. A. Sulai, P. Hamilton et al. (unpublished).
  47. D. F. Jackson Kimball, Nuclear spin content and constraints on exotic spin-dependent couplings, New J. Phys. 17, 073008 (2015).
  48. E. Klinger, T. Liu, M. Padniuk, M. Engler, T. Kornack, S. Pustelny, D. F. Jackson Kimball, D. Budker, and A. Wickenbrock, Optimization of nuclear polarization in an alkali-noble gas comagnetometer, Phys. Rev. Appl. 19, 044092 (2023).
  49. W. G. Anderson, P. R. Brady, J. D. E. Creighton, and E. E. Flanagan, Excess power statistic for detection of burst sources of gravitational radiation, Phys. Rev. D 63, 042003 (2001).
  50. F. E. James, Statistical Methods in Experimental Physics; 2nd ed. (World Scientific, Singapore, 2006).
  51. G. J. Feldman and R. D. Cousins, Unified approach to the classical statistical analysis of small signals, Phys. Rev. D 57, 3873 (1998).

  52. Another significant difference between GNOME magnetometers and other quantum sensors is their bandwidth and sample rate. For example, state-of-the-art atomic clocks generally sample data at a much lower rate, while optical cavities can sample data at a much higher rate. Even for the case of GNOME, another issue is sensor dead time. For this first analysis, we chose to analyze a dataset where all sensors were contributing throughout. Instead of a discrete Fourier transform, a future refinement to the algorithm could use a periodogram to analyze unevenly sampled data.

  53. M. Vetterli, J. Kovačević, and V. K. Goyal, Foundations of Signal Processing (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2014).
  54. S. Chatterji, L. Blackburn, G. Martin, and E. Katsavounidis, Multiresolution techniques for the detection of gravitational-wave bursts, Classical Quantum Gravity 21, S1809 (2004).
  55. B. P. Abbott et al. (The LIGO Scientific and the Virgo Collaborations), A guide to LIGO–Virgo detector noise and extraction of transient gravitational-wave signals, Classical Quantum Gravity 37, 055002 (2020).
  56. M. Maggiore, Gravitational Waves: Volume 1: Theory and Experiments (Oxford University Press, New York, 2008).

  57. The probability of getting k events for a Poissonian process with a mean value μ over an observation window is Pr(k)=μke−μ/k!. For rare events, the probability of getting one or more events in the limit of μ≪1 is Pr(k≥1)=1−Pr(k=0)≈1−e−μ≈μ.

  58. L. Lyons, Open statistical issues in particle physics, Ann. Appl. Stat. 2, 887 (2008).
  59. R. Abbott et al., GWTC-3: Compact binary coalescences observed by LIGO and Virgo during the second part of the third observing run, Phys. Rev. X 13, 041039 (2023).
  60. Jason Arakawa, Joshua Eby, Marianna S. Safronova, Volodymyr Takhistov, and Muhammad H Zaheer, Detection of bosenovae with quantum sensors on earth and in space, Phys. Rev. D 110, 075007 (2024).
  61. A. Lella, P. Carenza, G. Co’, G. Lucente, M. Giannotti, A. Mirizzi, and T. Rauscher, Getting the most on supernova axions, Phys. Rev. D 109, 023001 (2024).
  62. M. Pospelov, S. Pustelny, M. P. Ledbetter, D. F. JacksonKimball, W. Gawlik, and D. Budker, Detecting domain walls of axionlike models using terrestrial experiments, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 021803 (2013).
  63. A. Arvanitaki and S. Dubovsky, Exploring the string axiverse with precision black hole physics, Phys. Rev. D 83, 044026 (2011).
  64. G. Alonso-Álvarez, J. M. Cline, and C. Dewar, Self-interacting dark matter solves the final parsec problem of supermassive black hole mergers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 021401 (2024).
  65. G. Raffelt and D. Seckel, Bounds on exotic-particle interactions from SN1987A, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 1793 (1988).
  66. A. Iwazaki, Axion stars and fast radio bursts, Phys. Rev. D 91, 023008 (2015).
  67. Norman F. Ramsey, The tensor force between two protons at long range, Physica (Amsterdam) 96A, 285 (1979).
  68. Joseph A. Smiga, Assessing the quality of a network of vector-field sensors, Eur. Phys. J. D 76, 4 (2022).
  69. FRB Collaboration, A catalog of local universe fast radio bursts from CHIME/FRB and the KKO Outrigger, arXiv:2502.11217.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. X 15, 031048– Published 20 August, 2025
  • Received 22 July 2024
  • Revised 20 May 2025
  • Accepted 17 July 2025
  • Corrected 4 September 2026
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