Multimode optomechanical system in the quantum regime

William Hvidtfelt Padkær Nielsen, Yeghishe Tsaturyan, Christoffer Bo Møller, Eugene S. Polzik, and Albert Schliesser
PNAS January 3, 2017 114 (1) 62-66; published ahead of print December 20, 2016 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1608412114

  1. Edited by Andrew Cleland, University of Chicago, and accepted by Editorial Board Member Evelyn L. Hu November 22, 2016 (received for review May 25, 2016)

Significance

Optomechanics is the field of research studying the interaction of light and mechanical motion of mesoscopic objects. Recently, the quantum mechanical character of this interaction has been of particular interest. So far, experimental research, especially in the quantum regime, has focused on canonical systems with only one optical and mechanical degree of freedom—or mode—, respectively. In this work, we introduce a simple and robust optomechanical system featuring many, highly coherent mechanical modes. We evidence and investigate strong quantum correlations in this system, generated by the presence of this multitude of mechanical modes. This represents a key step toward multimode quantum optomechanics, which offers richer dynamics, new quantum phenomena, and a more accurate representation of real-world mechanical sensors.

Abstract

We realize a simple and robust optomechanical system with a multitude of long-lived (Q > 107) mechanical modes in a phononic-bandgap shielded membrane resonator. An optical mode of a compact Fabry–Perot resonator detects these modes’ motion with a measurement rate (96 kHz) that exceeds the mechanical decoherence rates already at moderate cryogenic temperatures (10 K). Reaching this quantum regime entails, inter alia, quantum measurement backaction exceeding thermal forces and thus strong optomechanical quantum correlations. In particular, we observe ponderomotive squeezing of the output light mediated by a multitude of mechanical resonator modes, with quantum noise suppression up to −2.4 dB (−3.6 dB if corrected for detection losses) and bandwidths ≲90 kHz. The multimode nature of the membrane and Fabry–Perot resonators will allow multimode entanglement involving electromagnetic, mechanical, and spin degrees of freedom.

Within the framework of quantum measurement theory (1, 2), quantum backaction (QBA) enforces Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle: It implies that any “meter” measuring a system’s physical variable induces random perturbations on the conjugate variable. Optomechanical transducers of mechanical motion (1⇓–3) implement weak, linear measurements, whose QBA is typically small compared with thermal fluctuations in the device. Nonetheless, recent experiments have evidenced QBA in continuous position measurements of mesoscopic (mass m≲ 200 ng) mechanical oscillators. Although QBA appears as a heating mechanism (4⇓⇓–7) from the point of view of the mechanics only, it correlates the fluctuations of mechanical position with the optical meter’s quantum noise. These correlations are of fundamental, but also practical interest, e.g., as a source of entanglement and a means to achieve measurement sensitivities beyond standard quantum limits (8⇓⇓–11). Correspondingly, they have been intensely studied experimentally (5, 12⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–19). Quantum correlations in multimode systems supporting many mechanical modes give rise to even richer physics and new measurement strategies (20⇓⇓⇓⇓–25). However, although quantum electromechanical coupling to several mechanical modes has been explored (26, 27), quantum fluctuations have so far been investigated only for a pair of collective motional modes of ∼900 cold atoms trapped in an optical resonator (28). In contrast, QBA cancellation and entanglement have been extensively studied with atomic spin oscillators (29⇓–31).

In our study, we use highly stressed, ∼60-nm-thick Si3N4 membranes as nanomechanical resonators (32). They naturally constitute multimode systems, supporting mechanical modes at frequencies Ωm(i,j)=Ωm(1,1)(i2+j2)/2 in the megahertz range, of which two examples are shown in Fig. 1C. The membrane is embedded in a 1.7-mm-long Fabry–Perot resonator held at a temperature T≈10 K in a simple flow cryostat (Fig. 1A). The location zm of the membrane along the standing optical waves (wavelength 2π/k) then determines an optical frequency shift Δfcav, as well as the resonance linewidth κ (refs. 33 and 34 and SI Appendix). As an optimal working point we choose 2kzm/2π≈0.43, where the optomechanical coupling G/2π=∂fcav/∂zm is largest (Fig. 1B), and the biggest fraction κT/κ of scattered photons exits the resonator through the “transmission” port toward the detector (SI Appendix).

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.

Multimode optomechanical system. (A) Optical setup, in which a low-noise Ti:S laser with modulation sidebands from an electro-optic modulator (EOM) pumps a Fabry–Perot resonator held in a cryostat. The resonator contains the sample chip (M) with the nanomechanical membrane and two spacer chips (S). (B) Tuning of optical resonator linewidth and frequency with membrane position with respect to the wavelength, which was changed in this experiment (varied around 810 nm). Solid lines are theoretical TMM predictions (SI Appendix). (C) Dark-field images of two mechanical modes.

One key challenge in the generation and observation of optomechanical quantum correlations is thermal decoherence of the mechanics, which occurs at a rate nΓm≈kBT/ℏQ. Here, n is the mode occupation in equilibrium with the bath of temperature T≈10 K, whereas Γm is the mechanical dissipation rate and Q=Ωm/Γm [dropping mode indexes (i,j) for convenience]. For the multimode system studied here, this necessitates ultrahigh mechanical Q factors across a wide frequency range, which we achieve via a phononic bandgap shield. By embedding the membrane in a periodically patterned silicon frame, we suppress phonon tunneling loss into elastic modes of the substrate, thereby consistently enabling ultralow mechanical dissipation (SI Appendix and refs. 35⇓–37).

To characterize the degree of acoustic isolation achieved, a prototype chip with a membrane of side-length L=547 μm is mounted on a swept-frequency piezo shaker. Under this excitation, the phononic “defect” that hosts the membrane in the center of the shield moves about 20 dB less than the sample’s outer frame (Fig. 2). Although this experiment probes the suppression of a subset of elastic modes only, we emphasize that the shield used provides a full phononic bandgap; i.e., no modes exist in this frequency region (SI Appendix and refs. 35 and 36). Furthermore, the small size of the defect (∼1.3 mm) in direct contact with the membrane results in a sparse background phononic density of states (Fig. 2), entailing a low number of membrane-defect hybrid modes.

Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.

(Top) Response of the sample frame (orange) and the sample center containing the membrane (red) to an acoustic excitation of the sample frame, showing broadband suppression of phonon propagation down to the measurement background (gray). (Bottom) Resulting membrane mode Q factors (light and dark blue circles), showing consistently Q≳107 in the protected 1- to 3-MHz frequency region—also for low-index modes with i∨j<3 (light blue)—but not outside. Inset shows photograph of the actual sample.

Fig. 2 indicates the effect on the Q factor of the 30 lowest-frequency mechanical modes. Clearly, the values scatter for modes outside the shielded 1- to 3-MHz region, whereas all modes in the bandgap achieve Q≳107. Importantly, this holds also for low-index modes with i or j<3, rendering our observations consistent with the full elimination of dissipation by elastic wave radiation (38, 39).

Returning to the membrane-in-the-middle system of Fig. 1A, we note that the optical mode width on the membrane is sufficiently small (w=39μm) to resolve all relevant mechanical mode patterns. The vacuum optomechanical coupling rates are then determined by the modes’ displacement at the location (x,y) of the optical beam in the membrane plane (SI Appendix)g0(i,j)(x,y)≈G⋅xZPF(i,j)sin(πixLx)sin(πjyLy),[1]where xZPF(i,j)=ℏ/2mΩm(i,j) is the mechanical zero-point fluctuation amplitude.

To extract these rates for a membrane with L≈544μm and m=62 ng, we probe the weakly driven optical resonator (linewidth κ/2π=14MHz at 2π/k=799.877nm) with an additional optical sideband generated by an EOM. A broad frequency scan reveals optomechanically induced transparency (OMIT) (41) features for more than 30 modes, as shown in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.

(Top) Multimode OMIT in the cavity response, with expected frequencies Ωm(i,j) indicated by red lines (for clarity, i≥j), labeled with the mode index. Inset shows the extracted location of the optical beam within one quadrant of the membrane, with color-coded normalized probability density. Contours of equal displacement of the (3,2) mode are also shown, with the membrane’s clamped edges indicated in orange. (Bottom) Strong simultaneous light squeezing from six mechanical modes. Blue traces are the recorded cavity output spectra, and orange is the shot noise level. The solid blue line shows the single-mechanical mode model, and the dashed blue line shows the two near-generate mechanical modes model. Differences are discussed in SI Appendix.

The extracted vacuum coupling rates differ widely for different modes and range up to ∼115Hz. The broadband “fingerprint” spectrum reveals, in addition, the mechanical mode frequencies, whose i – j degeneracies appear all lifted with Lx≈0.993Ly, in reasonable agreement with a 0.4% difference in membrane side lengths measured in a microscope image. This lifted degeneracy motivates the assumption that membrane–membrane mode hybridization (41) is negligible in this device. Although this assumption is not critical for the main conclusions of this work, it allows a simple inversion of the relations (Eq. 1) to localize the optical beam position on the membrane (Fig. 3).

To realize strong optomechanical quantum correlations, QBA—here essentially the quantum fluctuations of radiation pressure on the membrane—must exceed the thermal Langevin force. In the unresolved sideband case Ωm≪κ considered here, this translates to 1<S¯FFqba(Ω)/S¯FFth(Ω)≈Γopt/nΓm≡Cq, where Γopt=4g02n¯cav/κ is the optomechanical measurement rate (2), n¯cav the average number of intracavity photons, and Cq is the quantum cooperativity. Remarkably, due to the consistently ultrahigh Q factors, this condition can be fulfilled for a multitude of mechanical modes, even at T=10K, in the system reported here.

To evidence continuous variable quantum correlations and realize quantum-limited measurements in general, high detection efficiency is a second requirement—lest entangled meter states are replaced by ordinary vacuum. In contrast to both microwave and optical experiments that deploy advanced cryogenic technologies (6, 7, 17⇓–19, 42⇓–44), the simplicity of our setup (Fig. 1A) affords a high detection efficiency ηd=80%. Combined with a largely one-sided cavity, the probability for an intracavity sideband photon to be recorded as a photoelectron is expected to be η=ηdκT/κ=77%.

Ponderomotive squeezing (45, 46) provides a model-agnostic and simply calibrated manner to gauge the presence of optomechanically induced quantum correlations, because subvacuum optical noise levels can be directly measured, without knowledge about the circumstances of the optomechanical interaction. The squeezing itself originates from the correlations that radiation pressure creates between the quantum fluctuations of the light’s amplitude quadrature X and the membrane position q. As the latter, in turn, shifts the phase Y of the intracavity field, amplitude-phase quantum correlations in this field are created.

A slightly detuned cavity (|Δ|≪κ) rotates the optical quadratures so that the quantum correlations appear as subvacuum noise in the output light amplitude Xout (SI Appendix and refs. 45 and 46). Fig. 3B shows the measured spectrum S¯XXmeas(Ω) of this entity, after propagation to the detector. Here, the driving laser is held at the detuning Δ/2π=−1.8MHz of the OMIT measurement, but the EOM is deactivated. Depressions in the noise level appear close to the eigenfrequencies of strongly coupled modes, of which six are shown. A comparison with an independent measurement of optical vacuum noise (SI Appendix) reveals significant ponderomotive squeezing in all these spectral regions. The maximum squeezing is observed around the (3,2)−(2,3) mode pair and amounts to −2.4dB (or −3.6dB if corrected for detection losses ηd), exceeding all previously reported values for ponderomotive squeezing (13, 15, 16).

For a quantitative discussion of these results, we invoke a description of the system, using a Heisenberg–Langevin approach. The output amplitude fluctuation spectrum of an ideal system can be calculated using a covariance matrix approach (45, 46), and simplified to the intuitiveS¯XXout(Ω)≈1−28ΔκΓoptRe{χeff(Ω)}+(8Δκ)2Γopt|χeff(Ω)|2(Γopt+nΓm)[2]for the present case (4g02n¯cav/Γm≫κ≫Ωm,Δ) of a high-cooperativity, nonresolving cavity (SI Appendix). Note that χeff(Ω) is the effective mechanical susceptibility, taking into account the dynamical backaction (cooling) of the detuned laser (47, 48). If the correlation term (∝Re{χeff(Ω)}) is negative, it can reduce the noise below the vacuum noise level of 1, to a limit determined by the last term, representing thermal noise. Indeed, it can be shown (SI Appendix) that in this regime the noise level is bound from below byS¯XXout(Ω)≳1−ΓoptΓopt+nΓm,[3]implying that large squeezing requires the measurement rate to significantly exceed the decoherence rate. The photon collection inefficiencies discussed above reduce the squeezing further toS¯XXmeas(Ω)=ηS¯XXout(Ω)+(1−η)1.[4]

For a quantitative comparison, it is in principle necessary to take both of the (near-) degenerate modes of each (i,j)−(j,i) pair into account, which is possible but less intuitive (SI Appendix). For strongly asymmetric coupling and small frequency splitting, a good approximation can be obtained by considering only a single mechanical mode, namely the optically bright mode of the hybridizing pair. Its optomechanical coupling is given by [g0(b)]2=[g0(i,j)]2+[g0(j,i)]2, whereas the dark mode does not interact with the light directly (g0(d)=0), but only with the bright mode (SI Appendix and ref. 49).

The parameters (κ, Δ, g(i,j), Ωm(i,j)) of our system were independently determined from an OMIT trace, yielding a very high measurement rate of Γopt/2π≈96kHz for the bright (3,2) mode. The damping Γm/2π=170mHz is obtained from cryogenic ring-down measurements, whereas the bath temperature T=10±0.4K is extracted from comparison with a reference temperature, using a frequency modulation calibration (50). Whereas the detection efficiency ηd is determined by optical and photodetection losses, the cavity outcoupling efficiency hinges on the loss rate κT of the outcoupling mirror with respect to the total number of intracavity photons. In a transfer matrix model (refs. 33 and 34 and SI Appendix) we calculate κT/2π=13.4MHz from the known mirror and membrane transmission and positions.

Fig. 4 shows a direct comparison of the measured noise trace with the approximative bright-mode model with zero free parameters. Whereas the overall structure and signal-to-background level are well reproduced, the model predicts somewhat stronger squeezing. We attribute this discrepancy to a combination of an overestimated collection efficiency η (e.g., due to membrane tilt), residual frequency noise (most likely caused by substrate noise of the cavity mirrors), and contributions from neighboring modes. We find a better agreement if we allow an adjustment of the outcoupling efficiency and residual frequency noise, to better match the observed contrast and overall noise level, respectively. Fig. 4 shows both the bright-mode and the full dual-mode models, assuming κT/κ=80% and a frequency noise level corresponding to a 25% increase beyond shot noise in the absence of optomechanical coupling, achieving an excellent match of the measured data. From these parameters, we also extract cooling of the bright mode from an occupation n≈105 to neff≈4.7 (4.3 in the absence of mirror noise).

Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.

The strongest squeezing trace, close to the (3, 2) mode, in comparison with vacuum noise (orange). The bright blue line is a zero-free parameter model for a single mechanical mode. Slight adjustments of cavity outcoupling and mirror noise yield better-fitting model traces (dark blue), both in a single-mode (solid line) and a dual-mode (dashed line) model.

Interestingly, ponderomotive squeezing can be pictured to occur in two steps: A downconversion process first creates (or annihilates) an entangled pair of a red-sideband photon and a phonon. The latter is then converted to a blue-sideband photon in a swap process. The resulting entanglement between red and blue sideband photons is measured as suppressed quantum fluctuations in a particular optical quadrature, at a particular sideband frequency. This complementary perspective prompts us to evaluate the theoretically achievable entanglement between a mechanical degree of freedom and the light exiting the cavity (9, 42). By mathematically applying a spectral filter (e.g., a fictitious cavity) of width κ′/2π=0.2 MHz to the output light, we define an isolated mode whose steady-state entanglement with a mechanical mode can be computed (ref. 9 and SI Appendix). For simplicity, we calculate the logarithmic negativity E𝒩 (51⇓–53) for the entanglement with the (2,2) mode, which does not have a degenerate conjugate mode. The resulting entanglement varies as the filter is tuned across the output light and is maximum when it coincides with the red (Stokes) sideband of the coupling laser (ref. 9 and SI Appendix). Assuming that the reduced detection efficiency and effects of mirror noise can be avoided in an improved version of the experiment, we find a value as high as E𝒩≈0.8.

In conclusion, we have demonstrated a robust, compact, multimode optomechanical system that exhibits strong optomechanical quantum correlations, evidenced by significant ponderomotive squeezing. Unprecedentedly large correlations are enabled by very low mechanical decoherence on the one hand and the highest-yet realized detection efficiency in an optomechanics experiment on the other hand. Crucially, a phononic bandgap shield suppresses mechanical losses in a wide frequency range, so that quantum correlations can be observed with a large number of mechanical modes.

This system thus constitutes a promising platform for the realization of a range of nonclassical mechanical states (20⇓⇓–23), as well as measurements of displacements and forces beyond the standard quantum limit (24, 25). The multimode nature of the optical and mechanical resonators and the simplicity with which light or the mechanics interface to other quantum systems—such as superconducting microwave circuits or atomic ensembles—multiplies the possible applications of this system as a multimode quantum interface (54⇓⇓⇓⇓–59).

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to K. Usami and D. J. Wilson for input at an early stage of the project and E. Belhage and A. Barg for providing the dark-field images. This work was supported by the Grants Q-CEOM and INTERFACE from the European Research Council, a starting grant from the Danish Council for Independent Research, the Grants iQUOEMS and SIQS by the European Commission, the Defense Advanced Research Agency, and the Carlsberg Foundation.

Footnotes

  • ↵1To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: aschlies{at}nbi.ku.dk.

  • Author contributions: W.H.P.N., C.B.M., E.S.P., and A.S. designed research; Y.T. fabricated samples; W.H.P.N., Y.T., and C.B.M. performed research; W.H.P.N. and A.S. analyzed data; and W.H.P.N., Y.T., and A.S. wrote the paper.

  • The authors declare no conflict of interest.

  • This article is a PNAS Direct Submission. A.C. is a Guest Editor invited by the Editorial Board.

  • This article contains supporting information online at www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.1608412114/-/DCSupplemental.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Braginsky VB,
    2. Khalili FY
    (1992) Quantum Measurement (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UK).
    .
  2. ↵
    1. Clerk AA,
    2. Devoret MH,
    3. Girvin SM,
    4. Marquardt F,
    5. Schoelkopf RJ
    (2010) Introduction to quantum noise, measurement, and amplification. Rev Mod Phys 82:1155–1208.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  3. ↵
    1. Aspelmeyer M,
    2. Kippenberg TJ,
    3. Marquardt F
    (2014) Cavity optomechanics. Rev Mod Phys 86:1391–1452.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. ↵
    1. Murch KW,
    2. Moore KL,
    3. Gupta S,
    4. Stamper-Kurn DM
    (2008) Observation of quantum-measurement backaction with an ultracold atomic gas. Nat Phys 4:561–564.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  5. ↵
    1. Purdy TP,
    2. Peterson RW,
    3. Regal CA
    (2013) Observation of radiation pressure shot noise on a macroscopic object. Science 339:801–804.
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Teufel JD,
    2. Lecocq F,
    3. Simmonds RW
    (2016) Overwhelming thermomechanical motion with microwave radiation pressure shot noise. Phys Rev Lett 116:013602.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Peterson RW, et al.
    (2016) Laser cooling of a micromechanical membrane to the quantum backaction limit. Phys Rev Lett 116:063601.
    .
    OpenUrl
  8. ↵
    1. Vitali D, et al.
    (2007) Optomechanical entanglement between a movable mirror and a cavity field. Phys Rev Lett 98:030405.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Genes C,
    2. Mari A,
    3. Tombesi P,
    4. Vitali D
    (2008) Robust entanglement of a micromechanical resonator with output optical fields. Phys Rev A 78:032316.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  10. ↵
    1. Khalili FY,
    2. Miao H,
    3. Safavi-Naeini AH,
    4. Painter O,
    5. Chen Y
    (2012) Quantum back-action in measurements of zero-point mechanical oscillations. Phys Rev A 86:033840.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  11. ↵
    1. Buchmann LF,
    2. Schreppler S,
    3. Kohler J,
    4. Spethmann N,
    5. Stamper-Kurn DM
    (2016) Complex squeezing and force measurement beyond the standard quantum limit. arXiv:1602.02141.
    .
  12. ↵
    1. Verlot P,
    2. Tavernarakis A,
    3. Briant T,
    4. Cohadon P-F,
    5. Heidmann A
    (2009) Scheme to probe optomechanical correlations between two optical beams down to the quantum level. Phys Rev Lett 102:103601.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Brooks DWC, et al.
    (2012) Non-classical light generated by quantum-noise-driven cavity optomechanics. Nature 488:476–480.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Safavi-Naeini AH, et al.
    (2012) Observation of quantum motion of a nanomechanical resonator. Phys Rev Lett 108:033602.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Purdy TP,
    2. Yu P-L,
    3. Peterson RW,
    4. Kampel NS,
    5. Regal CA
    (2013) Strong optomechanical squeezing of light. Phys Rev X 3:031012.
    .
    OpenUrl
  16. ↵
    1. Safavi-Naeini AH, et al.
    (2013) Squeezed light from a silicon micromechanical resonator. Nature 500:185–189.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Weinstein AJ, et al.
    (2014) Observation and interpretation of motional sideband asymmetry in a quantum electromechanical device. Phys Rev X 4:041003.
    .
    OpenUrl
  18. ↵
    1. Underwood M, et al.
    (2015) Measurement of the motional sidebands of a nanogram-scale oscillator in the quantum regime. Phys Rev A 92:061801(R).
    .
    OpenUrl
  19. ↵
    1. Sudhir V, et al.
    (2016) Appearance and disappearance of quantum correlations in measurement-based feedback control of a mechanical oscillator. arXiv:1602.05942.
    .
  20. ↵
    1. Mancini S,
    2. Giovannetti V,
    3. Vitali D,
    4. Tombesi P
    (2002) Entangling macroscopic oscillators exploiting radiation pressure. Phys Rev Lett 88:120401.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Hartmann MJ,
    2. Plenio MB
    (2008) Steady state entanglement in the mechanical vibrations of two dielectric membranes. Phys Rev Lett 101:200503.
    .
    OpenUrlPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Bhattacharya M,
    2. Meystre P
    (2008) Multiple membrane cavity optomechanics. Phys Rev A 78:041801.
    .
    OpenUrl
  23. ↵
    1. Houhou O,
    2. Aissaoui H,
    3. Ferraro A
    (2015) Generation of cluster states in optomechanical quantum systems. Phys Rev A 92:063843.
    .
    OpenUrl
  24. ↵
    1. Woolley MJ,
    2. Clerk AA
    (2013) Two-mode back-action-evading measurements in cavity optomechanics. Phys Rev A 87:063846.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  25. ↵
    1. Buchmann LF,
    2. Stamper-Kurn DM
    (2015) The quantum/classical transition in mediated interactions. Ann Phys 527:156–161.
    .
    OpenUrl
  26. ↵
    1. Massel F, et al.
    (2012) Multimode circuit optomechanics near the quantum limit. Nat Commun 3:987.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    1. Noguchi A, et al.
    (2016) Strong coupling in multimode quantum electromechanics. arXiv:1602.01554.
    .
  28. ↵
    1. Spethmann N,
    2. Kohler J,
    3. Schreppler S,
    4. Buchmann L,
    5. Stamper-Kurn DM
    (2016) Cavity-mediated coupling of mechanical oscillators limited by quantum back-action. Nat Phys 12:27–31.
    .
    OpenUrl
  29. ↵
    1. Hammerer K,
    2. Sørensen AS,
    3. Polzik ES
    (2010) Quantum interface between light and atomic ensembles. Rev Mod Phys 82:1041–1093.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  30. ↵
    1. Krauter H, et al.
    (2011) Entanglement generated by dissipation and steady state entanglement of two macroscopic objects. Phys Rev Lett 107:080503.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. ↵
    1. Vasilakis G, et al.
    (2015) Generation of a squeezed state of an oscillator by stroboscopic back-action-evading measurement. Nat Phys 11:389–392.
    .
    OpenUrl
  32. ↵
    1. Thompson JD, et al.
    (2008) Strong dispersive coupling of a high-finesse cavity to a micromechanical membrane. Nature 452:72–75.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Jayich AM, et al.
    (2008) Dispersive optomechanics: A membrane inside a cavity. New J Phys 10:095008.
    .
    OpenUrl
  34. ↵
    1. Wilson DJ,
    2. Regal CA,
    3. Papp SB,
    4. Kimble HJ
    (2009) Cavity optomechanics with stoichiometric SiN films. Phys Rev Lett 103:207204.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. ↵
    1. Tsaturyan Y, et al.
    (2014) Demonstration of suppressed phonon tunneling losses in phononic bandgap shielded membrane resonators for high-Q optomechanics. Opt Express 22:6810–6821.
    .
    OpenUrl
  36. ↵
    1. Yu PL, et al.
    (2014) A phononic bandgap shield for high-Q membrane microresonators. Appl Phys Lett 104:023510.
    .
    OpenUrl
  37. ↵
    1. Jöckel A, et al.
    (2011) Spectroscopy of mechanical dissipation in micro-mechanical membranes. Appl Phys Lett 99:143109.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  38. ↵
    1. Wilson-Rae I, et al.
    (2011) High-Q nanomechanics via destructive interference of elastic waves. Phys Rev Lett 106:047205.
    .
    OpenUrlPubMed
  39. ↵
    1. Villanueva LG,
    2. Schmid S
    (2014) Evidence of surface loss as ubiquitous limiting damping mechanism in SiN micro- and nanomechanical resonators. Phys Rev Lett 113:227201.
    .
    OpenUrl
    1. Weis S, et al.
    (2010) Optomechanically induced transparency. Science 330:1520–1523.
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  41. ↵
    1. Chakram S,
    2. Patil YS,
    3. Chang L,
    4. Vengalattore M
    (2014) Dissipation in ultrahigh quality factor SiN membrane resonators. Phys Rev Lett 112:127201.
    .
    OpenUrl
  42. ↵
    1. Palomaki TA,
    2. Teufel JD,
    3. Simmonds RW,
    4. Lehnert KW
    (2013) Entangling mechanical motion with microwave fields. Science 342:710–713.
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  43. ↵
    1. Verhagen E,
    2. Deléglise S,
    3. Weis S,
    4. Schliesser A,
    5. Kippenberg TJ
    (2012) Quantum-coherent coupling of a mechanical oscillator to an optical cavity mode. Nature 482:63–67.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. ↵
    1. Wilson DJ, et al.
    (2015) Measurement-based control of a mechanical oscillator at its thermal decoherence rate. Nature 524:325–329.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. ↵
    1. Fabre C, et al.
    (1994) Quantum-noise reduction using a cavity with a movable mirror. Phys Rev A 49(2):1337–1343.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  46. ↵
    1. Mancini S,
    2. Tombesi P
    (1994) Quantum noise reduction by radiation pressure. Phys Rev A 49(5):4055–4065.
    .
    OpenUrlPubMed
  47. ↵
    1. Schliesser A,
    2. Del’Haye P,
    3. Nooshi N,
    4. Vahala K,
    5. Kippenberg T
    (2006) Radiation pressure cooling of a micromechanical oscillator using dynamical backaction. Phys Rev Lett 97:243905.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  48. ↵
    1. Arcizet O,
    2. Cohadon P-F,
    3. Briant T,
    4. Pinard M,
    5. Heidmann A
    (2006) Radiation-pressure cooling and optomechanical instability of a micromirror. Nature 444:71–74.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  49. ↵
    1. Shkarin AB, et al.
    (2014) Optically mediated hybridization between two mechanical modes. Phys Rev Lett 112:013602.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  50. ↵
    1. Gorodetsky ML,
    2. Schliesser A,
    3. Anetsberger G,
    4. Deleglise S,
    5. Kippenberg TJ
    (2010) Determination of the vacuum optomechanical coupling rate using frequency noise calibration. Opt Express 18:23236.
    .
    OpenUrlPubMed
  51. ↵
    1. Eisert J,
    2. Briegel HJ
    (2001) Schmidt measure as a tool for quantifying multiparticle entanglement. Phys Rev A 64:022306.
    .
    OpenUrl
  52. ↵
    1. Vidal G,
    2. Werner RF
    (2002) Computable measure of entanglement. Phys Rev A 65:032314.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  53. ↵
    1. Plenio MB
    (2005) The logarithmic negativity: A full entanglement monotone that is not convex. Phys Rev Lett 95:090503.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  54. ↵
    1. Hammerer K,
    2. Aspelmeyer M,
    3. Polzik ES,
    4. Zoller P
    (2009) Establishing Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen channels between nanomechanics and atomic ensembles. Phys Rev Lett 102:020501.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  55. ↵
    1. Muschik CA,
    2. Krauter H,
    3. Hammerer K,
    4. Polzik ES
    (2011) Quantum information at the interface of light with atomic ensembles and micromechanical oscillators. Quant Inform Process 10:839–863.
    .
    OpenUrl
  56. ↵
    1. Barzanjeh Sh,
    2. Abdi M,
    3. Milburn GJ,
    4. Tombesi P,
    5. Vitali D
    (2012) Reversible optical-to-microwave quantum interface. Phys Rev Lett 109:130503.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  57. ↵
    1. Tian L
    (2013) Robust photon entanglement via quantum interference in optomechanical interfaces. Phys Rev Lett 110:233602.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  58. ↵
    1. Andrews RW, et al.
    (2014) Bidirectional and efficient conversion between microwave and optical light. Nat Phys 10:321–326.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  59. ↵
    1. Bagci T, et al.
    (2014) Optical detection of radio waves through a nanomechanical transducer. Nature 507:81–85.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
View Abstract
Back to top
Article Alerts
Email Article
Citation Tools
Request Permissions
Multimode quantum optomechanics
William Hvidtfelt Padkær Nielsen, Yeghishe Tsaturyan, Christoffer Bo Møller, Eugene S. Polzik, Albert Schliesser
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Jan 2017, 114 (1) 62-66; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1608412114
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo

You May Also be Interested in

The much-ballyhooed artificial intelligence approach boasts impressive feats but still falls short of human brainpower. Researchers are determined to figure out what’s missing. Image credit: Shutterstock.com/MONOPOLY919.
News Feature: What are the limits of deep learning?
The much-ballyhooed artificial intelligence approach boasts impressive feats but still falls short of human brainpower. Researchers are determined to figure out what’s missing.
Image credit: Shutterstock.com/MONOPOLY919.
PNAS QnAs with NAS member and molecular biologist Steven A. Kliewer
Featured QnAs
PNAS QnAs with NAS member and molecular biologist Steven A. Kliewer
Holographic acoustic tweezers, in which ultrasonic waves produced by arrays of sound emitters are used to individually manipulate up to 25 millimeter-sized particles in three dimensions, could be used to create 3D displays consisting of levitating physical voxels.
Acoustic tweezers for 3D particle manipulation
Holographic acoustic tweezers, in which ultrasonic waves produced by arrays of sound emitters are used to individually manipulate up to 25 millimeter-sized particles in three dimensions, could be used to create 3D displays consisting of levitating physical voxels.
Human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived medial ganglionic eminence cells alleviate chronic epilepsy in rats, raising the possibility of autologous grafts, which could preclude the need for immune suppression after grafting and promote long-term graft–host integration.
Cell grafts for epilepsy treatment
Human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived medial ganglionic eminence cells alleviate chronic epilepsy in rats, raising the possibility of autologous grafts, which could preclude the need for immune suppression after grafting and promote long-term graft–host integration.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: 116 (4)
Current Issue

Submit

Jump to section