Arxiv:1511.04256V6 [Quant-Ph] 8 Aug 2017 the Spacetime Parameters

Quantum communications and quantum metrology in the spacetime of a rotating planet

Jan Kohlrus,1 David Edward Bruschi,2, 3 Jorma Louko,1 and Ivette Fuentes1, 4 1School of Mathematical Sciences, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD, United Kingdom 2Racah Institute of Physics and Quantum Information Science Centre, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Givat Ram, 91904 Jerusalem, Israel 3York Centre for Quantum Technologies, Department of Physics, University of York, Heslington, YO10 5DD York, United Kingdom 4Faculty of Physics, University of Vienna, Boltzmanngasse 5, 1090 Wien, Austria We study how quantum systems that propagate in the spacetime of a rotating planet are affected by the curved background. Spacetime curvature affects wavepackets of photons propagating from Earth to a satellite, and the changes in the wavepacket encode the parameters of the spacetime. This allows us to evaluate quantitatively how quantum communications are affected by the curved spacetime background of the Earth and to achieve precise measurements of Earth’s Schwarzschild radius and equatorial angular velocity. We then provide a comparison with the state of the art in parameter estimation obtained through classical means. Satellite to satellite communications and future directions are also discussed.

I. INTRODUCTION of the parameter in a single-shot run [4]. Typical applications of quantum metrology range from Quantum communications is a rapidly growing field phase estimation in quantum optics to estimating the which promises several technical improvements to cur- gravitational potential with Bose Einstein Condensates rent classical communications. One example is the use of (BECs) [5, 6]. However, when estimating relativistic pa- quantum cryptography which would make communica- rameters, gravity usually appears as an external poten- tions more secure, thanks to more robust protocols than tial, or a phase modification, which does not overcome the classical ones [1]. More fundamental aspects can also the inherent inconsistency between quantum physics and be studied using quantum communications. For exam- relativity [7]. Recently, this gap has been bridged and ple, the interplay between quantum physics and relativ- quantum field theory in curved spacetime has been em- ity can be probed through quantum communications be- ployed as the core framework to compute the ultimate tween moving observers and within schemes in a curved bounds on ultra-precise measurements of relativistic pa- spacetime background [2]. The results of the measure- rameters. In particular, it was shown that it is possible ments can then be compared with the predictions ob- to use the shifting induced on the frequency distribution tained by theories that were developed in the overlap of of single photons ascending the gravitational potential of quantum physics and relativity, the most well known and a static planet to estimate with great precision the dis- understood of these being Quantum Field Theory (QFT) tance between a user based on Earth and one on a satel- in curved spacetime [3]. lite [2, 8]. In this case, gravity isn’t affecting the quantum Knowing quantitatively how quantum communications state as the simple addition of a phase. The effects due are affected by the curved spacetime background would to curved spacetime can therefore not be explained by a enable to compensate undesirable relativistic effects in simple ad hoc implementation of proper time in a classical future quantum technologies. Precise values of the nec- quantum mechanics scheme. Furthermore, it was shown essary corrections in such quantum communication se- that these effects can have potentially high impact on tups can only be obtained with an accurate knowledge of specific types of quantum key distribution (QKD) proto- arXiv:1511.04256v6 [quant-ph] 8 Aug 2017 the spacetime parameters. We thus need to employ tech- cols [2]. This direction has the potential of leading to- niques from the field of quantum metrology, which aims wards the development of new relativistic and quantum at exploiting quantum resources, such as entanglement, technologies aimed at testing the predictions of quantum to estimate physical parameters [4]. Within a standard field theory in curved spacetime in space-based experi- estimation protocol, an input quantum state undergoes ments with satellites. a transformation that encodes the parameter to be esti- In this work we extend the analysis carried out in pre- mated. The resulting state of this transformation is then vious works which investigated quantum estimation tech- compared, by means of the fidelity, to a neighbouring niques in scenarios where photons are exchanged between state which is infinitesimally close in terms of the param- Earth and a satellite [8]. There, the Earth was assumed eter. One can define a distance between these two states as static and the effects on the propagation of the photons that is directly related to the Quantum Fisher Informa- depend only on the Schwarzschild radius of the Earth. tion (QFI), which in turn is directly related to the max- Here we consider a rotating planet, and we model the imum precision one can obtain in an estimation scheme. metric outside the mass distribution by the well known A final measurement provides an estimation of the value Kerr metric [9]. The transformation induced by the cur- 2 vature on the traveling photon reduces to a beam-splitter, coordinates (t, r, φ) reads [9]: a well known linear transformation in quantum optics 2M 1 [10]. We can therefore restrict ourselves to Gaussian ds2 = − 1 − dt2 + dr2 states and employ the powerful covariance matrix formal- r ∆ ism that allows to achieve analytical insight in scenarios 2Ma2 4Ma + r2 + a2 + dφ2 − dt dφ, (1) that involve Gaussian states and linear unitary transfor- r r mations [11, 12]. In particular, we seek out the effects of 2M a2 ∆ = 1 − + . (2) rotation on previously employed entanglement-swapping r r2 protocols [2, 8]. We find the error bound on the equatorial angular ve- For clarity, we will consider the rotating planet to be the locity of the Earth and compare it with that achieved Earth, with mass M, radius rA, angular momentum J and Kerr parameter (i.e., angular momentum per unit with cutting edge technology. The rate of improve- J ment of quantum optical technologies and the rapid in- mass) a = M . crease of the control over quantum systems suggest that A photon is sent radially by Alice from a laboratory in the near future our scheme might provide a reliable on Earth’s equator to Bob who is in a satellite circularly way to outperform current technologies based on classi- orbiting at radius rB in the equatorial plane of the Kerr cal means. spacetime. A schematic representation of the setup can be found in Fig. 1. The paper is organised as follows. In Section II, we present the process of exchanging photons between Earth and a satellite, we characterise and model the system, and we give the mathematical formalism that is going to be relevant for the general relativistic calculations that will follow. In Section III, we derive the expression of the frequency shift for the photon travelling through the Kerr spacetime. Section IV consists of the relativistic quantum metrology calculations. It introduces the relevant perturbative quantities that are affecting the states, and derives the Quantum Fisher Information (QFI) for the system studied, and hence the estimated error bounds for the spacetime parameters. Section V introduces the satellite to satellite scheme and the related precision estimations are computed in the same fashion as in the Earth to satellite case. Finally, Section VI briefly dis- cusses how the effects computed in this work can affect FIG. 1: Alice on Earth sends a photon (localised around a simple QKD protocol, specifically comparing the mag- the straight line) to Bob in the satellite. The photon ex- periences the effects of the curvature of spacetime along the nitude of the effect with what has been found in [2]. whole path while propagating, which can be seen in the pic- Throughout the whole paper we employ geometrical ture by the progressive tightening and redshifting of the Gaus- units G = 1 = c. Relevant constants are restored when sian wavepacket. The final effect is a nonlocal and cumulative needed for the sake of clarity. Vectors and matrices effect due to travel along the whole path. are denoted in bold characters. Vectors are written using the usual differential geometry notation [13], namely t r θ φ t r θ φ X = (X ,X ,X ,X ) = X ∂t +X ∂r +X ∂θ +X ∂φ. Einstein’s summation convention is assumed on repeated B. Wave packet characterisation Greek indices. A and B indices denote evaluations at Alice’s and Bob’s events respectively. In this work we employ photons which are geometrically radial, namely with vanishing angular velocities ˙ ˙ φγ = 0 = θγ . We will see that in Kerr space-time such II. INTRODUCTION TO THE FORMALISM photons have a non trivial angular momentum constant of motion, contrarily to the Schwarzschild case. The evo- lution of the quantum field is thus a 1+1 dimensional A. Description of the experiment problem. Such a photon can be modelled by a wave

packet of frequency distribution Fω0 (ω) of monochro- In this work we consider a spherical planet that rotates matic plane waves with frequency ω and peaked at ω0. slowly. The Kerr metric can be used, to good approxi- The annihilation operator associated to this photon by mation, to model the spacetime background around the an observer (inﬁnitely) far from Earth is: rotating planet [9]. Our work will be constrained to the π Z +∞ equatorial plane θ = 2 to be able to work with simple an- −iωt aω0 (t) = dω e Fω0 (ω) aω. (3) alytical formulas. The reduced metric in Boyer-Lindquist 0 3

The canonical bosonic commutation relations with the amount of shifting being quantified by the new [a (t), a† (t)] = 1 for the bosonic operator (3) at parameter δ defined by1: ω0 ω0 any instant of time follow directly from those for the † 0 δ = f − 1. (9) sharp frequency operators [aω, aω0 ] = δ(ω − ω ) and from the normalisation of the frequency distribution function R ∞ 2 In the following, we will derive the explicit formula for f Fω0 (ω) i.e., 0 dω|Fω0 (ω)| = 1. It is possible to rewrite the annihilation operator (3) of in terms of the spacetime parameters. the same photon as described by Alice or Bob. We then follow notation in [2] and reproduce the equation below: III. FREQUENCY SHIFT IN KERR Z +∞ (K) SPACETIME a (τ ) = dΩ e−iΩK τK F (Ω ) a , (4) ΩK,0 K K ΩK,0 K ΩK 0 where the index K = A, B refers to observer Alice or A. Preliminaries Bob respectively. The quantity ΩK is the frequency of the photon as measured locally by the observer K with The general frequency shift formula for a photon emit- proper time τK . We have introduced the peak frequency ted from Alice on Earth and received by Bob in the satel- Ω of the frequency distribution F (K) , and the bosonic lite reads [13, 14]: K,0 ΩK,0 canonical commutation relations for each observer read h i † ˙ [a , a ] = 1. k.XB ΩK ΩK ΩB |X=XB Alice now prepares and sends a wave packet F (A) at f = = h i , (10) ΩA,0 ΩA k.X˙ A altitude rA which is received by Bob on the satellite as a |X=X (B) A wave packet FΩ at altitude rB. Throughout its jour- B,0 ˙ ˙ ney, the wave packet has changed due to the spacetime where XA and XB are the four-velocities of Alice and being curved. The relation between the two frequency Bob respectively, while k is the tangent vector to the distributions has been already found in [2]. We define affinely parametrised null geodesic that the photon fol- the frequency shift as ΩB = fΩA, where f is the total lows. For simplicity of the computations, we restrain our shifting function that will be made explicit later (notice study to a satellite that follows a circular orbit, i.e. we that we are not using the same definition for f as in haver ˙B = 0 =r ˙A, where the dot stands for derivative [2, 8]). Then one finds: with respect to proper time. Bob’s satellite has its motion r constrained to the equatorial plane of the Kerr spacetime, (B) 1 (A) 1 ˙ thus θB = 0 and Alice has neither a θ−motion. Also our FΩ (ΩB) = FΩ ΩB . (5) B,0 f A,0 f photon is geometrically radial, hence: Bob knows that the photon Alice has sent was charac- µ t (A) k (X˙ ) = k (t˙ g + φ˙ g ), (11) terised by F . One way to quantify the change in K µ K tt K tφ ΩA,0 the state of the photon is to use the fidelity between the where again K = A, B. initial state prepared with wave packet F (A) and the fi- ΩA,0 The velocity of our observers are [15, 16]: (B) nal state received with wave packet FΩ . The fidelity B,0 X˙ = γ ∂ + ω ∂ , (12) F = |Θ|2 for a single photon in a pure state is simply A A t A φ defined through the overlap function between the two X˙ B = γB (1 + a ωB) ∂t + ωB ∂φ , (13) frequency distributions: Z +∞ where = +1 for direct orbits (i.e., when the satellite co- Θ = dΩ F (B)?(Ω )F (A) (Ω ). (6) rotates with the Earth), and = −1 for retrogade ones B ΩB,0 B ΩA,0 B 0 (i.e., the opposite way). The parameter ωA = dφA/dtA The fidelity would tend to zero for photons traversing re- denotes Earth’s angular velocity at the equator, while p 3 gions of the spacetime with sufficiently strong curvature, ωB = M/rB is Bob’s orbit frequency. The normalisa- while it would reach unity in flat spacetime. tion factors γA and γB are given by: A convenient choice of wave packet is a normalised 1 − 2 Gaussian wave packet of width σK and with a frequency 2 2 2 2M 2 γA = 1 − ωA rA + a − 1 − a ωA , (14) distribution of the form: rA 1 (Ω −Ω )2 − 1 − K K,0 3M 2 (K) 4σ2 γB = 1 − + 2 a ωB . (15) F (ΩK ) = e K . (7) ΩK,0 p4 2 rB 2πσK We therefore employ (6) and (7) (also see [2]) to find:

s δ2Ω2 − B,0 2(1 + δ) 4(1+(1+δ)2)σ2 1 Θ = e B , (8) In this updated version, we adopt the same convention for the 1 + (1 + δ)2 parameter δ as in [8] for consistency with this previous work. 4

The tangent vector to the photon’s worldline reads: the problem in the case of a radial photon propagating in Schwarzschild spacetime, the result does not depend ! 1 √ on the direction of rotation of the satellite, namely on . k = E ∂ + κ ∂ , (16) γ 2M t r One can also notice that, in this limit, photons received 1 − r 3 on satellites orbiting at radius rB = rA will not expe- a2 2M 4 M 2 a2 2 κ = 1 + 1 + + , (17) rience any frequency shift. In the Schwarzschild picture, r2 r 2M r4 1 − r this is the altitude at which the gravitational effect of the Earth and the special relativistic effect due to the where it has been used that for such a geometrically ra- motion of the satellite compensate each other, and Bob’s dial photon we have: clock rate becomes equal to the clock rate of Alice. In- deed, the satellite’s motion around the Earth slows down E 2M L = −a γ . (18) Bob’s proper time, but the higher altitude of Bob intro- γ 2M r 1 − r duces a lower redshift which therefore has also a lower effect on Bob’s clock rate, as compared to Alice. Spe- The constants of motion Eγ and Lγ are respectively the cial relativistic effects thus dominate the frequency shift energy and longitudinal angular momentum of the pho- 3 of photons received at altitudes below rB = 2 rA, where ton as measured by an inertial observer at space infinity. photons will actually be received blue-shifted, while the These quantities are conserved along geodesics thanks to 3 photons will be received red-shifted at rB > 2 rA where the presence of the two Killing fields ∂t and ∂φ. After the gravitational frequency shift dominates. A last rele- evaluation at XB, the explicit form of the numerator in vant check is to verify the absence of frequency shift in (10) thus reads: flat spacetime. Unsurprisingly, we get from the relevant ! limit of (21) that in Minkowski spacetime fM = 1. µ ˙ a ωB [k (XB)µ]| = −Eγ γB 1 + . (19) XB 1 − 2M rB IV. QUANTUM ESTIMATION OF ROTATION The denominator of (10), after evaluation at XA, reads: PARAMETERS OF THE EARTH ! µ ˙ 2M a ωA In this section, we apply quantum estimation tech- [k (XA)µ]|X = −Eγ γA 1 + 2M . (20) A rA 1 − rA niques to find the ultimate bounds on the precision of measurements of parameters of the Earth. The A and B subscripts on the quantities ∆ and κ denote evaluation at rA and rB respectively. We now have all the ingredients to compute explicitly the frequency shift A. Summary of spacetime parameters of the photon (10).

In our result (21) for the frequency shift of a radial pho- B. Frequency shift formula ton traveling from Earth to space there are five dimensionless perturbative parameters of interest, for which we Plugging (19) and (20) in (10), we obtain the ex- give numerical values in the table I. plicit expression of the frequency shift for the photon exchanged between Alice on Earth and Bob in the circu- Quantity (N. Units) Quantity (S.I.) Value Orbit 2 −10 larly orbiting satellite. We find: M/rA GM/(rAc ) 6.95 × 10 / −10 2 1.05 × 10 GEO a ωB v M/rB GM/(rB c ) 1 + 2M u 2M 2 2 2 −10 1− 1 − (1 − a ωA) − (a + r )ωA 5.29 × 10 LEO rB u rA A f = t . −7 2M a ωA 3M a/rA a/rA 5.11 × 10 / 1 + 2M 1 − + 2 a ωB rA 1− rB rA 7.73 × 10−8 GEO (21) a/rB a/rB 3.89 × 10−7 LEO −6 In the Schwarzschild limit (a, ωA) → (0, 0), the frequency rAωA rAωA/c 1.55 × 10 / shift simplifies to: TABLE I: Dimensionless perturbative parameters in the fre- v quency shift formula. u1 − 2M u rA fS = t . (22) 1 − 3M rB We have used the following values: a = 3.26m, ωA = −5 24 7.29×10 rad/s, rA = 6378km, M = 5.97×10 kg. Fur- Therefore, equation (21) reduces to the known result for thermore we consider two orbits for satellites, low Earth a radial photon in a static planet spacetime that has orbits rB(LEO) = rA + 2000km and geostationary ones been used in [2, 8]. As expected by the symmetry of rB(GEO) = rA + 35784km. 5

B. Quantification of the frequency shift measurement errors we have explicitly found above. In order to achieve this goal, we need to compute the Quan- The amount of change in the photon’s frequency dis- tum Fisher Information H(δ) which will allow us to em- tribution is quantified by our general parameter δ: ploy the Cramér-Raotheorem. Ω δ = B − 1, (23) ΩA C. Quantum Fisher Information (QFI) and single parameter estimation where ΩB/ΩA has an explicit expression in 21. We proceed by expanding perturbatively (21) in the parameters The most important quantity in quantum metrology is from table I. We obtain a δ parameter of the following the quantum Fisher information H, which allows to di- form: rectly compute the bounds on measurements of interest through the well known Cramér-Raotheorem [17]. In δ = δ + δ + δ , (24) S rot c particular it was shown in [17] that, if one wishes to estimate the parameter δ encoded in the final state ρ(δ) where δS is a first order Schwarzschild term, δrot is the lowest order rotation term, and we gather all higher order of a system after a transformation U(δ), one can employ the fidelity F(ρ(δ), ρ(δ+dδ)) between the states ρ(δ) and corrections in δc. We give explicit values of the first two: ρ(δ + dδ) and obtain the QFI as 1 r 1 − 2 L S rA p δS = , (25) 1 − F(ρ(δ), ρ(δ + dδ)) 4 r L A 1 + r H = lim 8 . (29) A dδ→0 dδ2 (r ω )2 δ = − A A ∼ −10−12, (26) rot 2 One can then compute the ultimate bound on the error ∆δ through the Cramér-Raoinequality as where we have introduced the Schwarzschild radius of the Earth r = 2M and the distance between Alice and 1 S |∆δ| ≥ √ , (30) Bob L = rB − rA. Notice that δS in (25) is different N H to the δ displayed in the Schwarzschild scenario papers [2, 8]. It comes from the fact that we are expanding the where N is the number of probes in the experiment. total frequency shift (21) taking into account both special Following [8], we employ an initial two mode squeezed and general relativistic effects, while in [2, 8] δ has been state and compute the fidelity F in order to obtain the Ω2 2 obtained by expanding only the gravitational frequency QFI. For the regime we are interested in, δ 8σ2 δ 1, −10 shift. With the values used in table I, we have δS ∼ 10 it reads: for LEO orbits and δ ∼ −10−10 for GEO orbits. Lowest S 2 2 −21 Ω + Ω order terms from δc are of order 10 . F = 1 − 1 2 sinh2(s) dδ2, (31) If one assumes that the positions of Alice and Bob 4σ2 are known with sufficient (i.e. infinite) precision, one can where s denotes the squeezing parameter, σ the spread of employ (24) to express the precision ∆δ on measurements the frequency distribution of the photon, and Ω denote on δ in terms of the precision ∆r on the Schwarzschild i S the peak frequencies of the distribution of each mode, radius: i.e., i = 1, 2. From this we compute the QFI as: ∆rS ∆δ = δ . (27) 2 2 S Ω + Ω 2 rS H = 1 2 sinh (s). (32) σ2 We have used that for most orbits |δS| |δc| to neglect Finally, we find our desired result: terms coming from δc. Yet, as noticed in (22), there is no frequency shift in Schwarzschild spacetime for orbits σ |∆δ| ≥ . (33) L = rA/2, and consequently δS vanishes for these orbits. p 2 2 N(Ω1 + Ω2) sinh(s) Hence, for such orbits L ∼ rA/2 we need to take higher order corrections from δc into account, and (27) will have In the following we specialise equation (33) to different a more involved expression. estimations, such as estimation of the Schwarzschild ra- We are also interested in the precision one can achieve dius or the equatorial angular velocity of the Earth. for the measurement of Earth’s equatorial angular velocity. The relation between ∆δ and ∆ωA is simply: D. Optimal bounds for the error on spacetime ∆ωA ∆δ = 2δrot . (28) parameters ωA We will now proceed to employ the quantum estimation In this section we will focus on applying the previous techniques necessary to find the ultimate bounds on the techniques to estimate the ultimate error bounds on the 6

Schwarzschild radius rS and on the equatorial angular space between the two parties) is free from the noise in- velocity ωA of the Earth. We assume absence of losses troduced, for example, by the presence of the atmosphere and use typical values for the parameters of the setup in the case of Alice sending a photon from Earth to Bob’s such as the bandwith σ = 106Hz, the peak frequencies satellite [22, 23]. Using (10) with Charlie instead of Alice 14 Ω1 = Ω2 = Ω = 7 × 10 Hz and the allowed number and (19) for Bob and Charlie, the general frequency shift of measurements N = 1010. In practice, these numbers formula for a photon emitted from Charlie’s device on a imply a measurement time of Nσ−1 ∼ 3hours. Further- satellite and received later by Bob on a higher satellite more, we present results for squeezing s = 2, which is reads: achievable with state-of-the-art technology [8, 18]. The a ω v 1 + B 3M optimal bound for the error on the measurement of 1− 2M u ΩB r u1 − r + 2 η a ωC = B C , (36) Earth’s Schwarzschild radius is given by: a ωC t 3M ΩC 1 + η 2M 1 − + 2 a ωB 1− rB rC |∆rS| 1 σ −1 ≥ √ δS . (34) where all the quantities with a C subscript are the same rS 2N sinh(s) Ω as Bob’s but substituting rB with rC and with η. The rotation terms being negligible, the result is essen- Similarly to Bob’s , η = ±1 depending on which way tially the same bound as in [8] for measurements of the Charlie’s satellite revolves around the Earth. In this ex- −5 Schwarzschild radius, namely |∆rS/rS| ∼ 10 for LEO pression there are four perturbative parameters of inter- −6 orbits and |∆rS/rS| ∼ 10 for GEO orbits. Yet, these est: the Schwarzschild parameters M/rB, M/rC , and the values now take into account special relativistic effects Kerr parameters a/rB, a/rC . In order to obtain the shift due to Alice’s and Bob’s motion. quantity δs = (ΩB/ΩC ) − 1 that quantifies the shift in rA the frequency distribution of the photon, we need to ex- For orbits at altitude around L ∼ 2 however, the Schwarzschild term δS in (34) vanishes, we then need to pand perturbatively the square root of (36) with respect add the lowest order terms from δc. These are several to these four parameters. Doing so, we find an expression orders of magnitude smaller than δS, therefore satellites of the following form: orbiting at these altitudes are not recommended for the experiments proposed here since the precision they would δs = δs,S + δs,rot + δs,c, (37) provide for the measurement of the Schwarzschild radius with: is significantly lower. This result is new compared to the study carried in [8], it comes from taking into account 3 L rS 1 −10 δs,S = − ∼ −10 , (38) special relativistic effects due to our observers’ motions. 4 r2 1 + L C rC We shift our attention to estimating the bound for the 1 r a2 L −3 equatorial angular velocity of the Earth. We get: S −23 δs,rot = 3 1 + − 1 ∼ −10 , (39) 4 rC rC |∆ωA| 1 σ −1 ≥ √ δrot , (35) where now L = r − r > 0, δ are higher order contri- ω Ω B C s,c A 2 2N sinh(s) butions that are negligible, and we give numerical values of δ and δ for Charlie following a LEO and Bob a which gives bounds of order |∆ω |/ω ∼ 10−3. We are s,S s,rot A A GEO. Notice that in this scheme where both observers five orders of magnitude below the IERS Numerical Stan- are geodesic, contrary to the Earth to satellite setup, dards that give a relative uncertainty of order 10−8 [19], there are no orbits for which the Schwarzschild term δ as well as the per billion precision of a recent direct mea- s,S vanishes. We can now express the error ∆δ on our shift surement involving large ring laser gyroscopes [20] and of s parameter δ in terms of the error on the spacetime pa- old interferometer experiments [21]. However, given the s rameters. We find: current rate of improvement in quantum technologies, it is reasonable to assume that, in the near future, we will ∆rS ∆rS ∆δs = (δs,S + δs,rot) ≈ δs,S , (40) be able to employ higher squeezing values and photons rS rS of higher energy. Finally, larger number of measurement ∆a ∆ωA probes would also contribute to enabling us to exceed the ∆δs = 2δs,rot = 2δs,rot , (41) a ω state-of-the-art precision. A where we have used for the last equality that a = 2IωA/rS, where I is Earth’s moment of inertia. For a V. SATELLITE TO SATELLITE photon sent from Charlie on a low Earth orbit (rC ∼ COMMUNICATION 8000km) to Bob on a geostationary one (rB ∼ 42000km), we find the order of magnitude for the precision on the −6 Another possible experimental setup would see two Schwarzschild radius to be |∆rS|/rS ∼ 10 and on the parties, Bob and Charlie, both following geodesic circu- rotation parameters |∆a|/a ∼ |∆ωA|/ωA 1. There- lar orbits in the equatorial plane of the Earth, located fore, in this satellite to satellite scheme, the rotation pa- at altitudes rB and rC respectively, with rB > rC . The rameters measurements are losing several orders of mag- advantage of this setup is that the channel (i.e., the free nitude of precision compared to the Earth to satellite 7 setup. This is understandable by looking at the nature the value for the QBER for quantum communications of the observer. On Earth, Alice is strongly dragged between a LEO and a GEO satellite is of order 10−2 by Earth’s rotation while the satellites experience only too. However, taking into account atmospheric effects in a slight dragging due to the weak rotation of the met- the ground to satellite case would make the satellite to ric. It is then not surprising that the satellite to satellite satellite scheme more accurate. setup, which is made of two geodesic orbiting observers, is less sensitive to the rotation parameters of the Kerr spacetime. However, the value for the precision on the VII. CONCLUSION measurement of the Schwarzschild radius is similar to the Earth to satellite scheme, making both setups equally In this paper we have derived an expression for the good in theory. Yet, one has to keep in mind that a satel- general relativistic frequency shift of a photon travel- lite to satellite scheme will provide channels free from any ling through Earth’s rotating surrounding spacetime. We atmospheric noise and should therefore eventually yield have specialised to photons travelling with vanishing an- more precise measurements. gular velocities from an equatorial laboratory on Earth towards a satellite revolving in the equatorial plane of the Kerr spacetime. This study provides analytical in- VI. QUANTUM BIT ERROR RATE (QBER) IN sight and successfully extends previous results obtained A SIMPLE QKD PROTOCOL for Schwarzschild spacetime [2, 8]. We have found that including the rotation of the Earth does not change pre- In order to complete our analysis of the possible means vious estimates obtained for the Schwarzschild radius in a of detecting these effects, we can compute the QBER quantum metrology scheme. However, we were able to es- for a simple QKD protocol, following closely what has timate the precision for the quantum measurement of the been done in [2]. Alice and Bob have two memories each: equatorial angular velocity of the Earth. We find that the A1,A2 and B1,B2 respectively. The optical modes con- error bound predicted for the equatorial angular velocity tained in the memories of one user (e.g. Alice’s) are prop- of the Earth can exceed the precision obtained with the agated to the other user (Bob, in this case). The optical state of the art when high values of squeezing and a large modes from memories A1 and B1 are then entangled at number of probe systems (or measurements) are em- the receiver’s lab and similarly for A2 and B2. Alice ployed. Suitably chosen signals, such as frequency comb, then beam splits A1 and A2 and each output branch of instead of gaussian-shaped frequency distributions, could the beamsplitter is measured by a detector. Bob per- also improve precision [24, 25]. Taking into account spe- forms the same operation with B1 and B2. If each user cial relativistic effects, we have also found a specific class has one detector clicking, the protocol has been working of circular orbits where the frequency of the received pho- successfully. The probability for Alice and Bob to share tons remains almost unchanged. For quantum metrol- the same bit, i.e., the probability for memories A1,B1 ogy purposes these orbits have to be avoided since the and A2,B2 to have the same state is p = 1 − q/2, where quantum state of the photons is less perturbed, yet they q 1 will in our case be related to our δ parameter and are very useful for minimal curved spacetime disturbance the wave packet distributions. The QBER is the rate channels for quantum communication. To complete our of bits that were not shared between Alice and Bob, i.e. analysis, we have added a study of the error bounds for QBER =p ¯ = 1 − p = q/2. We employ the same protocol the same parameters when communication occurs be- between Alice and Bob and adapt it to our new results, tween two satellites, which has relevance for practical which take into account Earth’s rotation and special rel- implementations of many quantum information schemes, ativistic effects. From [2] we have: such as proposed implementations of QKD through satel- δ2 Ω2 lite nodes [26]. We conclude that recent advances in quantum technologies, which include the ability to create QBER ∼ 2 , (42) 8 σ larger values of squeezing, show the promising opportu- Ω2 2 nities of improving the state of the art for measurements in the regime δ 8σ2 δ 1. In the Earth to satellite setup, the contribution of the rotation to δ in (24) of physical parameters of the Earth. is negligible for most orbits. We obtain a QBER of order 10−4 for communications to LEO orbits and 10−2 to 3 Acknowledgments GEO orbits. For orbits at radii rB ∼ 2 rA however, the rotation term becomes dominant and the QBER shrinks to ∼ 10−8. Hence, these orbits are recommended to re- J. Louko was supported in part by STFC (Theory Con- duce the QBER in Earth to satellite quantum communi- solidated Grant ST/J000388/1). D. E. Bruschi was par- cations. tially supported by the I-CORE Program of the Plan- In the satellite to satellite case, the Schwarzschild part ning and Budgeting Committee and the Israel Science of the shift is always dominant. The value of the shift Foundation (grant No. 1937/12), as well as by the Israel between a LEO and a GEO satellite is similar to the Science Foundation personal grant No. 24/12. D. E. Br- GEO orbits case in the Earth to satellite scheme, hence uschi would also like to thank the University of Vienna 8 for hospitality.

[1] IEEE International conference on computers, systems wobble of the Earth with a large ring laser gyroscope. and signal processing. Quantum Cryptography: Public Phys. Rev. Lett., 107:173904, 2011. key distribution and coin tossing, 1984. [21] R. Anderson, H.R. Bilger, and G.E. Stedman. Sagnac [2] David Edward Bruschi, Ivette Fuentes, Thomas Jen- effect: a century of Earth-rotated interferometers. Am. newein, and Mohsen Razavi. Spacetime effects on J. Phys., 62:975, 1994. satellite-based quantum communications. Phys. Rev. D, [22] C. Bonato, A. Tomaello, V. Da Deppo, G. Naletto, and 90:045041, 2014. P. Villoresi. Feasibility of satellite quantum key distribu- [3] Leonard Parker and David Toms. Quantum field theory tion. New Journal of Physics, 11(4):045017, 2009. in curved spacetime. Cambridge University Press, Cam- [23] Giuseppe Vallone, Davide Bacco, Daniele Dequal, Si- bridge, 2009. mone Gaiarin, Vincenza Luceri, Giuseppe Bianco, and [4] Vittorio Giovanetti, Seth Lloyd, and Lorenzo Maccone. Paolo Villoresi. Experimental satellite quantum commu- Advances in quantum metrology. Nature Photon., 5:222, nications. Phys. Rev. Lett., 115:040502, Jul 2015. 2011. [24] Sebastian P. Kish and Timothy C. Ralph. Estimating [5] Carlos Sab´ın, David Edward Bruschi, Mehdi Ahmadi, spacetime parameters with a quantum probe in a lossy and Ivette Fuentes. Phonon creation by gravitational environment. Phys. Rev. D, 93:105013, 2016. waves. New J. Phys., 16:085003, 2014. [25] Timothy C. Ralph Peter P. Rohde and Michael A. [6] David Edward Bruschi, Carlos Sab´ın, Angela White, Nielsen. Optimal photons for quantum-information pro- Valentina Baccetti, Daniel K.L. Oi, and Ivette Fuentes. cessing. Phys. Rev. A, 72:052332, 2005. Testing the effects of gravity and motion on quantum en- [26] Elizabeth Gibney. Chinese satellite is one giant step for tanglement in space-based experiments. New J. Phys., the quantum internet. Nature, 535:478–479, July 2016. 16:053041, 2014. [7] T. van Zoest et al. Bose-Einstein condensation in micro- gravity. Science, 328(5985):1540–1543, 2010. [8] David Edward Bruschi, Animesh Datta, Rupert Ursin, Timothy C. Ralph, and Ivette Fuentes. Quantum estimation of the Schwarzschild spacetime parameters of the Earth. Phys. Rev. D, 90:124001, 2014. [9] Matt Visser. The Kerr spacetime: A brief introduction. arXiv:0706.0622, 2007. [10] Michael A. Nielsen and Isaac L. Chuang. Quantum computation and quantum information. Cambridge Uni- versity Press, Cambridge, 2000. [11] Paulina Marian and Tudor A. Marian. Uhlmann fidelity between two-mode Gaussian states. Phys. Rev. A, 86:022340, 2012. [12] Gerardo Adesso, Sammy Ragy, and Antony R. Lee. Con- tinuous variable quantum information: Gaussian states and beyond. Open Syst. Inf. Dyn., 21(01n02):1440001, 2014. [13] Robert M. Wald. General relativity. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1984. [14] Erwin Schrödinger. Expanding universe. Cambridge Uni- versity Press, Cambridge, 2011. [15] Fernando de Felice and Donato Bini. Classical measurements in curved space-times. Cambridge Uni- versity Press, Cambridge, 2010. [16] Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar. The mathematical theory of black holes. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1983. [17] Harald Cramér. Mathematical methods of statistics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1999. [18] Henning Vahlbruch et al. Observation of squeezed light with 10-db quantum-noise reduction. Phys. Rev. Lett., 100:033602, 2008. [19] IERS Numerical Standards, IAG1999. http://hpiers. obspm.fr/eop-pc/models/constants.html. [20] K.U. Schreiber, T. Klügel,J.-P.R. Wells, R.B. Hurst, and A. Gebauer. How to detect the Chandler and the annual