Paper detail

A Michelson-Morley Test of Lorentz Symmetry for Electrons

All evidence so far suggests that the absolute spatial orientation of an experiment never affects its outcome. This is reflected in the Standard Model of physics by requiring all particles and fields to be invariant under Lorentz transformations. The most well-known test of this important cornerstone of physics are Michelson-Morley-type experiments\cite{MM, Herrmann2009,Eisele2009} verifying the isotropy of the speed of light. Lorentz symmetry also implies that the kinetic energy of an electron should be independent of the direction of its velocity, \textit{i.e.,} its dispersion relation should be isotropic in space. In this work, we search for violation of Lorentz symmetry for electrons by performing an electronic analogue of a Michelson-Morley experiment. We split an electron-wavepacket bound inside a calcium ion into two parts with different orientations and recombine them after a time evolution of 95ms. As the Earth rotates, the absolute spatial orientation of the wavepackets changes and anisotropies in the electron dispersion would modify the phase of the interference signal. To remove noise, we prepare a pair of ions in a decoherence-free subspace, thereby rejecting magnetic field fluctuations common to both ions\cite{Roos2006}. After a 23 hour measurement, we limit the energy variations to $h\times 11$ mHz ($h$ is Planck's constant), verifying that Lorentz symmetry is preserved at the level of $1\times10^{-18}$. We improve on the Lorentz-violation limits for the electron by two orders of magnitude\cite{Hohensee2013c}. We can also interpret our result as testing the rotational invariance of the Coloumb potential, improving limits on rotational anisotropies in the speed of light by a factor of five\cite{Herrmann2009,Eisele2009}. Our experiment demonstrates the potential of quantum information techniques in the search for physics beyond the Standard Model.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.