Paper detail

Direct Bound-Electron $g$ factor Difference Measurement with Coupled Ions

The quantum electrodynamic (QED) description of light-and-matter interaction is one of the most fundamental theories of physics and has been shown to be in excellent agreement with experimental results. Specifically, measurements of the electronic magnetic moment (or $g$ factor) of highly charged ions (HCI) in Penning traps can provide a stringent probe for QED, testing the Standard model in the strongest electromagnetic fields. When studying the difference of isotopes, even the intricate effects stemming from the nucleus can be resolved and tested as, due to the identical electron configuration, many common QED contributions do not have to be considered. Experimentally however, this becomes quickly limited, particularly by the precision of the ion masses or the achievable magnetic field stability. Here we report on a novel measurement technique that overcomes both of these limitations by co-trapping two HCIs in a Penning trap and measuring the difference of their $g$ factors directly. The resulting correlation of magnetic field fluctuations leads to drastically higher precision. We use a dual Ramsey-type measurement scheme with the ions locked on a common magnetron orbit, separated by only a few hundred micrometres, to extract the coherent spin precession frequency difference. We have measured the isotopic shift of the bound electron $g$ factor of the neon isotopes of $^{20}$Ne$^{9+}$ and $^{22}$Ne$^{9+}$ to 0.56 parts-per-trillion ($5.6 \cdot 10^{-13}$) precision relative to their $g$ factors, which is an improvement of more than two orders of magnitude compared to state-of-the-art techniques. This resolves the QED contribution to the nuclear recoil for the very first time and accurately validates the corresponding theory. Furthermore, the agreement with theory allows setting constraints for a fifth-force, resulting from Higgs-portal-type dark-matter interactions.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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.

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 graph slice

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.