All that is gold does not glitter

A. Safavi-Naini, P. Rabl, P. Weck, H. Sadeghpour
{"title":"All that is gold does not glitter","authors":"A. Safavi-Naini, P. Rabl, P. Weck, H. Sadeghpour","doi":"10.4324/9781315776293-10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Considering how it affects science and technology, surprisingly little is known about the electric field noise generated near the surface of metals. Now, in a theoretical paper appearing in Physical Review A, Arghavan SafaviNaini at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge and colleagues have uncovered a source of noise from the surfaces of metals that has been a major headache for ion trapping experiments. They argue that electrical dipoles, formed by impurity atoms adsorbed on the metal electrodes of an ion trap, cause noise of just the right strength and characteristics to explain the noise that has been observed in ion trap experiments [1]. Their work provides a guideline for attacking electric field noise and could impact many fields, including surface and materials science, modern electronics, quantum information technology, and precision tests of fundamental physics. Scientists in all of these disciplines strive to have an electrically quiet environment for their measurements. Is there, however, a fundamental lower limit for electric noise generated by an ordinary conductor, such as a piece of gold? Although electric field (or voltage) noise from the thermal motion of the freely moving electrons inside a conductor is well understood, this so-called JohnsonNyquist noise is typically not the sole source. In practice, nonequilibrium noise mechanisms, such as flicker and shot noise, often dominate device performance. Controlling noise is particularly important for modern applications that use ion traps, such as ion-trap quantum computing. In ion traps, electrodes, usually metallic, generate electric fields that confine the ions to a small volume close by. When researchers started laser-cooling ions to the ground state of the trap, they expected that the ions would stay cold for many minutes. However, electric field noise from the trap electrodes heated up the ions within milliseconds, several orders of magnitude faster than what was expected from Johnson-Nyquist noise [2, 3]. The intensity of this unexpected noise appeared to drop with the ion’s distance d from the metal as 1/d4 and the noise appeared to be thermally activated [4]. Trying to piece the puzzle together, researchers tried a host of different metals and even tested traps with semiconducting and superconducting electrodes. Still, no clear picture of what was causing the excessive noise emerged and even initially promising models could not explain the size of the field noise [3]. Early on, researchers guessed that the 1/d4 scaling could be the result of a large number of uncorrelated electrical-dipole-type noise sources sitting on the metal surfaces. For example, in the so-called patch-potential model, dipolelike fields are caused by patches on the surface of a metal in which the electrons have a different work function compared to other regions on the surface. In this model, the noise arises because the patches fluctuate as impurities adsorbed on the trap electrodes diffuse around the surface, similar to the mechanism causing flicker noise in field-emission tips [3, 5]. The model seemed plausible, since even the electrode surfaces in an ultrahigh vacuum ion trap apparatus can be strongly contaminated [5]. It turned out, however, that the surface patch model predicted noise that was much lower in spectral densities than what was observed [3]. Researchers tried to think of mechanisms other than diffusing impurities that would lead to patches and increased noise. Grain boundaries, material interfaces, and the bulk of the material itself were suspected to contribute to the noise, but a clear mechanism to explain it was lacking. One reason researchers were reluctant to abandon the patch model was that scientists in other fields were also encountering problems related to patches, although in different frequency and distance regimes. For example, scanning probe microscopy [6], the detection of Casimir forces [7], measurements of free fall of charged particles [8], and tests of general relativity [9] all encounter patch-potential effects. In all of this work, one important aspect might have been underestimated: Impurity atoms adsorb on the surfaces and the individual adsorbed atoms form electrical dipoles (Fig. 1). The thermal motion of these adsorbed","PeriodicalId":87430,"journal":{"name":"APS observer","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"APS observer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315776293-10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Considering how it affects science and technology, surprisingly little is known about the electric field noise generated near the surface of metals. Now, in a theoretical paper appearing in Physical Review A, Arghavan SafaviNaini at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge and colleagues have uncovered a source of noise from the surfaces of metals that has been a major headache for ion trapping experiments. They argue that electrical dipoles, formed by impurity atoms adsorbed on the metal electrodes of an ion trap, cause noise of just the right strength and characteristics to explain the noise that has been observed in ion trap experiments [1]. Their work provides a guideline for attacking electric field noise and could impact many fields, including surface and materials science, modern electronics, quantum information technology, and precision tests of fundamental physics. Scientists in all of these disciplines strive to have an electrically quiet environment for their measurements. Is there, however, a fundamental lower limit for electric noise generated by an ordinary conductor, such as a piece of gold? Although electric field (or voltage) noise from the thermal motion of the freely moving electrons inside a conductor is well understood, this so-called JohnsonNyquist noise is typically not the sole source. In practice, nonequilibrium noise mechanisms, such as flicker and shot noise, often dominate device performance. Controlling noise is particularly important for modern applications that use ion traps, such as ion-trap quantum computing. In ion traps, electrodes, usually metallic, generate electric fields that confine the ions to a small volume close by. When researchers started laser-cooling ions to the ground state of the trap, they expected that the ions would stay cold for many minutes. However, electric field noise from the trap electrodes heated up the ions within milliseconds, several orders of magnitude faster than what was expected from Johnson-Nyquist noise [2, 3]. The intensity of this unexpected noise appeared to drop with the ion’s distance d from the metal as 1/d4 and the noise appeared to be thermally activated [4]. Trying to piece the puzzle together, researchers tried a host of different metals and even tested traps with semiconducting and superconducting electrodes. Still, no clear picture of what was causing the excessive noise emerged and even initially promising models could not explain the size of the field noise [3]. Early on, researchers guessed that the 1/d4 scaling could be the result of a large number of uncorrelated electrical-dipole-type noise sources sitting on the metal surfaces. For example, in the so-called patch-potential model, dipolelike fields are caused by patches on the surface of a metal in which the electrons have a different work function compared to other regions on the surface. In this model, the noise arises because the patches fluctuate as impurities adsorbed on the trap electrodes diffuse around the surface, similar to the mechanism causing flicker noise in field-emission tips [3, 5]. The model seemed plausible, since even the electrode surfaces in an ultrahigh vacuum ion trap apparatus can be strongly contaminated [5]. It turned out, however, that the surface patch model predicted noise that was much lower in spectral densities than what was observed [3]. Researchers tried to think of mechanisms other than diffusing impurities that would lead to patches and increased noise. Grain boundaries, material interfaces, and the bulk of the material itself were suspected to contribute to the noise, but a clear mechanism to explain it was lacking. One reason researchers were reluctant to abandon the patch model was that scientists in other fields were also encountering problems related to patches, although in different frequency and distance regimes. For example, scanning probe microscopy [6], the detection of Casimir forces [7], measurements of free fall of charged particles [8], and tests of general relativity [9] all encounter patch-potential effects. In all of this work, one important aspect might have been underestimated: Impurity atoms adsorb on the surfaces and the individual adsorbed atoms form electrical dipoles (Fig. 1). The thermal motion of these adsorbed
并非所有的金子都闪闪发光
考虑到它对科学技术的影响,令人惊讶的是,人们对金属表面附近产生的电场噪声知之甚少。现在,在一篇发表在《物理评论a》上的理论论文中,剑桥麻省理工学院的Arghavan SafaviNaini和他的同事发现了金属表面的噪声源,这一直是离子捕获实验的一个主要问题。他们认为,由杂质原子吸附在离子阱的金属电极上形成的电偶极子,产生的噪声强度和特性正好可以解释在离子阱实验b[1]中观察到的噪声。他们的工作为攻击电场噪声提供了指导方针,并可能影响许多领域,包括表面和材料科学、现代电子学、量子信息技术和基础物理的精密测试。所有这些学科的科学家都努力为他们的测量提供一个安静的环境。然而,普通导体(如一块金子)产生的电噪声是否存在一个基本的下限?虽然导体内部自由运动的电子的热运动产生的电场(或电压)噪声很好理解,但这种所谓的约翰逊-奈奎斯特噪声通常不是唯一的来源。在实际应用中,非平衡噪声机制,如闪烁噪声和散弹噪声,往往支配着器件的性能。控制噪声对于使用离子阱的现代应用尤其重要,例如离子阱量子计算。在离子阱中,电极(通常是金属的)产生电场,将离子限制在附近的小体积内。当研究人员开始用激光将离子冷却到阱的基态时,他们预计离子会保持低温数分钟。然而,来自陷阱电极的电场噪声在几毫秒内加热了离子,比Johnson-Nyquist噪声的预期快了几个数量级[2,3]。这种意想不到的噪音强度似乎随着离子与金属的距离d而下降,为1/d4,噪音似乎是热激活的[4]。为了将谜团拼凑起来,研究人员尝试了许多不同的金属,甚至用半导体和超导电极测试了陷阱。然而,没有清晰的图像显示是什么导致了过度的噪音,甚至最初有希望的模型也无法解释磁场噪音[3]的大小。早些时候,研究人员猜测,1/d4的比例可能是金属表面上大量不相关的电偶极子型噪声源的结果。例如,在所谓的贴片电位模型中,偶极子场是由金属表面上的贴片引起的,其中的电子与表面上的其他区域相比具有不同的功函数。在该模型中,噪声的产生是由于吸附在陷阱电极上的杂质在表面扩散时斑块波动,类似于场发射尖端产生闪烁噪声的机制[3,5]。这个模型似乎是可信的,因为即使是超高真空离子阱装置中的电极表面也可能被强烈污染。然而,事实证明,表面斑块模型预测的噪声在光谱密度上要比观测到的低得多。研究人员试图想出除了扩散杂质之外的其他机制,这些机制会导致斑块和噪音增加。人们怀疑晶界、材料界面和材料本身的体积是产生噪音的原因,但缺乏一个清晰的机制来解释它。研究人员不愿意放弃斑块模型的一个原因是,其他领域的科学家也遇到了与斑块有关的问题,尽管频率和距离不同。例如,扫描探针显微镜([6])、卡西米尔力([7])的探测、带电粒子自由落体([8])的测量以及广义相对论([9])的测试都遇到了补丁势效应。在所有这些工作中,一个重要方面可能被低估了:杂质原子吸附在表面上,单个被吸附的原子形成电偶极子(图1)。这些被吸附的热运动
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信