Quantum Noise Limit in Gravitational Wave Detector - Nergis Mavalvala

Source - serious-science...
MIT Prof. Nergis Mavalvala on Poisson distributed noise sources, squeezed states of light, and optical cavities

[@charlesbromberick4247]

A truly wonderful presentation which for me has shed some light on something I have wondered about in my ex-classmates (Bernie Schutz) LIGO experiment. Tks.

[@MOHNAKHAN]

I respect and love this lady that being a Pakistani she did a lot in Science Field...

[@Etheoma]

I watched an the Linus Tech Tips video on this and had no idea what they were going on about. This makes it clear enough to understand what is going on. They're not a science channel so it is to be expected that they would be poor at explaining anything science related. Although I am not sure what you mean by a non-linear interactions. I assume in this case it would just means that it is an interaction which effects the phase and amplitude "conversely" for a lack of a better term, as that is the only thing that makes sense.

[@robinswamidasan]

A most interesting video. But, I don't think I understand how it will actually be put to work at LIGO or in other optical interferometers. In the base case, squeezing light reduces the uncertainty in Amplitude and increases the uncertainty in Phase, to keep the product above h_bar (or h_cross, as we called it). But, the Michelson (+ Fabry-Perot) interferometer, as at LIGO, works on the basis of a difference in phase between the 2 paths of light. So, doesn't increasing the uncertainty in Phase reduce the resolution/accuracy/precision of the Interferometer? By how much, relative to the increase in SNR?

[@bussi7859]

1/f Noise Limit. You are not adjusting the output to compensate for the instrument frequency response curv

[@bussi7859]

Your shade around your eyes indicate that you should get some fresh air in a nice environment

[@bussi7859]

Blablablablablablabla