Skip to main content
Springer logoLink to Springer
. 2016 Dec 15;123(1):8. doi: 10.1007/s00340-016-6585-7

Measuring and imaging nanomechanical motion with laser light

Andreas Barg 1, Yeghishe Tsaturyan 1, Erik Belhage 1, William H P Nielsen 1, Christoffer B Møller 1, Albert Schliesser 1,
PMCID: PMC7045900  PMID: 32165791

Abstract

We discuss several techniques based on laser-driven interferometers and cavities to measure nanomechanical motion. With increasing complexity, they achieve sensitivities reaching from thermal displacement amplitudes, typically at the picometer scale, all the way to the quantum regime, in which radiation pressure induces motion correlated with the quantum fluctuations of the probing light. We show that an imaging modality is readily provided by scanning laser interferometry, reaching a sensitivity on the order of 10fm/Hz1/2, and a transverse resolution down to 2μm. We compare this approach with a less versatile, but faster (single-shot) dark-field imaging technique.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00340-016-6585-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Introduction

Lasers are indispensable tools in science and technology today. They heal eyes, power the Internet, and print objects in 3D. They have also revolutionized atomic physics: Techniques such as laser cooling and optical frequency metrology have enabled the creation of new states of matter, precision tests of fundamental physical laws, and the construction of clocks more accurate than ever before. The lasers’ key feature—high spatial and temporal coherence of the emitted light—is a unique asset, too, for the measurement of distance and motion. The laser interferometric gravitational wave observatory (LIGO) has provided the most recent, spectacular demonstration of this fact, with the direct detection of gravity waves [1].

While LIGO is concerned with the apparent displacement of kg-scale test masses, laser-based techniques are also an excellent choice to track the motion of micro- and nanoscale objects. Indeed, lasers have been used to measure a microcantilever’s motion induced by the magnetic force of a single electron spin [2], providing only one example of the force and mass sensing capabilities of laser-transduced mechanical devices. The interaction of laser light and nanomechanical motion, which lies at the heart of any such measurement scheme, has, itself, moved to the center of attention recently. Research in the field of cavity optomechanics [3] explores the fundamental mechanisms—governed by the laws of quantum mechanics, of course—and the limitations and opportunities for mechanical measurements that they imply. Without even making an attempt at a comprehensive review of the vast activity in this field, we illustrate recent progress through a selection of our own results below.

For this research, it is often crucial to understand not only the spectral properties of the mechanical resonators, such as their eigenmodes’ frequency and lifetime, but also the modes’ spatial displacement patterns, as it determines the effective mass meff, and therefore the optomechanical interaction strength. The pattern can also strongly affect the modes’ coherence properties. Both are particularly important for the development of new resonator systems. For example, the full knowledge of the mode shape has allowed us to design resonators with a “soft” phononic crystal clamping that enables unprecedented room-temperature quality factors Q>108 at MHz frequencies [4]. While finite-element simulations of mechanical modes become ever more powerful and accurate, they often miss fabrication imperfections and substrate effects that can lead to broken symmetries or mode hybridization, among others. For this reason, we have developed several laser-based imaging techniques of micro- and nanomechanical devices. In this article, we provide a description of these highly useful tools.

Laser interferometry and spectroscopy

A simple two-path interferometer (Fig. 1a) constitutes the most straightforward approach to measuring mechanical displacements. One arm’s path involves the reflection off the mechanical device’s surface, so that its motion modulates the path length difference between the two arms. If the interferometer is biased to the optimum point, it can detect displacement (double-sided) spectral densities Sxx down to a level of [5]

Sxx1/2=λ2π1ηdP/ħω. 1

It is limited by the quantum phase uncertainty of the coherent state that the laser emits, referred to as the measurement imprecision. Here, λ, ω, and P are the wavelength, angular frequency, and power of the employed laser light, respectively. ηd is the detection efficiency, which also absorbs penalties in the sensitivity due to optical losses, insufficient interference contrast, etc. Equation (1) implies that within a bandwidth BW, the smallest displacements that can be recovered with unity signal-to-noise ratio are given by δxmin/BW=Sxx.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Probing mechanical motion δx(t) by laser interferometry. a Simple two-path interferometer, involving reflection off the mechanical device (top). The thermal motion (blue trace) of a high-Q membrane is readily resolved above the measurement imprecision background (gray). b Cavity-enhanced measurement, here of a radial-breathing mode of an optical whispering-gallery-mode resonator (top). Thermal motion (red trace) is far above the imprecision background (gray), which is itself below the resonant standard quantum limit (SQL) for this mechanical mode (from [10]). c Cavity-based measurements of highly coherent mechanical resonators, here a high-Q silicon nitride membrane placed inside a Fabry–Perot resonator (top). Quantum backaction starts to dominate over the thermal motion of the device, inducing correlations that lead to squeezing of the output light (violet trace) below the vacuum noise (gray), among others (from [20]). d Comparison of the relative levels of measurement imprecision, backaction, and thermomechanical noise in the measurement regimes depicted in the examples (a)–(c)

Our instrument (detailed below ) employs a near-infrared laser and mW-scale probing powers and typically achieves a Sxx1/210fm/Hz displacement sensitivity, consistent with Eq. (1). This compares favorably with the picometer-scale thermal root-mean-square (RMS) displacement δxth=kBT/meffΩm2 of the mechanical resonators we employ [4, 6], with nanogram mass meff and MHz frequency Ωm/2π at room temperature T. In the Fourier domain, the spectral density of the thermal motion is spread over the mechanical linewidth Γm=Ωm/Q. Correspondingly, a nearly four-order-of-magnitude signal-to-noise ratio Sxxth(Ωm)/Sxx between the peak thermal displacement spectral density Sxxth(Ωm)=δxth2Γm/2 and the noise background Sxx can be reached already with quality factors in the millions. An example for such a measurement is shown in Fig. 1a.

This sensitivity is insufficient, however, for the detection of displacements at the level of the mechanical RMS zero-point fluctuations δxzpf=ħ/2meffΩm, which are at the femtometer level for the parameters discussed above. An optical cavity is needed to enhance the interaction between light and motion, recycling the light for a number of roundtrips that is commensurate with the finesse F of the cavity. The phase shift of the light emerging from the cavity is multiplied correspondingly, allowing more sensitive detection with the same amount of laser light. In the simplest case of resonant probing (ω=ωc, the cavity resonance frequency), the quantum imprecision noise is equivalent to displacement spectral densities of [7]

Sxx1/2(Ω)=λ16ηcF1ηdP/ħω1+Ωκ/22, 2

for a Fabry–Perot resonator with a moving end mirror (in the case of a whispering-gallery-mode resonator whose radius is measured, λλ/π). Note that the sensitivity now acquires a dependence on the Fourier frequency Ω, here a simple cutoff behavior for frequencies larger than the cavity half linewidth κ/2, as well as the degree of cavity overcoupling ηc.

Figure 1b shows an example of such a measurement, in this case performed on the radial-breathing mode of a silica whispering-gallery-mode resonator [7], with the help of a polarization spectroscopy technique [8]. It resolves not only thermal motion with a large signal-to-noise ratio (here, about 58dB), but also achieves an imprecision noise below that at the resonant standard quantum limit (SQL), SxxSQL(Ωm)=δxzpf2Γm/2. Note that this coincides with the peak spectral density of ground-state fluctuations [9], for this device with Ωm/2π=40.6MHz, Γm=1.3kHz and meff=10ng at the level of SxxSQL(Ωm)=(2.2am)2/Hz [10].

Cavity-enhanced laser interferometry has also been applied to nanomechanical resonators all the way down to the molecular scale. For example, it was shown that a fiber-based optical microcavity can resolve the thermal motion of carbon nanotubes [11]. Another successful sensing scheme consists in introducing nanomechanical resonators in the near field of optical whispering-gallery-mode resonators. It achieves imprecision well below that at the SQL of stressed silicon nitride nanostrings with picogram masses and Q106 [1214]. It is also expected that optical cavities suppress diffraction losses through preferential scattering into the cavity mode.

To track or steer coherent dynamics of mechanical resonators at the level of their vacuum fluctuations, yet higher sensitivities are required [14]. In particular, it is necessary to resolve the ground state—which entails averaging for a time 4Sxx/xzpf2—before it decoheres, e.g., by heating. The latter happens at a rate nthΓm, where nth=kBT/ħΩm1 is the mean occupation of the dominant thermal bath at temperature T. It follows from Eq. (2) that a resolution at the level of the zero-point-fluctuations is acquired at the measurement rate [9] Γopt=4g2/κ, where g=xzpf(ωc/x)a, and |a|2 the number of photons in the cavity (assuming ηcηd=1, Ωκ). The above-mentioned requirement can then be written as ΓoptnthΓm.

Interestingly, a completely new effect becomes relevant in this regime as well: the quantum fluctuations of radiation pressure linked to the quantum amplitude fluctuations of the laser light, representing the quantum backaction of this measurement [15]. And indeed the ratio of radiation pressure to thermal Langevin force fluctuations is given by SFFqba(Ωm)SFFth(Ωm)=ΓoptnthΓm. While these force fluctuations induce random mechanical motion that can mask a signal to be measured, it is important to realize that motion and light become correlated, at the quantum level, via this mechanism. As a consequence, the mere interaction of cavity light with a nanomechanical device can induce optical phase–amplitude quantum correlations, which squeeze the optical quantum fluctuations, in a particular quadrature, below the level of the vacuum noise. This effect is referred to as ponderomotive squeezing [1619].

An example of this phenomenon is shown in Fig. 1c [20]. A 1.928-MHz nanomechanical membrane resonator of dimensions (544μm)2×60nm is placed in a laser-driven high-finesse optical cavity and thereby measured at a rate of Γopt/2π=96kHz. Its decoherence rate is reduced to nΓm/2π20kHz, by cooling it in a simple cryostat to T=10K. A slight detuning of the laser field with respect to the optical resonator (Δ=ω-ωc=-2π×1.4MHz) leads to further cooling of the mechanical mode [2124], akin to Doppler cooling of atomic gases [25]—here to a mean occupation of neff5. It also allows direct observation of the squeezing in the amplitude fluctuations of the light emerging from the resonator: Its normalized spectral density assumes the form

SXXout(Ω)1-28ΔκΓoptReχeff(Ω)++8Δκ2Γoptχeff(Ω)2Γopt+nthΓm. 3

Note that the second term represents the correlations, which can assume negative values and thus lead to noise below the vacuum level SXXout=1 (χeff is the effective mechanical susceptibility [3]). Ponderomotive squeezing down to -2.4dB has been observed, the strongest value so far, and simultaneous squeezing in a multitude of mechanical modes [20]. Schemes that exploit such quantum correlations for sub-SQL measurements of displacement and forces are subject of ongoing research [2628].

The above examples show that laser-based measurements resolve the motion of nanomechanical oscillators all the way to the level of their vacuum fluctuations. In a simple classification (Fig. 1d), basic interferometers can readily resolve thermal motion, as required in many sensing and characterization experiments. Cavity-enhanced approaches achieve imprecision below the resonant SQL. To measure and control motion at the quantum level, displacements at the scale of the vacuum fluctuations must be resolved within the coherence time of the mechanical resonator. Then the imprecision (of an ideal setup) is more than nth times below the resonant SQL, and quantum backaction exceeds thermal force fluctuations and induces quantum correlations [3, 9].

While the above-described techniques can be considered variants of laser interferometry, there are a number of techniques to characterize mechanical devices that are laser spectroscopic in nature. A prominent example is optomechanically induced transparency (OMIT), first described in Refs. [29, 30]. It consists in the observation that a laser-driven cavity containing a dispersively coupled mechanical device will have a modified transmission spectrum for a second “probe” laser beam at the frequency ωp=ω+Ωm+Δ, where |Δ|κ is the two-photon detuning. The intracavity probe field,

apκ(-iΔ+κ/2)+g2-iΔ+Γm/2 4

in the simplest case -Δ=Ωmκ, encodes the coupling strength g. It is thus possible to derive g, for example, from probe transmission measurements [31, 32].

Laser-based imaging

As already indicated, it can be of great interest to also spatially resolve mechanical displacement patterns. With laser light, this can be accomplished in an extremely sensitive and virtually non-perturbing manner [3337]. In the following, we present two methods that we have implemented for characterizing nano- and micromechanical resonators with micrometer transverse resolution, sufficient for resolving the spatial patterns of MHz mechanical modes.

Scanning laser interferometry

The first setup, shown in Fig. 2, is a Michelson interferometer based on a Nd:YAG laser at λ=1064 nm. A polarizing beam splitter (PBS1) splits its output into two interferometer arms. In one arm, a single-mode fiber guides light to a probe head mounted on a motorized 3-axis translation stage. The probe head (Fig. 2a) consists of a microscope objective focusing the laser light to a spot of diameter 2μm on the sample and a CMOS camera capturing images of the sample in real time. To reduce viscous (gas) damping of the nanomechanical motion, the sample is placed inside a high vacuum chamber at a pressure of <10-5mbar. A piezoelectric shaker (PZT1) can excite mechanical eigenmodes (Fig. 2b).

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Setup for interferometric imaging of mechanical motion. a Probe head with microscope objective mounted on a motorized 3-axis translation stage to position a focused laser spot on the sample. The sample is imaged simultaneously onto a CMOS camera via a beam splitter (BS) and a lens. b Sample placed on top of a piezo (PZT1) inside a high vacuum chamber. c Main part of the Michelson interferometer. A balanced receiver (detectors D1 and D2) measures the relative phase between the light returned from the sample and the reference arm. Electronic feedback to a piezomounted mirror (PZT2) stabilizes this phase with a low (10kHz) bandwidth. d Signal from the balanced receiver as a function of time while scanning (blue) and actively stabilizing (purple) the relative phase

Light reflected off the sample is spatially overlapped with the local oscillator from the other interferometer arm in PBS1 (Fig. 2c). Projection on a common polarization basis subsequently enforces interference in a second polarizing beam splitter (PBS2), whose outputs are monitored with a high-bandwidth (0-75 MHz) InGaAs-balanced receiver. This configuration ensures shot-noise-limited detection of the reflected light when a typical 800μW beam is sent to the sample. In the correct polarization base, one obtains a receiver signal Vffcos(ϕ), where ϕ is the relative phase between the two beams and Vff is the full fringe voltage, which we check with an oscilloscope (Fig. 2d). For maximal transduction, ϕ is actively stabilized to the mid-fringe position by means of a mirror mounted on a piezoelectric transducer in the local oscillator arm (PZT2) and a proportional-integral (PI) feedback control.

In this case, small measured voltages δV(t)Vff convert to displacement via δx(t)±δV(t)λ/4πVff. Modulating PZT2 continuously with known frequency and amplitude generates a reference displacement and provides an independent calibration tone (CT) in the spectra.

As a first example, Fig. 3 shows a raster scan of a stoichiometric silicon nitride (SiN) membrane with side length l=1mm. We scan the membrane surface with the probe head using stepper motor actuation and record traces δx(t) at each of the 22×22 positions. The traces are spectrally filtered around the peaks of several mechanical modes via digital post-processing. In this manner, we extract RMS displacements of each mechanical eigenmode in each scan pixel. Figure 3 shows the corresponding displacement maps for the modes, which are thermally excited at room temperature (PZT1 off). The measured mode patterns compare well with the hybridized eigenmodes of a square membrane:

wn,msin(knu)sin(kmv)+βsin(kmu)sin(knv), 5

where kn=2πn/l, km=2πm/l, and n,m1 denote the number of antinodes along in-plane coordinates u and v, respectively, and |β|<1 quantifies the degree of hybridization between degenerate mode pairs. We find that the measured maximum RMS displacements, as calibrated by the CT, are in good agreement with the expected thermal motion (Fig. 3). Here, we have assumed a mass meff=ρl2h/434ng, given the thickness h=50 nm and density ρ=2.7 g/cm3 of the membrane. Note that the modes (n,m)=(1,2) and (2, 1) show hybridization with |β|0.2.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Nanomechanical modes of a stoichiometric SiN membrane measured with the raster-scan interferometer. ae Measurements of thermal motion on a 22×22 point grid. fj Calculated displacement for mode numbers (nm), accounting for hybridization between mode (1, 2) and (2, 1)

Scanning laser interferometry is particularly useful to characterize complex mode structures, such as SiN membranes patterned with phononic crystal structures [4] (Fig. 4). A scan measured on a grid of 100×100 points with a 5μm spacing resolves also the 9.3μm-wide tethers in between two holes, as Fig. 4b shows. At the expense of measurement time, the grid spacing could be further reduced; however, the spatial resolution of the obtained image is eventually limited to the 2μm diameter of the laser spot. Figure 4c shows another mode of the same device imaged over a larger area. At a distance of 500μm from the center, the mode’s amplitude has decayed to the measurement noise level, illustrating the localization of the mode to the defect.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Measurements of patterned SiN membrane with the raster-scan interferometer. a Micrograph of a SiN membrane patterned with a phononic crystal structure. b Localized nanomechanical mode imaged on 100×100 grid in the scan area indicated by a green square in (a). Holes are detected by disappearance of the calibration peak and shown as white pixels. c Snapshot of an animation provided as supplementary material. It shows the displacement pattern (left) corresponding to a particular frequency bin (green line) of the averaged spectrum (right) (from [4])

An advantage of measuring thermally excited modes is that information on all modes within the detector bandwidth is acquired simultaneously. This large set of data can be processed and represented in different ways. As an example, Fig. 4c shows an average spectrum of 400 measurement points on the defect. It clearly reveals a phononic bandgap between about 1.41 and 1.68MHz, containing five defect mode peaks, as well as the calibration peak at 1.52MHz. The left panel shows a displacement map corresponding to a specific frequency bin of this spectrum. We can also create an animation that composes the displacement maps for each of the frequency bins in the spectrum. It is provided as electronic supplementary material to this article (see supplementary material). It delivers an instructive illustration of the effect of the phononic crystal structure, contrasting the small number of localized modes inside the bandgap with a “forest” of distributed modes at frequencies outside the bandgap.

A disadvantage of the scanning laser interferometer is its long measurement time. For instance, a high-resolution scan, such as the one shown in Fig. 4b, takes more than 8 hours. This is because for each pixel of the image we probe thermal motion during several seconds, averaging over timescales longer than Γm-1. Some acceleration is possible by either artificially increasing Γm, e.g., by controlled gas damping, or by driving the modes coherently using PZT1. The latter can furthermore provide information about the mechanical phase at each position, if mechanical frequency drifts are properly accounted for.

Dark-field imaging

A powerful approach to single-shot characterization of mechanical modes is provided by dark-field imaging [35]. Figure 5a shows the setup which we have implemented to this end. It directly captures the squared displacement patterns of two-dimensional resonators such as membranes or cantilevers on a CCD camera. Its functional principle is described with simple Fourier optics [38]. A collimated laser beam with a wavelength λ=1064nm and beam diameter of 2.4mm impinges perpendicularly on the sample, here a SiN membrane with side length l=1mm. The reflected electric field Er at transverse position (uv) is subject to a phase shift proportional to the membrane displacement w(uvt). We assume that the incident electric field E0eiωt is constant across the membrane, since the incident beam diameter is 2.4 times larger than the membrane. Assuming furthermore w(u,v,t)λ, the reflected electric field reads Er(u,v,t)rE0eiωt1+ikw(u,v,t), where r is the absolute value of the reflection coefficient, k=2π/λ and ω=ck. A lens (focal length f1=75mm) performs an optical Fourier transform F with respect to the coordinates (uv), yielding

F(Er)=rE0eiωtF(1)+F(ikw(u,v,t)). 6

The zero-order peak (first term in Eq. (6)) is removed from the beam by an opaque disk in the Fourier plane. This extracts the diffracted light due to the membrane displacement w. A second, subsequent lens (focal length f2=50 mm) performs another Fourier transform on the filtered light. The time-averaged intensity pattern

I(u,v)=rE0eiωtF(F(ikw(u,v,t)))2=I0r2k2w(-u,-v,t)2, 7

is then recorded by a camera, where I0=|E0eiωt|2 is the incident intensity. It directly shows an intensity pattern proportional to the squared displacement of an eigenmode.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5

Setup for dark-field imaging of mechanical motion. a Optical configuration with small opaque disk in the Fourier plane A, creating a dark-field image of the sample in the image plane B. A lens (f3) projects a magnified image onto a CCD camera. A ray diagram illustrates how the image is formed (purple lines). b Image of the Fourier plane, where an opaque disk blanks out undiffracted zero-order light, when a membrane mode is excited. c Sample is mounted on a piezoelectric actuator (PZT1) in a high vacuum chamber

In our setup, a third lens with focal length f3=35mm is placed in front of the camera to magnify the image. It also allows imaging the Fourier plane by adjusting the distance between camera and lens to f3. Figure 5b shows a Fourier image of the membrane with diffraction patterns extending in two orthogonal directions due to the sharp edges of the membrane. Two bright spots close to the center originate from diffraction due to a driven eigenmode, a hybridization between the modes (1,2) and (2,1) at a frequency of 645 kHz. The opaque disk made of aluminum deposited on a thin piece of glass is seen as a white disk in the center. With a diameter d=100μm, it blocks diffraction angles αd/2f1 generated by mechanical modes with a distance between nodes of λ/2α800μm.

A piezoelectric actuator (PZT1) successively excites the eigenmodes of the SiN membrane inside a vacuum chamber, by slowly sweeping a strong drive tone across the frequency window of interest (here 0.42MHz). Figure 6 shows images of several modes recorded with an incident optical power of 100μW and a typical integration time of 10ms. Comparison with mode patterns calculated from Eq. (5) allows inferring the mode numbers (nm), and the degree of hybridization, as seen, for example, on the 1.683-MHz mode.

Fig. 6.

Fig. 6

Nanomechanical modes of a stoichiometric SiN membrane measured with dark-field imaging. ae Single-shot (acquisition time 10ms) measurements of mechanical modes at various frequencies while driving the membrane with PZT1. Pixels colored in dark red indicate high intensities and correspond to large values of squared mechanical displacement. fj Calculated squared mechanical mode patterns with mode numbers (nm). Modes (3, 5) and (5, 3) show nearly complete hybridization with |β|1

While it enables much shorter measurement times than the scanning laser interferometer, the dark-field imaging setup has a relatively low displacement sensitivity. For this reason, PZT1 has to be driven with a stroke of 300 pm, significantly increasing the membrane oscillation amplitude, up to a regime where mechanical nonlinearities (e.g., Duffing-type frequency shifts) can play a role. In principle, the sensitivity can be enhanced by increasing the laser intensity I0, yet in practice it is often limited by background noise due to scattered light from optical components increasing equally with I0. Another important limitation is that diffraction from the sample’s geometry cannot be discriminated from modal displacements. In this simple implementation, the approach is thus unsuitable for devices with fine structures in their geometry, such as the patterned membranes.

Conclusion

In summary, we have described several laser-based techniques to measure and image nanomechanical motion. As we show, exquisite displacement sensitivity can be reached, well into the regime in which quantum backaction and the ensuing light-motion quantum correlations dominate over thermomechanical noise. This sensitivity is rivaled only by techniques based on superconducting microwave electromechanical systems, which operate at ultra-low (T1K) cryogenic temperatures [39, 40]. Interest in this quantum domain has originally been motivated by observatories such as LIGO and can now, for the first time, be explored with optical and microwave experiments [3, 9, 15, 41, 42]. In addition, laser-based techniques can provide spatial imaging of mechanical displacement patterns. They constitute not only highly useful tools to develop and characterize novel micro- and nanomechanical devices [4, 6, 3537]. Similar techniques could also be used to address individual elements in multimode devices [20] or (opto-)mechanical arrays [4, 43]—if need be, also in combination with cavity-enhanced readout [33, 44].

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge our (former and present) colleagues Georg Anetsberger, Olivier Arcizet, Tobias Kippenberg, Jörg H. Müller, Eugene S. Polzik, Andreas Næsby Rasmussen, Remi Rivière, Anders Simonsen, Koji Usami, Stefan Weis, and Dalziel J. Wilson for their contributions to the work discussed here. Financial support came from the ERC starting grant Q-CEOM, a starting grant from the Danish Council for Independent Research, the EU FP7 grant iQUOEMS, and the Carlsberg Foundation.

Footnotes

This article is part of the topical collection “Enlightening the World with the Laser” - Honoring T. W. Hänsch guest edited by Tilman Esslinger, Nathalie Picqué, and Thomas Udem.

An erratum to this article is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00340-017-6722-y.

References

  • 1.Abbott BP, Abbott R, Abbott TD, Abernathy MR, Acernese F, Ackley K, Adams C, Adams T, Addesso P, Adhikari RX, et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2016;116:061102. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Rugar D, Budakian R, Mamin HJ, Chui BW. Nature. 2004;430:329. doi: 10.1038/nature02658. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Aspelmeyer M, Kippenberg TJ, Marquardt F. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2014;86:1391. doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.86.1391. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Y. Tsaturyan, A. Barg, E.S. Polzik, A. Schliesser, arXiv:1608.00937 (2016) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 5.Wagner JW, Spicer JB. J. Opt. Soc. Am. B. 1987;4:1316. doi: 10.1364/JOSAB.4.001316. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Tsaturyan Y, Barg A, Simonsen A, Villanueva LG, Schmid S, Schliesser A, Polzik ES. Opt. Express. 2013;6:6810. doi: 10.1364/OE.22.006810. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Schliesser A, Anetsberger G, Rivière R, Arcizet O, Kippenberg TJ. New J. Phys. 2008;10:095015. doi: 10.1088/1367-2630/10/9/095015. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Hänsch TW, Couillaud B. Opt. Commun. 1980;35:441. doi: 10.1016/0030-4018(80)90069-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Clerk AA, Devoret MH, Girvin SM, Marquardt F, Schoelkopf RJ. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2010;82:1155. doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.82.1155. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.A. Schliesser, T. J. Kippenberg, Cavity optomechanics with whispering-gallery mode optical micro-resonators. in Advances in Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, vol. 58, Chap. 5, ed. by P. Berman, E. Arimondo, C. Lin (Elsevier Academic Press, 2010), pp. 207–323
  • 11.Stapfner S, Ost L, Hunger D, Reichel J, Favero I, Weig EM. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2013;102:151910. doi: 10.1063/1.4802746. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Anetsberger G, Arcizet O, Unterreithmeier QP, Rivière R, Schliesser A, Weig EM, Kotthaus JP, Kippenberg TJ. Nat. Phys. 2009;5:909. doi: 10.1038/nphys1425. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Anetsberger G, Gavartin E, Arcizet O, Unterreithmeier QP, Weig EM, Gorodetsky ML, Kotthaus JP, Kippenberg TJ. Phys. Rev. A. 2010;82:061804. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.82.061804. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Wilson DJ, Sudhir V, Piro N, Schilling R, Ghadimi A, Kippenberg TJ. Nature. 2015;524:325. doi: 10.1038/nature14672. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Caves CM. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1980;45:75. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.45.75. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Fabre C, Pinard M, Bourzeix S, Heidmann A, Giacobino E, Reynaud S. Phys. Rev. A. 1994;49:1337. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.49.1337. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Mancini S, Tombesi P. Phys. Rev. A. 1994;49:4055. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.49.4055. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Purdy TP, Yu P-L, Peterson RW, Kampel NS, Regal CA. Phys. Rev. X. 2013;3:031012. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.063601. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Safavi-Naeini AH, Gröblacher S, Hill JT, Chan J, Aspelmeyer M, Painter O. Nature. 2013;500:185. doi: 10.1038/nature12307. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.W.H.P. Nielsen, Y. Tsaturyan, C.B. Møller, E.S. Polzik, A. Schliesser, arXiv:1605.06541 (2016)
  • 21.Arcizet O, Cohadon P-F, Briant T, Pinard M, Heidmann A. Nature. 2006;444:71. doi: 10.1038/nature05244. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Gigan S, Böhm HR, Paternosto M, Blaser F, Langer G, Hertzberg JB, Schwab KC, Bäuerle D, Aspelmeyer M, Zeilinger A. Nature. 2006;444:67. doi: 10.1038/nature05273. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Schliesser A, Del’Haye P, Nooshi N, Vahala K, Kippenberg T. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2006;97:243905. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.243905. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Thompson JD, Zwickl BM, Jayich AM, Marquardt F, Girvin SM, Harris JGE. Nature. 2008;452:72. doi: 10.1038/nature06715. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Hänsch TW, Schawlow AL. Opt. Commun. 1975;13:68. doi: 10.1016/0030-4018(75)90159-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Arcizet O, Briant T, Heidmann A, Pinard M. Phys. Rev. A. 2006;73:033819. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.73.033819. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Buchmann LF, Schreppler S, Kohler J, Spethmann N, Stamper-Kurn DM. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2016;117:030801. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.030801. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.N.S. Kampel, R.W. Peterson, R. Fischer, P.-L. Yu, K. Cicak, R.W. Simmonds, K.W. Lehnert, C.A. Regal, arXiv:1607.06831 (2016)
  • 29.A. Schliesser, Cavity optomechanics and optical frequency comb generation with silica whispering-gallery-mode microresonators, Ph.D. thesis, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, 2009
  • 30.Agarwal GS, Huang S. Phys. Rev. A. 2010;81:041803. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.81.041803. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Weis S, Rivière R, Deléglise S, Gavartin E, Arcizet O, Schliesser A, Kippenberg TJ. Science. 2010;330:1520. doi: 10.1126/science.1195596. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Safavi-Naeini AH, Mayer TP, Alegre I, Chan J, Eichenfield M, Winger M, Lin JQ, Hill JT, Chang DE, Painter O. Nature. 2011;472:69. doi: 10.1038/nature09933. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Briant T, Cohadon P-F, Heidmann A, Pinard M. Phys. Rev. A. 2003;68:033823. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.68.033823. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Arcizet O, Cohadon P-F, Briant T, Pinard M, Heidmann A, Mackowski J-M, Michel C, Pinard L, Francais O, Rousseau L. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2006;97:133601. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.133601. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Chakram S, Patil YS, Chang L, Vengalattore M. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2014;112:127201. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.127201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Wang Z, Lee J, Feng PXL. Nat. Commun. 2014;5:5158. doi: 10.1038/ncomms6158. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Davidovikj D, Slim JJ, Cartamil-Bueno SJ, van der Zant HSJ, Steeneken PG, Venstra WJ. Nano Lett. 2016;16:2768. doi: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.6b00477. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.See Supplementary Material
  • 39.Lauterborn W, Kurz T, Wiesenfeldt M. Coherent Optics. Berlin: Springer; 1995. [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Teufel JD, Donner R, Castellanos-Beltran MA, Harlow JW, Lehnert KW. Nat. Nanotech. 2009;4:820. doi: 10.1038/nnano.2009.343. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Teufel JD, Lecocq F, Simmonds RW. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2016;116:013602. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.013602. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Braginsky VB, Khalili FY. Quantum Measurement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1992. [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Tittonen I, Breitenbach G, Kalkbrenner T, Müller T, Conradt R, Schiller S, Steinsland E, Blanc N, de Rooij NF. Phys. Rev. A. 1999;59:1038–1044. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.59.1038. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Heinrich G, Ludwig M, Qian J, Kubala B, Marquardt F. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2011;107:043603. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.043603. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Mader M, Reichel J, Hänsch TW, Hunger D. Nat. Commun. 2015;6:7249. doi: 10.1038/ncomms8249. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials


Articles from Applied Physics. B, Lasers and Optics are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES