Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Stimulated emission or absorption of gravitons by light

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A Sagnac-type loop of light pulses inside a passing gravitational wave should convert the wave's stretching into a lasting frequency shift, exposing stimulated emission or absorption of gravitons.

desk verdict Interesting scheme with a clean coupling derivation, but the 'present-day technology' claim rests on an unvalidated million-reflection storage scheme and a factor-of-two slip in Eq. (5). read the letter →

arxiv 2502.10221 v1 pith:2IVRGERF submitted 2025-02-14 gr-qc quant-ph

Ralf Schützhold This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qcquant-ph
keywords gravitonsgravitationalwavesstimulatedemissionSagnacinterferometerphoton–gravitoncouplingnon-classicallightquantumgravitysignaturesopticalWeberbar
topics Quantum Gravity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that a passing gravitational wave can exchange a measurable amount of energy with laser light, provided the light is steered through a Sagnac-type loop that switches direction twice per gravitational-wave period. Because the wave stretches space differently along the two transverse axes, a photon travelling along one axis gains frequency and a photon along the other loses it; switching the propagation direction at the right instants turns these small oscillating shifts into a lasting change in the pulse's energy. The paper identifies an energy transfer of one quantum $\hbar\omega$ or more with stimulated emission or absorption of gravitons, and estimates that with an effective optical path of $10^6$ km the effect should be visible with present-day technology for waves of amplitude $h\sim 10^{-22}$. It then argues that non-classical photon states could push the phase sensitivity toward the Heisenberg limit and that interference-visibility measurements could test whether the gravitational field behaves as a coherent, thermal, or Fock state.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the linearized metric of a linearly polarized gravitational wave, $ds^2 = dt^2 - [1+h]dx^2 - [1-h]dy^2 - dz^2$, which rescales the $x$ and $y$ directions oppositely. Substituting this into the electromagnetic Lagrangian produces the interaction Hamiltonian $\hat{H}_{\rm int} = h \int d^3r [ (\partial_y \hat{A}_z)^2 - (\partial_x \hat{A}_z)^2 ]$, so the coupling is governed by the anisotropy of the magnetic field. Since the light frequency $\Omega$ is far above the gravitational-wave frequency $\omega$, the WKB (slowly varying envelope) approximation applies: wave numbers are conserved between reflections and each photon's frequency shifts by $\pm h\Omega/2$ depending on its propagation direction. The Sagnac-type geometry with $45^\circ$ mirrors switches the pulse between the two directions at instants when $\dot{h}=0$, converting reversible frequency oscillations into a permanent energy shift, and a long folded optical path then accumulates the resulting phase difference.

What would settle it

The most direct test is to run the two-arm Sagnac loop during a gravitational-wave event whose strain amplitude is independently measured; if the accumulated phase difference between the arms is not consistent with the predicted $\sim 10^{-7}$ rad per photon (and total $O(10^{23})$ enhancement) at the measured $h$, the energy-transfer calculation or its graviton interpretation fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central result is the energy-transfer law $$ \frac{d\langle \hat{H}\rangle}{dt} = \dot{h} \int $d^{3}$r\, \langle (\partial_y \hat{A}_z)^2 - (\partial_x \hat{A}_z)^2 \rangle, $$ which says the rate at which a gravitational wave and light exchange energy is controlled by the difference between the magnetic-field energy densities in the two transverse directions. On this basis the paper shows that each photon's frequency shifts by $\pm h\Omega/2$ per half-period of the wave, and that by alternating the pulse between the $x$ and $y$ directions exactly when $\dot{h}=0$ these shifts accumulate into a lasting frequency change of order $h\Omega$ per half-cycle. With a mJ pulse containing about $10^{16}$ photons and an effective path length of about $10^6$ km, the author finds a total enhancement factor of order $10^{23}$, enough for the accumulated phase shift to be seen for a wave of amplitude $h\sim 10^{-22}$. The paper's claim is that such an observation would mark the transition from passively detecting gravitational waves to actively manipulating them, and would constitute evidence for the emission or absorption of gravitons by light.

Load-bearing premise

The observability claim rests on storing the light for about a million reflections (an effective path of a million kilometres) with negligible loss, whereas current mirror technology supports orders of magnitude fewer reflections before the signal falls below the shot-noise floor.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A passing gravitational wave of amplitude $h\sim 10^{-22}$ should imprint a lasting frequency shift of order $h\Omega$ on every photon in a properly timed Sagnac loop, making the energy transfer a genuine alternative to resonant-bar detection.
  • Because phase accumulation can continue after the gravitational wave has passed, the scheme's interaction time and measurement time are decoupled, a feature that becomes more pronounced at higher gravitational-wave frequencies.
  • Using NOON states would change the phase sensitivity from the Poisson limit, $\Delta\phi \propto 1/\sqrt{N}$, to the Heisenberg limit, $\Delta\phi \propto 1/N$, reducing the required photon number accordingly.
  • If the predicted energy transfer is absent while the same wave is seen by established detectors, that would contradict the assumption that gravitational-wave energy comes in quanta $\hbar\omega$, a directly checkable consequence of the paper's claim.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • An extension the author leaves implicit is that the same direction-switching mechanism could be tuned to much higher gravitational-wave frequencies, where the phase-accumulation advantage over standard arm-length-limited interferometry grows even larger.
  • The bound $|\dot{E}| \le |\dot{h}| E$ suggests a general efficiency ceiling for photon\u2013graviton energy conversion in this geometry; it would be worth checking numerically in full nonlinear general relativity, since the paper's estimate uses the linearized and long-wavelength approximations.
  • The proposed measurement of phase fluctuations as a probe of $\langle \hat{h}(t)\hat{h}(t')\rangle$ could give a laboratory-scale window into the two-point function of a gravitational-wave field, complementing the single-strain-amplitude information that current detectors provide.
  • If the timing requirement of hitting the $45^\circ$ mirrors exactly at $\dot{h}=0$ is relaxed, a continuous-wave version of the loop could act as a gravitational-wave detector whose sensitive band is set by the loop-switching time rather than by arm length, a design worth exploring.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper considers a linearly polarized gravitational wave (GW) propagating along z and an electromagnetic field polarized along z, described by the Lagrangian L = 1/2[(∂_t A)^2 − (1−h)(∂_x A)^2 − (1+h)(∂_y A)^2]. It derives an interaction Hamiltonian and an energy-transfer rate d⟨H⟩/dt (Eq. (5)), then analyzes wave packets in the WKB approximation, claiming that each photon acquires a frequency shift ±hΩ/2 per reflecting leg. It proposes a Sagnac-type geometry in which pulses switch between x and y propagation in phase with ḣ so that the energy shifts accumulate, and it estimates that with ~10^6 reflections (effective path ~10^6 km) the resulting phase shift is measurable with present-day technology. It also discusses non-classical photon states (NOON states) and possible tests of quantum properties of the gravitational field.

Significance. The paper is commendably self-contained: the core energy-transfer calculation is a first-principles consequence of linearized gravity and Maxwell theory, with no fitted parameters, and the proposal is falsifiable. If the factor-of-two issue and the feasibility assumptions are corrected, the scheme would be a conceptually interesting and potentially complementary GW detector, and the discussion of state-dependent overlap and entanglement with the graviton field suggests a concrete observable distinction between coherent, Fock, and thermal graviton states. However, the current numerical estimates are not reliable, and the central "present-day technology" claim is not supported as written.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III, Eqs. (4)–(5)] Differentiating the canonical Hamiltonian associated with Lagrangian (3), H = 1/2(∂_t A)^2 + 1/2(1−h)(∂_x A)^2 + 1/2(1+h)(∂_y A)^2, gives dH/dt = (ḣ/2) ∫ d^3r [(∂_y A)^2 − (∂_x A)^2]. Both Eq. (4) for the interaction Hamiltonian and Eq. (5) for the energy-transfer rate are missing the factor 1/2. This is not a convention choice: Section IV’s statement ΔΩ = ±hΩ/2 is consistent with the corrected formula and inconsistent with Eq. (5) as printed. All numerical estimates in Section V inherit the resulting factor of 2.
  2. [Section V] The claim "with present day technology" rests entirely on the assumption of an effective optical path length O(10^6 km) obtained by "assuming O(10^6) reflections." The paper provides no loss budget, no cavity finesse estimate, and no noise analysis for this storage. With per-reflection power loss L, the surviving power after M reflections is (1−L)^M; for L = 10 ppm and M = 10^6 the signal is suppressed by e^{−10} ≈ 4.5×10^−5, while state-of-the-art Fabry–Perot cavities achieve finesse ~10^5 with per-mirror losses of a few ppm. The required combination of finesse ~10^6 and per-reflection loss ≤1 ppm is not demonstrated. Consequently the central observability claim is not supported.
  3. [Section V] The "total enhancement factor of O(10^23)" is never defined. A reader cannot reproduce this number from the stated inputs: the length-to-wavelength ratio O(10^9), the reflection number O(10^6), and the photon-number factor N^{1/2} = O(10^8) would give O(10^23) only if multiplied together, but no equation connects these factors to Δφ or to the shot-noise limit. Since this number is used to support the feasibility conclusion, the derivation of the phase sensitivity should be written out explicitly.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section IV] The term "half-period" is used ambiguously: a quarter-cycle leg between a zero crossing and an extremum is called a half-period in some places, while in others half-period means half an oscillation. Please define the interval over which ΔΩ = ±hΩ/2 is accumulated.
  2. [Section V] The sentence "Form another perspective" contains a typo; it should read "From another perspective."
  3. [Section V] The statement "a lasting frequency shift of ±ΔΩ = O(hΩ) which gives O(10^−7 Hz)" should specify whether h is the peak amplitude or the instantaneous amplitude and whether the shift is per leg or per full cycle; the factor-of-two issue in Eq. (5) makes this distinction material.
  4. [Figure 1] The figure caption says "half silvered mirror" and "45◦ mirrors"; please use consistent terminology and indicate the retro-reflection folding of the arms, which is essential to the storage estimate.
  5. [Section VII] The quantum-state-discrimination discussion is clearly labeled as speculative, but the claim that coherence between |E_grav−ΔE⟩ and |E_grav+ΔE⟩ can be measured via visibility would benefit from a quantitative treatment of decoherence from the gravitational-wave background and from the overlap of multimode coherent states.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the energy-transfer formula is derived from the linearized Einstein–Maxwell action without fitted parameters; the O(10^6)-reflection feasibility estimate is an explicit practical assumption, and the self-citation [16] is contextual rather than load-bearing.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained. Starting from the linearized metric (2) and the Maxwell Lagrangian (3), the paper constructs the interaction Hamiltonian (4) and obtains the energy-transfer rate (5) via the Heisenberg equation; no parameter is fitted to the quantity being predicted. The wave-packet analysis in Sec. IV follows from the same Lagrangian through the dispersion relation (7) and WKB reasoning, and the resulting phase estimate is an independent consistency check on Eq. (5). The claim of observability with present-day technology in Sec. V rests on an explicit assumption of O(10^6) reflections, which is a feasibility assumption rather than a hidden input to the derivation; an unvalidated practical parameter is a correctness/feasibility concern, not circularity. The only self-citation, Ref. [16], is invoked in passing ('cf. [16]' and the footnote about mechanical means) and is not load-bearing: the coupling is rederived here from standard first principles. The skeptic's factor-of-1/2 objection to Eq. (5), if correct, would be a quantitative error rather than a circularity. Accordingly, no circular step can be exhibited with the required quote-and-reduction standard.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper uses only standard ingredients: weak-field GR, Maxwell theory, QED, and WKB. No new free parameters are fitted, and no new entities are postulated. The central assumption is the quantized nature of gravitational waves, which is the target of the proposed experiments rather than an input to the derivation.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Linearized general relativity with metric ds² = dt² - [1+h]dx² - [1-h]dy² - dz² and h << 1, so that higher-order terms in h are neglected.
    The entire calculation uses first-order perturbation theory in the strain h, which is standard for LIGO-scale gravitational waves (h ~ 10^-22).
  • domain assumption The gravitational wave energy is quantized in units of ℏω (i.e., gravitons), at least in the weak-field regime.
    Stated in the introduction as 'quite natural but not verified experimentally yet'. This assumption underlies the interpretation of the energy transfer as graviton emission or absorption.
  • standard math The WKB approximation is valid for the electromagnetic field because the optical frequency Ω is much larger than the gravitational wave frequency ω.
    Used in Section IV to derive the frequency shift from the dispersion relation (7); justified by Ω = O(10^15 Hz) vs ω = O(kHz).
  • domain assumption The electromagnetic field is quantized as in standard QED, with normal ordering for renormalized expectation values.
    Used in Section III to define the interaction Hamiltonian and to subtract vacuum contributions in Eq. (5).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Stimulated emission or absorption of gravitons by light." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2IVRGERF

@misc{pith2026250210221,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Stimulated emission or absorption of gravitons by light},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2IVRGERF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.10221}
}
read the original abstract

We study the exchange of energy between gravitational and electromagnetic waves in a Sagnac type geometry, in analogy to an ``optical Weber bar.'' In the presence of a gravitational wave (such as the ones measured by LIGO), we find that it should be possible to observe signatures of stimulated emission or absorption of gravitons with present day technology. Apart from marking the transition from passively observing to actively manipulating such a natural phenomenon, this could also be used as a complementary detection scheme. Non-classical photon states may improve the sensitivity and might even allow us to test certain quantum aspects of the gravitational field.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.10221 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Sketch (not to scale) of a possible geometry. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Suppressed Quantum Effects of Weakly Coupled Waves

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Nonclassical (quantum) signatures of weakly coupled waves are suppressed by an extra power of the tiny conversion efficiency η (~10^-21 for axions, ~10^-33 for gravitons), so experiments cannot establish the quantizat...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    In this case, we have ˙E < 0 and thus the emission of gravitons (in view of energy conservation)

    As long as ˙h > 0, we have a light pulse propagating in x-direction, and then – after reflection by a mirror – it propagates in y-direction as long as ˙h < 0, and so on. In this case, we have ˙E < 0 and thus the emission of gravitons (in view of energy conservation). The opposite case ( x-direction for ˙h < 0 and y-direction for ˙h > 0) yields ˙E > 0 and t...

    work page

  2. [2]

    optical Weber bar

    After interacting with the gravitational wave, the photons acquire oppo- site phases ( e+iN ∆ ϕ |N ⟩ |0⟩ + e−iN ∆ ϕ |0⟩ |N ⟩)/ √ 2 such that now the achievable phase sensitivity scales with the Heisenberg limit ∆ ϕ = O(1/N ) instead of the Poisson limit ∆ ϕ = O(1/ √ N ). As a result, the required num- ber N of photons would be much smaller, but actually g...

    work page

  3. [3]

    reads ( ∂ 2 t − [1 − h]∂ 2 x − [1 + h]∂ 2 y ) Az = 0 . (6) Since the frequency Ω = O(1015 Hz) of the electromag- netic waves corresponding to visible or near infra-red photons with energies in the eV regime is much larger than frequency ω of the gravitational wave (e.g., in the 3 kHz or the Hz range), we may use the WKB approxi- mation. In the coordinates...

    work page

  4. [4]

    J. H. Taylor and J. M. Weisberg, A new test of general relativity: Gravitational radiation and the binary pulsar PS R 1913+16 , Astrophys. J. 253, 908-920 (1982)

    work page 1982

  5. [5]

    Thus we find a rigorous bound | ˙E| ≤ | ˙h|E for the energy trans- fer ˙E = d⟨ ˆH⟩/dt in terms of the total energy E of the laser pulse [20]

    is the difference between the total energies of the light pulse in the mag- netic field components in x and y direction. Thus we find a rigorous bound | ˙E| ≤ | ˙h|E for the energy trans- fer ˙E = d⟨ ˆH⟩/dt in terms of the total energy E of the laser pulse [20]. In practise, however, it is very hard to saturate this bound since the light energy oscillates ra...

    work page

  6. [6]

    Thus, the amplitude of Az changes with 1 / √ Ω

    simplifies to the ordinary differential equation ¨Az + Ω 2(t)Az = 0 with the conserved Wronskian W = A∗ z ˙Az − ˙A∗ zAz which yields W ≈ − 2iΩ |A2 z| in the WKB approximation. Thus, the amplitude of Az changes with 1 / √ Ω. Since the total en- ergy E of the pulse scales with (Ω Az)2 and the volume in terms of the coordinates ( 2) does not change during free...

    work page

  7. [7]

    Ideally, this should hap- pen when ˙h = 0 such that the sign changes of h(t) and the integrand in Eq

    Then, after a propagation time of order ms, the light pulses hit the 45 ◦ mirrors which change their direction from Kin = Kxex to K out = Kyey or vice versa. Ideally, this should hap- pen when ˙h = 0 such that the sign changes of h(t) and the integrand in Eq. ( 5) cancel each other. Depending on how monochromatic the gravitational wave is, one could repea...

    work page

  8. [8]

    So far, the set-up is similar to (half of) a Sagnac inter- ferometer, but as an important difference, one does not let the two light pulses interfere at this stage

    In this way, these two pulses would acquire opposite energy transfers. So far, the set-up is similar to (half of) a Sagnac inter- ferometer, but as an important difference, one does not let the two light pulses interfere at this stage. Instead, they are both sent through another optical path length (which can be basically the same for both pulses) during w...

    work page

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    However, a non-classical state can be advantageous for the accuracy of the phase measurement

    is bounded by the total en- ergy of the light pulse (independent of its quantum state), a squeezed state would not be an advantage here – except that it could have an energy variance which is different from a coherent state. However, a non-classical state can be advantageous fo...

  2. [10]

    Einstein, N¨ aherungsweise Integration der Feldgle- ichungen der Gravitation , Sitzungsberichte der K¨ oniglich Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Berlin), 688 (1916)

    A. Einstein, N¨ aherungsweise Integration der Feldgle- ichungen der Gravitation , Sitzungsberichte der K¨ oniglich Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Berlin), 688 (1916)

    1916

  3. [11]

    Einstein, ¨Uber Gravitationswellen , Sitzungsberichte der K¨ oniglich Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Berlin), 154 (1918)

    A. Einstein, ¨Uber Gravitationswellen , Sitzungsberichte der K¨ oniglich Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Berlin), 154 (1918)

    1918

  4. [12]

    R. A. Hulse and J. H. Taylor, Discovery of a pulsar in a binary system , Astrophys. J. Lett. 195, L51-L53 (1975)

    1975

  5. [13]

    B. P. Abbott et al (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger , Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 061102 (2016)

    2016

  6. [14]

    https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/

  7. [15]

    R. M. Wald, General Relativity, Chicago Univ. Pr. (1984)

    1984

  8. [16]

    In view of the ω 6 scaling of the emitted power ( 1), go- ing to much higher frequencies could help, but imag- ining masses m = O(kg) oscillating with amplitudes L = O(m) at frequencies in the kHz regime – and de- tecting small energy shifts of ℏω – shows that such an experime...

  9. [17]

    Charged particles such as protons or electrons can also be accelerated to nearly the speed of light, but in this case the electromagnetic radiation would dominate any gravitational effects by far

  10. [18]

    For other (hypothetical) coupling terms between photons and gravitons, the situation might be different

    Note that this applies to the standard coupling hµν Tµν to the energy-momentum tensor Tµν in linearized gen- eral relativity. For other (hypothetical) coupling terms between photons and gravitons, the situation might be different. However, even in those cases, symmetries such a...

  11. [19]

    Spengler, D

    F. Spengler, D. R¨ atzel and D. Braun, Perspectives of measuring gravitational effects of laser light and particle beams, New J. Phys. 24, 053021 (2022)

    2022

  12. [20]

    https://lasers.llnl.gov/

  13. [21]

    Boughn and T

    S. Boughn and T. Rothman, Aspects of graviton detec- tion: Graviton emission and absorption by atomic hydro- gen, Class. Quant. Grav. 23, 5839-5852 (2006)

    2006

  14. [22]

    Rothman and S

    T. Rothman and S. Boughn, Can gravitons be detected? , Found. Phys. 36, 1801-1825 (2006)

    2006

  15. [23]

    Giovannini, Stimulated emission of relic gravitons and their super-Poissonian statistics , Mod

    M. Giovannini, Stimulated emission of relic gravitons and their super-Poissonian statistics , Mod. Phys. Lett. A 34, no.23, 1950185 (2019)

    2019

  16. [24]

    Gr¨ afe, F

    J. Gr¨ afe, F. Adamietz and R. Sch¨ utzhold,Energy transfer between gravitational waves and quantum matter , Phys. Rev. D 108, 064056 (2023)

    2023

  17. [25]

    Weber, Gravitational Radiation, Phys

    J. Weber, Gravitational Radiation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 18, 498 (1967)

    1967

  18. [26]

    Weber, Gravitational-Wave-Detector Events , Phys

    J. Weber, Gravitational-Wave-Detector Events , Phys. Rev. Lett. 20, 1307 (1968)

    1968

  19. [27]

    Weber, Evidence for Discovery of Gravitational Radi- ation, Phys

    J. Weber, Evidence for Discovery of Gravitational Radi- ation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 22, 1320 (1969)

    1969

  20. [28]

    Even though the renormalized expectation values ⟨(∂x ˆAz)2⟩ren or ⟨(∂y ˆAz)2⟩ren could also become negative in some regions of space-time, the total volume integral of them must be non-negative

  21. [29]

    These mirrors, however, do not change the propagation direction from Kin = Kxex to K out = Kyey but from Kin = Kxex to K out = −Kxex or from K in = Kyey to Kout = −Kyey and thus they do not change the sign of ˙E in Eq. ( 5)

  22. [30]

    Lieu, Exclusion of standard ℏω gravitons by LIGO ob- servation, Class

    R. Lieu, Exclusion of standard ℏω gravitons by LIGO ob- servation, Class. Quant. Grav. 35, no.19, 19LT02 (2018)

    2018

  23. [31]

    V. B. Braginskii and Y. I. Vorontsov, Quantum- mechanical limitations in macroscopic experiments and modern experimental techniques, Usp. Fiz. Nauk 114, 41- 53 (1974)

    1974

  24. [32]

    W. G. Unruh, Analysis of Quantum Nondemolition Mea- surement, Phys. Rev. D 18, 1764-1772 (1978)

    1978

  25. [33]

    W. G. Unruh, Quantum nondemolition and gravity-wave detection, Phys. Rev. D 19, 2888-2896 (1979)

    1979

  26. [34]

    Aasi et al

    J. Aasi et al. [LIGO Scientific], Enhancing the sensitivity of the LIGO gravitational wave detector by using squeezed states of light , Nature Photon. 7, 613-619 (2013)

    2013

  27. [35]

    J. P. Dowling, Quantum optical metrology – the lowdown on high-N00N states , Contemp. Phys. 49, no.2, 125-143 (2008)

    2008

  28. [36]

    Baym and T

    G. Baym and T. Ozawa, Two-slit diffraction with highly charged particles: Niels Bohr’s consistency argument that the electromagnetic field must be quantized , Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 106, 3035-3040 (2009)

    2009

  29. [37]

    Romero-Isart, Quantum superposition of massive ob- jects and collapse models , Phys

    O. Romero-Isart, Quantum superposition of massive ob- jects and collapse models , Phys. Rev. A 84, no.5, 052121 (2011)

    2011

  30. [38]

    A. Mari, G. De Palma and V. Giovannetti, Experiments testing macroscopic quantum superpositions must be slow , Sci. Rep. 6, 22777 (2016)

    2016

  31. [39]

    Belenchia, R

    A. Belenchia, R. M. Wald, F. Giacomini, E. Castro-Ruiz, ˇC. Brukner and M. Aspelmeyer, Quantum Superposi- tion of Massive Objects and the Quantization of Gravity , Phys. Rev. D 98, no.12, 126009 (2018)

    2018

  32. [40]

    Altamirano, P

    N. Altamirano, P. Corona-Ugalde, R. B. Mann and M. Zych, Gravity is not a Pairwise Local Classical Chan- nel, Class. Quant. Grav. 35, no.14, 145005 (2018)

    2018

  33. [41]

    Marletto and V

    C. Marletto and V. Vedral, Gravitationally-induced en- tanglement between two massive particles is sufficient ev- idence of quantum effects in gravity , Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, no.24, 240402 (2017)

    2017

  34. [42]

    M. Zych, F. Costa, I. Pikovski, T. C. Ralph and C. Brukner, General relativistic effects in quantum in- terference of photons , Class. Quant. Grav. 29, 224010 (2012)

    2012

  35. [43]

    Pikovski, M

    I. Pikovski, M. Zych, F. Costa and C. Brukner, Univer- sal decoherence due to gravitational time dilation , Nature Phys. 11, 668-672 (2015)

    2015

  36. [44]

    M. P. Blencowe, Effective Field Theory Approach to Gravitationally Induced Decoherence , Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, no.2, 021302 (2013)

    2013

  37. [45]

    Anastopoulos and B

    C. Anastopoulos and B. L. Hu, A Master Equation for Gravitational Decoherence: Probing the Textures of Spacetime, Class. Quant. Grav. 30, 165007 (2013)

    2013

  38. [46]

    Bassi, A

    A. Bassi, A. Großardt and H. Ulbricht, Gravitational De- coherence, Class. Quant. Grav. 34, no.19, 193002 (2017)

    2017

  39. [47]

    G. C. Ghirardi, A. Rimini and T. Weber, A Unified Dy- namics for Micro and MACRO Systems , Phys. Rev. D 34, 470 (1986)

    1986

  40. [48]

    Di´ osi,Models for universal reduction of macroscopic quantum fluctuations , Phys

    L. Di´ osi,Models for universal reduction of macroscopic quantum fluctuations , Phys. Rev. A 40, no.3, 1165 (1989)

    1989

  41. [49]

    Penrose, On gravity’s role in quantum state reduction , Gen

    R. Penrose, On gravity’s role in quantum state reduction , Gen. Rel. Grav. 28, 581-600 (1996)

    1996

  42. [50]

    Kafri, J

    D. Kafri, J. M. Taylor and G. J. Milburn, A classi- cal channel model for gravitational decoherence , New J. Phys. 16, 065020 (2014)

    2014

  43. [51]

    Carney, P

    D. Carney, P. C. E. Stamp and J. M. Taylor, Tabletop experiments for quantum gravity: a user’s manual , Class. Quant. Grav. 36, no.3, 034001 (2019)

    2019

  44. [52]

    Furthermore, for each specific model, one should first study whether it does or does not contradict known experimental results and observations

    For theories modifying the standard rules of quantum mechanics in gravity, the resulting experimental impli- cations depend on the specific model under considera- tion. Furthermore, for each specific model, one should first study whether it does or does not contradict known exper...

  45. [53]

    How- ever, somewhat similar to the comment [8], the required parameters make such an experiment quite challenging

    In principle, the stimulated emission or absorption of gravitons could also be achieved via mechanical means, e.g., by a rotating and vibrating barbell, see [16]. How- ever, somewhat similar to the comment [8], the required parameters make such an experiment quite challenging

  46. [54]

    D. N. Page and C. D. Geilker, Indirect Evidence for Quantum Gravity , Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 979-982 (1981)

    1981

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.