Sensitive Rb "atom" gyroscope

[Fred56]

A new, highly sensitive gyroscope which uses Rb atoms as a matter-wave may be able to measure frame-dragging more accurately:

 

PHYSICS: Atom Gyroscopes

Ian S. Osborne

 

We terrestrials tend to get our bearings from compass readings, tracking the stars, or more recently in a digital format from global positioning systems. For the likes of satellites, orbiting telescopes, and probes navigating through deep space, the systems of choice to point the way are based on gyroscopes aligned with a distant reference star. To study predictions of general relativity such as frame dragging, the effects of which would be seen as tugs on the rotation axis of the gyros, high sensitivity of the gyroscopes to rotation is a prerequisite. In this context, atom interferometers can surpass mechanical gyroscopes or optical interferometers by orders of magnitude. Wu et al. report on the development of a cold-atom interferometer in which a matter wave of Rb atoms is split in two, with both halves sent around opposite paths repeatedly and brought together again to produce an interference pattern. The phase shift is sensitive to the rotation of the interferometer. -- ISO

 

Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 173201 (2007).

[swansont]

What is your cite? Osborne is not the author of the paper.

 

Article 173201 is

"Demonstration of an Area-Enclosing Guided-Atom Interferometer for Rotation Sensing," Saijun Wu, Edward Su, and Mara Prentiss

 

The new part of this is how they increase the area of the interferometer to make it more sensitive; atom interferometry has been around >15 years.

[Fred56]

Is there a problem with just including the ref at the bottom?

[swansont]

Is there a problem with just including the ref at the bottom?

 

The PRL article search function wasn't finding it for some reason, and I tried searching by author, which obviously didn't work when I used Osborne, since it turns out I completely missed the "Wu, et. al" in the text. I eventually had to go in and do a manual search. Just pointing this out in case anyone else does it. It looked to me like you were referencing the PRL breakdown of articles and quoting the abstract, and that was a bad assumption on my part.

[Fred56]

OK, this is from an "Editor's choice" email, looks like I will need to do more than just cut&paste. I'll avoid including the editor's name, and post a link to the article (I have a few subscriptions to exploit).

Sorry about that folks...