Thermal Noise Suppression Strategy for Dual-Cavity Mechanical Quantum Gyroscope

Jingyu Wang; Min Nie; Guang Yang; Meiling Zhang; Aijing Sun; Changxing Pei

doi:10.3788/AOS202242.2327002

Journals >Acta Optica Sinica >Volume 42 >Issue 23 >Page 2327002 > Article

Acta Optica Sinica
Vol. 42, Issue 23, 2327002 (2022)

Thermal Noise Suppression Strategy for Dual-Cavity Mechanical Quantum Gyroscope

Jingyu Wang^1、*, Min Nie¹, Guang Yang¹, Meiling Zhang¹, Aijing Sun¹, and Changxing Pei²

Author Affiliations

¹School of Communications and Information Engineering, Xi′an University of Posts & Telecommunications, Xi′an710121, Shaanxi , China

²State Key Laboratory of Integrated Services Networks, Xidian University, Xi′an710071, Shaanxi , China

show less

DOI: 10.3788/AOS202242.2327002 Cite this Article Set citation alerts

Jingyu Wang, Min Nie, Guang Yang, Meiling Zhang, Aijing Sun, Changxing Pei. Thermal Noise Suppression Strategy for Dual-Cavity Mechanical Quantum Gyroscope[J]. Acta Optica Sinica, 2022, 42(23): 2327002 Copy Citation Text

show less

Fig. 1. Schematic of a dual-cavity optomechanical quantum gyroscope

Download full size

Variation of noise proportion with laser field intensity a¯0(effective detuning of optical cavity:Δ1'=0,Δ2=-ωm; cavity decay rate: k1=5ωm,k2=0.3ωm; phonon number: n=312; mechanical oscillator decay rate: γ=8×10-4ωm; optical cavity coupling intensity: J=2ωm)

Fig. 2. Variation of noise proportion with laser field intensity

{\bar{a}}_{0}

(effective detuning of optical cavity:

Δ_{1}^{'} = 0

Δ_{2} = - ω_{m}

; cavity decay rate:

k_{1} = 5 ω_{m}

k_{2} = 0.3 ω_{m}

; phonon number:

n = 312

; mechanical oscillator decay rate:

γ = 8 \times 10^{- 4} ω_{m}

; optical cavity coupling intensity:

J = 2 ω_{m}

)

Download full size

Fig. 3. Schematic of phonon state transition of mechanical resonator

Download full size

Fig. 4. Radiation pressure fluctuation spectra

S_{F F} (ω)

under different optical cavity coupling intensities

J

(effective detuning of optical cavity:

Δ_{1}^{'} = ω_{m}

Δ_{2} = - ω_{m}

; cavity decay rate:

k_{1} = 3 ω_{m}

k_{2} = 0.3 ω_{m}

)

Download full size

Fig. 5. Radiation pressure fluctuation spectra

S_{F F} (ω)

under different auxiliary cavity detuning

Δ_{2}

(effective detuning of optical cavity:

Δ_{1}^{'} = ω_{m}

; cavity decay rate:

k_{1} = 3 ω_{m}

k_{2} = 0.3 ω_{m}

; optical cavity coupling intensity:

J = 2 ω_{m}

)

Download full size

Fig. 6. Radiation pressure fluctuation spectra

S_{F F} (ω)

under different optical cavity detuning

Δ_{1}^{'}

(effective detuning of the auxiliary cavity:

Δ_{2} = - ω_{m}

; optical cavity coupling intensity:

J = \sqrt[]{2 ω_{m} (ω_{m} - Δ_{1}^{'})}

; cavity decay rate:

k_{1} = 3 ω_{m}

k_{2} = 0.3 ω_{m}

)

Download full size

Fig. 7. Radiation pressure fluctuation spectra

S_{F F} (ω)

under different decay rates of auxiliary optical cavities

k_{2}

when cavity decay rate

k_{1} = 3 ω_{m}

and optical cavity coupling intensity

J = \sqrt[]{2 ω_{m} (ω_{m} - Δ_{1}^{'})}

. (a) Effective detuning of optical cavity

Δ_{1}^{'} = - 2 ω_{m}

and

Δ_{2} = - ω_{m}

; (b) effective detuning of optical cavity

Δ_{1}^{'} = 0

Δ_{2} = - ω_{m}

Download full size

Fig. 8. Cooling effect of scheme I under different decay rates of auxiliary optical cavities when effective detuning of optical cavity

Δ_{2} = ω_{m} - J^{2} / ω_{m}

. (a) Variation of cooling rate with optical cavity coupling intensity

J

; (b) variations of cooling limit

n_{c}

and the final mean phonon number of the mechanical resonator

n_{f}

with optical cavity coupling intensity

J

Download full size

Fig. 9. Comparison of cooling effects of scheme 1 [

S_{F F} (ω_{m})

maximum,

Δ_{1}^{'} = 0

Δ_{2} = ω_{m} - J^{2} / ω_{m}

k_{1} = 3 ω_{m}

k_{2} = 0.05 ω_{m}

] and scheme 2 [

S_{F F} (- ω_{m})

minimum,

Δ_{1}^{'} = 0

Δ_{2} = ω_{m} - J / ω_{m}

k_{1} = 3 ω_{m}

k_{2} = 0.05 ω_{m}

]. (a) Variation of cooling rate with optical cavity coupling intensity

J

; (b) variations of cooling limit

n_{c}

and the final mean phonon number of mechanical resonator

n_{f}

with optical cavity coupling intensity

J

Download full size

Fig. 10. Comparison of radiation pressure fluctuation spectra between original model (coupling strength

J = 0

) and optimized dual-cavity model (coupling strength

J = \sqrt[]{2} ω_{m}

). Effective detuning of optical cavity:

Δ_{1}^{'} = 0

Δ_{2} = - ω_{m}

; cavity decay rate:

k_{1} = 3 ω_{m}

k_{2} = 0.05 ω_{m}

Download Citation

Set citation alerts for the article

Tools

Set citation alerts for the article

Save the article for my favorites

Paper Information