![Arxiv:2002.11731V3 [Hep-Ph] 17 May 2021 for the Edms, They Have Not Been Observed Yet](http://data.docslib.org/img/e904d6d2be9ae4852ad60141b266b797-1.webp)
KEK–TH–2194
Novel approach to neutron electric dipole moment search using weak measurement
Daiki Ueda∗ KEK Theory Center, IPNS, KEK, Tsukuba 305-0801, Japan, and The Graduate University of Advanced Studies (Sokendai), Tsukuba 305-0801, Japan and Teppei Kitahara† Physics Department, Technion—Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa 3200003, Israel, Institute for Advanced Research, Nagoya University, Nagoya 464-8601, Japan, and Kobayashi-Maskawa Institute for the Origin of Particles and the Universe, Nagoya University, Nagoya 464-8602, Japan (Dated: May 18, 2021) We propose a novel approach in a search for the neutron electric dipole moment (EDM) by tak- ing advantage of signal amplification in a weak measurement, known as weak value amplification. Considering an analogy to the weak measurement that can measure the spin magnetic moment interaction, we examine an experimental setup with a polarized neutron beam through an external electric field with spatial gradient, where the signal is sensitive to the EDM interaction. In partic- ular, a dedicated analysis of effects from impurities in pre- and post-selections is performed. We show that the weak value amplification occurs where the signal is enhanced by up to two orders of magnitude, and demonstrate a potential sensitivity of the proposed setup to the neutron EDM. Keywords: neutron electric dipole moment, weak measurement
I. INTRODUCTION limit is five orders of magnitude larger than the SM pre- −(31–32) diction (dn)SM ∼ 10 e cm [6,7,9]. Nevertheless, Since CP violation arises from only the phase of it severely constrains the NP scenarios that include ad- the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix in the standard ditional CP violation. model (SM) and it is tiny [1], CP -violating observables In the early stage of the neutron EDM experiments, have provided good measurement sensitive to physics be- not the UCNs but a polarized neutron beam had been yond the SM. In particular, measurement of the electric utilized [31–34]. However, it was known that there was dipole moment (EDM) of the neutron, dn, can give a clear a large systematic uncertainty in neutron beam experi- signal of new physics (NP), and has been a big subject ment which comes from relativistic effects. The relativis- for the last seventy years [2]. tic effects arise from the motion of neutrons (velocity v) The neutron EDM arises from three-loop short- through the electric field E, as (see, e.g., Ref. [35] for a distance [3–5], two-loop long-distance [6,7], one-loop derivation) contributions from the QCD theta term [8], and tree-level E × v charm-quark contributions [9] within the SM, while it can B = . (3) arise from one-loop diagrams in general NP models, such c2 as multi-Higgs bosons [10–13], supersymmetric particles Even if the neutron beam is shielded from the external [14–17], leptoquark [18–20], and models with dynamical magnetic field which we will assume in this paper, the electroweak symmetry breaking [21, 22]. In addition, ob- external electric field does generate the magnetic filed served matter-antimatter asymmetry in the Universe re- depending on the velocity (it can be interpreted as the quires new CP -violating sources [23, 24], which could be relativistic transformation of F ), and the sensitivity of e.g. µν verified by the measurement of the EDM, , Ref. [25]. the experiment becomes dull because of the large spin So far, although much effort has been devoted to search magnetic moment interaction. arXiv:2002.11731v3 [hep-ph] 17 May 2021 for the EDMs, they have not been observed yet. One In order to avoid large uncertainties, current experi- of the most severe limits comes from the neutron EDM ments and new proposed projects are using the UCNs search [26] [36–44]. Moreover, most of the experiments have em- − ployed the Ramsey method [27, 28]. The main reasons (d ) < 3.0 × 10 26 e cm (90% CL) , (1) n exp why the UCNs are preferred are the following two [45]: by measuring a neutron resonant frequency of ultracold First, the systematic uncertainty from the relativistic ef- neutrons (UCNs) based on the separated oscillatory field fects can be neglected because of its small velocity of method (the so-called Ramsey method) [27, 28].#1 This
nEDM collaboration [29, 30]:
∗ −26 [email protected] (dn)exp < 1.8 × 10 e cm (90% CL) . (2) † [email protected] #1 Very recently, an improved limit has been announced by the 2 the UCNs. Second, the UCNs can have longer interac- gradient, and apply methods of the weak measurement tion times with the external electric field because they which leads to amplification of the signal. can be trapped easily, and the statistical uncertainty is Very interestingly, it will be shown in our setup that suppressed. the systematic uncertainty from the relativistic E × v On the other hand, in the polarized neutron beam ex- effect can be irrelevant compared to a neutron EDM sig- periments, although severe systematic effects come from nal. This fact is expected as a new virtue of the weak the relativistic E×v corrections [33, 45], one can prepare measurement because our finding implies that the weak a much larger amount of neutrons, which can reduce sta- measurement itself is useful in quantum systems to sup- tistical fluctuations. Also, one can use stronger external press the systematic uncertainty such as the relativistic electric fields, because the neutron beams are not cov- effect. ered by an insulating wall unlike the UCNs. Besides, This paper is organized as follows. In Sec.II, we pro- there are several ideas that the relativistic E × v correc- pose an experimental setup for the neutron EDM search tions can be suppressed in the neutron beam experiments using the weak measurement. In Sec.III, we analytically with the Ramsey method [45] or with a spin rotation in calculate an expected observable in this setup. Espe- non-centrosymmetric crystals [46–49]. The latter idea cially, the weak value is introduced. Numerical results has been realized in an experiment [50]. are evaluated in Sec.IV. We will show the weak value In this paper, we propose a novel experimental ap- amplification and a potential sensitivity to the neutron proach in the search for the neutron EDM by applying EDM signal in this setup. Finally, Sec.V is devoted for not the Ramsey method but a method of weak measure- the conclusions. In AppendixA, a general setup of an ment [51–53], and discuss conditions how our setup can external electric field is considered. In AppendixB, a overtake the current upper limit in Eq. (1). This work is formalism of a full-order calculation of the expected ob- the first application of the weak measurement to the neu- servable is provided. tron EDM measurement. For instance, the spin magnetic moment interaction had been measured by the weak mea- surement [52, 54], where a tremendous amplification of II. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP signal (a component of a spin) emerged. Also, the weak measurement using an optical polarizer with a laser beam We consider application of the weak measurement has been realised [55, 56]. We also show that the rela- method [52] to the neutron EDM measurement. Because tivistic E×v corrections are suppressed in this approach. Ref. [52] utilizes an external magnetic field with a spatial In the weak measurement, two quantum systems are gradient for measuring the spin magnetic moment, one prepared, and then the initial and final states are prop- should use the polarized neutron beam and an external erly selected in one of the quantum systems, which are electric field with a spatial gradient. called pre- (|ψii) and post-selections (hψf |), respectively. In order to obtain a signal amplification in a weak A weak value, corresponding to an observable Aˆ, is de- measurement (weak value amplification), two important fined as selections are necessary: the pre-selection and the post- selection. The pre-selection is equivalent to preparation ˆ W hψf |A|ψii of the initial state in the conventional quantum mechan- hAˆi ≡ ∈ C , (4) hψf |ψii ics. On the other hand, the post-selection is extraction of a specific quantum state at the late time [51], and it and can be amplified by choosing the proper selections of makes to understand the weak value amplification diffi- the states: hψf |ψii ∼ 0, which is called weak value am- cult because of lack of counterparts in the conventional plification (for reviews see, e.g., Refs. [57, 58]). Since the quantum mechanics. In a nutshell, the role of the post- weak value is obtained as an observable quantity corre- selection is filtering where only events that the observ- sponding to Aˆ in an intermediate measurement between able (such as the position of the neutron) takes a large |ψii and hψf | without disturbing the quantum systems, value are collected. Note that the weak value amplifica- measurement of the weak value plays an important role tion originates from the quantum interference [63–66], so in the quantum mechanics itself. In addition, the weak that classical filtering is not suitable. In our setup, we value provides new methods for precise measurements impose selections of the spin polarization of the neutrons [59, 60]. In fact, the weak value amplification was ap- as the pre- and post-selections. plied to precise measurements such as the spin Hall ef- Figure1 shows our proposed experimental setup. The fect of the light (four orders of magnitude amplified) [61] detailed explanation is given in the figure caption and the and the beam deflection in a Sagnac interferometer (two following paragraph, especially the electric field with the orders of magnitude amplified) [62]. spatial gradient αx is represented by the orange arrows. In our setup (see Fig.1), as explained in details at We set xyz axis as follows: The neutrons fly along the the next section, unlike the Ramsey method with using z axis. The external electric field has the gradient along the UCN, we consider a polarized neutron beam with the x axis. A spin direction of the pre-selection at the first velocity of ∼ 103 m/sec. We investigate the motion of a spin polarizer is y axis. neutron bunch in the external electric field with spatial The entire process of the setup is divided into four 3
y
x
pre-selection ( spin polarizer
y
z x
↵
neutron bunch pre-selection external electric field post-selection measure the center of mass
FIG. 1. Schematic drawing of the proposed experimental setup. First, emitted neutron bunches from neutron source (the leftmost gray box) are polarized into the yellow arrow in the first polarizer (the yellow box) and it is called pre-selection. The initial state in this paper is a neutron state that just goes through the first polarizer. After the pre-selection, the neutron bunches go through the external electric field with spatial gradient along x axis for a distance L (= vT ). Then, the neutron bunches are selected by the second polarizer (the pink box) where a specific spin polarization state (the pink allow) can pass. The final state is a neutron state that just goes through the post-selection. After the post-selection, the detector measures a position of the center-of-mass of the neutron bunch. Spin directions of the two polarizers are exhibited above the polarizers. The black dots in the neutron bunch roughly represent the single neutron: the number of neutron significantly decreases after the post-selection. stages: 4. Measurement of the center of mass. After the post- selection, position shifts of the neutron along x- Pre-selection. 1. At t = 0, the neutron bunch emit- axis are measured.#2 Here, by taking the average ted from the neutron source is polarized at the first of those shifts, one can measure a position shift of polarizer (the yellow box in Fig.1), and the quan- the center-of-mass of the neutrons passing the post- tum state of the total system is represented by the selection. The expectation value of the position following density matrices shift is expressed as total P S ρˆini =ρ ˆini ⊗ ρˆini , (5) P W TrP xˆρˆfin P ∆x = P . (8) whereρ ˆini is the initial state of the neutron position TrP ρˆfin S andρ ˆini is the pre-selected spin polarization. 2. Time evolution in external electric field. For 0 < The detail evaluations of these processes will be discussed t < T , the neutron bunch goes through the external in the next section. electric field with spatial gradient in Fig.1, where The external electric field is set between the pre- the total system evolves by the Hamiltonian Eq. (9) selection and the post-selection. As discussed in Ap- as pendixA, one can define the x axis as the direction of spatial gradient of the external electric field. Therefore, x total −iHtˆ total iHtˆ ρˆini (t) = e ρˆini e . (6) dependence of y and z components of the external electric field is negligible without loss of generality. According as Note that in this paper, although we do not use the the size of the neutron EDM and the spin polarization, natural units, ~ is discarded for simplicity. displacement of the neutron along x axis occurs. We 3. Post-selection. After the time evolution of the total would like to maximize this displacement by the weak system in the external electric field, at t = T , the value amplification. neutrons are selected in the second polarizer (the pink box in Fig.1) where a specific spin polariza- S tion state (ˆρfin) of the neutron can pass. Then, the neutron position is represented by a density matrix #2 Even if the post-selection is provided by the Stern–Gerlach appa- ratus, a neutron position shift occurs in y–z plane, and a position P S total shift along x-axis does not happen there. ρˆfin = TrS ρˆfinρˆini (T ) . (7) 4
In this setup, the single neutron can be described by Assumption 2 : We consider the following neutron ini- the non-relativistic Hamiltonian [67]: tial state in the Hilbert space HP :
ρˆP ≡ |G ⊗ p ⊗ p i hG ⊗ p ⊗ p | , (11) pˆ2 µ ini px0 y0 z0 px0 y0 z0 ˆ − Eˆ · σ − n Eˆ × p · σ H = dn ˆ 2 ( ˆ) ˆ , (9) 2mn mnc where we defined as
2 1 ip ·x − x where pˆ is the momentum operator of a neutron, mn h | i x0 4d2 x Gpx0 = 2 1/4 e e , (12) is the neutron mass, dn is the neutron EDM, µn is the (2πd ) neutron magnetic moment, Eˆ is an operator of the exter- 1 ipj0·j nal electric field vector, and σˆ is the spin operator cor- hj|pj0i = √ e , for j = y, z . (13) responding to the polarized neutron: the operation on 2π spin-states is defined asσ ˆi |±ii = ± |±ii for i = x, y, z. Here, p , p and p are the initial neutron momenta, This Hamiltonian is defined in the Hilbert space H = x0 y0 z0 and |Gpx0 i, |py0i and |pz0i are the quantum states of x, y HP ⊗ HS, where HP is the Hilbert space of the position and z directions, respectively. We are interested in the (P ) of the neutron, while HS is that of the spin (S) of #3 spatial displacement of the neutron along x axis. As ex- the neutron. Note that although the external magnetic plained below, in the weak measurement, the expectation field is zero in the setup, the magnetic filed is generated value of the neutron position depends on only variance by the relativistic effect in Eq. (3). of the distribution. Therefore, we assume the Gaussian wave packet |Gi as the a quantum state of x direction, for simplicity [68, 69]. In the distribution, we regard d as a standard deviation of the neutron beam and assume that III. WEAK MEASUREMENT the neutron beam diameter is 2d for the x direction.#5 On the other hand, for y and z directions, we assume the In this section, we derive an analytic formula of an plane wave. expectation value of deviation of the neutron position In addition to above assumptions, we use several nu- W from x = 0, which is shown as ∆x in Fig.1. merical approximations in this section. These approxi- To analytically study our strategy for the neutron mation are reasonable when one takes input values which EDM search based on the weak value amplification, we will be used in Sec.IV. Note that these numerical approx- adopt two assumptions as follows: imations are not used in the final plot of Sec.IV. Based on the assumption 1 in Eq. (10), the Hamilto- Assumption 1 : We consider the following external elec- nian in Eq. (9) can be expressed as tric field operator: 2 pˆ 0 0 0 0 ˆ − ⊗ Eˆ H = gµ χ Ex + αxˆ + Ey nˆpz σˆx = Ex + αx,ˆ Ey , 0 , (10) 2mn 0 0 − gµ χEy − Ex + αxˆ nˆpz ⊗ σˆy 0 0 where Ex,Ey , and α are constants (namely α = − 0 − 0 ⊗ #4 gµ Ex + αxˆ nˆpy Ey nˆpx σˆz, (14) dEx/dx). xˆ is an operator corresponding to the x co- ordinate of the neutron. A necessary condition of this q 2 2 2 where we defined p0 ≡ p + p + p , gµ ≡ form is discussed in AppendixA. Even if the Ez com- x0 y0 z0 2 ponent is nonzero, the effect is irrelevant in this setup. µnp0/(mnc ), χ ≡ dn/gµ, andn ˆpi ≡ pˆi/p0 (i = x, y, z) Although Ez generates Bx,y via the relativistic effects for convenience in the following analysis. All interactions in the third terms of Eq. (9), they are significantly sup- are normalized by gµ, and the EDM interaction is repre- pressed by small neutron momenta, vx and vy. sented as χgµ. Note that χ is dimensionless real quantity.
−iHtˆ 2 The time evolution operator is e . Using the Baker–Campbell–Hausdorff formula, and [ˆx, pˆx] = i and [ˆx, pˆx] =
#3 One has to consider the free-falling neutrons in the earth. How- beam is described as a mixed state which is a statistical ensemble ever, we assume that x axis is perpendicular to the direction of of single neutron state. Here, we assumed that both states can be the gravity force, so that we can treat the free-falling effects of described as the Gaussian distributions, and the standard devia- neutrons independently. tion of the mixed state and single neutron state are represented #4 ˆ By adding −αzˆ to z component of E, the electric field satisfies by d and d , respectively. We checked that d contribu- ˆ single single the equation of motion ∇ · E = 0 in the vacuum. Our formalism tions to the following analysis are numerically irrelevant, and all ˆ does not change by the z component of E. the results are sensitive to only d. This justifies our assumption 2. #5 We also considered more realistic distribution that the neutron 5
2ipˆx, we obtain p2 2 ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ 3 2 α 3 2 0 pˆx exp −iHt = exp −i t exp −i H0 + Hχ t + O t gµ , t gµαEy , (15) 2mn mn mn where the interaction Hamiltonian with the background (Hˆ0) and with the EDM (Hˆχ) are " ! # E0 E0 t ˆ ≡ − 0 y ⊗ − ⊗ − y ⊗ ⊗ − ⊗ H0 gµEx 0 nˆpz σˆx nˆpz σˆy + nˆpy 0 nˆpx σˆz + gµα xˆ + pˆx nˆpz σˆy nˆpy σˆz , (16) Ex Ex 2mn ˆ 0 t 0 Hχ ≡ −χgµ Ex + α xˆ + pˆx ⊗ σˆx − χgµEy ⊗ σˆy . (17) 2mn
We have checked that the O(t3) terms in Eq. (15) are numerically negligible in the following analysis. Moreover, the 0 ˆ last term in Eq. (17) is totally screened by gµExnˆpz ⊗ σˆy in H0. Then, we expand the interaction Hamiltonian by αxˆ, and obtain the following analytic form:
2! h i t 2 t exp −i Hˆ0 + Hˆχ t = Uˆ0(t) + α xˆ + pˆx Uˆ1(t) + O α xˆ + pˆx , (18) 2mn 2mn with
0 0 2 Ey Ey 0 ! −i 0 npx0 + inpy0 −npz0 + i 0 npz0 + iχ Ey ˆ 0 Ex Ex 0 U0(t) =I2 cos gµExt + 0 0 sin gµExt + O , (19) Ey Ey E0 npz0 + i 0 npz0 + iχ +i 0 npx0 − inpy0 x Ex Ex 0 0 Ey Ey −i 0 npx0 + inpy0 i 0 npz0 − npz0 + iχ ˆ Ex Ex 0 U1(t) = 0 0 gµt cos gµE t Ey Ey x i 0 npz0 + npz0 + iχ i 0 npx0 − inpy0 Ex Ex 0 0 2 Ey Ey 0 ! i 0 2 npx0 − gµt −i 0 2 npz0 E (Ex) (Ex) 0 y + 0 0 sin gµExt + O , (20) Ey Ey E0 −i 0 2 npz0 −i 0 2 npx0 − gµt x (Ex) (Ex)
× → 2 2 2 where I2 is the 2 2 unit matrix. Hereafter, we assumen ˆpi npi0 = pi0/p0 (i = x, y, z) and npx0 + npy0 + npz0 = 1 0 0 2 0 0 for simplicity of calculations. The higher-order terms O((Ey /Ex) ) are numerically irrelevant when Ey Ex. The Uˆ0(t) and Uˆ1(t) satisfy the unitarity condition:
† † 2 † † Uˆ0(t)Uˆ0(t) = I2 , Uˆ1(t)Uˆ1(t) = (gµt) I2 , Uˆ0(t)Uˆ1(t) + Uˆ1(t)Uˆ0(t) = 0 , (21) up to the following higher-order corrections:
!2 E0 E0 E0 O χ y , χ2, y , n2 , y n n . (22) 0 0 px0 0 px0 py0 Ex Ex Ex
Now, we obtain the compact form of the time evolution operator,
pˆ2 t exp −iHtˆ ' exp −i t Uˆ0(t) + α xˆ + pˆx Uˆ1(t) . (23) 2mn 2mn
As mentioned previous section, the weak measurement final result significantly depends on the impurity effect. requires pre- and post-selections, and we select the neu- This is because neutron passing probability at the post- tron spin polarization. Since the neutron polarization selection is sensitive to the impurity effect in this setup, rate is not perfect in practical spin polarizers, we include and large passing probability dulls the neutron position an impurity effect in the pre- and post-selections as mixed shift. We consider the following pre-selected state in the spin states of the neutron. As will be shown later, the 6 Hilbert space HS: 1 i |φi = |−yi = √ . (26) 2 1 S ρˆini = (1 − )|ψihψ| + |φihφ| 1 1 −i(1 − 2) |± i = , (24) Here, y are eigenstates of the spin operatorσ ˆy, and 2 i(1 − 2) 1 (0 < 1) stands for the selection impurity. After the pre-selection, the quantum state of the total where two polarization states are (see Fig.1) system at the initial time t = 0 can be expressed as direct-productρ ˆtotal =ρ ˆP ⊗ ρˆS , whereρ ˆP is defined in 1 i ini ini ini ini |ψi = |+yi = √ , (25) Eq. (11), which is the assumption 2. 2 −1
The late-time quantum state of the total system at t = T (see Fig.1) just before the post-selection is given as
total −iHTˆ total iHTˆ ρˆini (T ) = e ρˆini e 2 2 −i pˆ T T † T † i pˆ T 2mn ˆ ˆ total ˆ ˆ 2mn = e U0(T ) + α xˆ + pˆx U1(T ) ρˆini U0(T ) + α xˆ + pˆx U1(T ) e . (27) 2mn 2mn Next, we consider the following post-selected state:
S ρˆfin = (1 − )|φδihφδ| + |ψδihψδ| 1 1 + (1 − 2) sin δ i(1 − 2) cos δ = , (28) 2 −i(1 − 2) cos δ 1 − (1 − 2) sin δ with δ δ δ 1 i cos − sin i 2 σˆx 2 2 |ψδi ≡ e |+yi = √ δ δ , 2 − cos 2 + sin 2 δ δ δ 1 i cos + sin i 2 σˆx 2 2 |φδi ≡ e |−yi = √ δ δ . (29) 2 cos 2 − sin 2 Here, δ is a polarization angle around x-axis for the post-selection (see Fig.1). It is known that small δ angle is preferred for the weak value amplification [52]. The selection impurity is also included in the post-selection, and we assume its quality is the same as the pre-selection, for simplicity. total P S After the post-selection, the final state of the total system is written asρ ˆfin =ρ ˆfin ⊗ ρˆfin. Using the late-time state in Eq. (27), we obtain the neutron final state in the Hilbert space HP , P total S total ρˆfin ≡TrS ρˆfin = TrS ρˆfinρˆini (T ) 2 2 h †i −i pˆ T T ∗ T i pˆ T S ˆ S ˆ 2mn P P P 2mn =TrS ρˆfinU0(T )ˆρiniU0(T ) e ρˆini + χgµαT W ρˆini xˆ + pˆx + W xˆ + pˆx ρˆini e 2mn 2mn 2 + O (gµαT ) , (30) where we defined the following dimensionless complex quantity W , h i S ˆ S ˆ † 1 TrS ρˆfinU0(T )ˆρiniU1(T ) W ≡ h i . (31) χgµT S ˆ S ˆ † TrS ρˆfinU0(T )ˆρiniU0(T )
The W corresponds to the weak value. For the third term of Eq. (30), using Eqs. (24) and (28), we used h i h i S ˆ S ˆ † ˆ ∗ S T ˆ T S T TrS ρˆfinU1(T )ˆρiniU0(T ) = TrS U0(T ) (ˆρini) U1(T ) (ˆρfin) h i∗ S ˆ S ˆ † = TrS ρˆfinU0(T )ˆρiniU1(T ) . (32) h i h i∗ S ˆ S ˆ † S ˆ S ˆ † Similarly, one can easily find TrS ρˆfinU0(T )ˆρiniU0(T ) = TrS ρˆfinU0(T )ˆρiniU0(T ) = real. 0 0 In an ideal experimental setup limit, Ey /Ex → 0, npx0,y0 → 0, and → 0, the weak value W is expressed as hψ(T )|σˆ |φ i i hψ(T )|σˆ |φ i W = −i x δ + y δ (33) hψ(T )|φδi χ hψ(T )|φδi 7 i − 0 δ = − e 2igµExT cot + O(χ) , (34) χ 2 where we define
|ψ(T )i = Uˆ0(T )|ψi 0 0 = cos gµExT I2 + i sin gµExT [χσˆx − σˆy] |ψi (35) 0 −igµExT 0 = e |ψi + i sin gµExT χσˆx|ψi . (36) W i W According to the definition of the weak value in Eq. (4), we find W = −ihσˆxi + χ hσˆyi in the ideal experimental limit, and show that W is amplified by cot(δ/2) for small δ region [52]. One should note that since W is always multiplied by χ in Eq. (30), the first term in Eq. (34) is not singular in χ → 0 limit. In other words, there is a W contribution in Eq. (30) that is independent of χ (signal) and sensitive to the weak value W , especially hσˆyi . We will show that such a contribution corresponds to a background effect (from the relativistic E × v effect). It would be interesting possibility to measure the weak value from the background effect, even if one cannot measure the neutron EDM signal. It is noteworthy that proposed setup is valuable for not only the neutron EDM search but also the quantum mechanics itself. 0 In practical experimental setup, since Ey =6 0, npx0,y0 =6 0, and =6 0, O(1/χ) term survives in W that induces χ- independent contributions in Eq. (30). This means that the neutron magnetic moment, which should be χ independent, behaves as a background effect against the neutron EDM signal in the weak measurement. P P P Usingρ ˆfin in Eq. (30), one can consider TrP [ˆρfin] and TrP [ˆxρˆfin] as follows: P total TrP ρˆfin =Tr ρˆfin h i S ˆ S ˆ † px0 2 2 =TrS ρˆfinU0(T )ˆρiniU0 (T ) 1 + χgµα T ReW + O (gµαT ) , (37) mn P total TrP xˆρˆfin =Tr xˆρˆfin
pˆ2 pˆ2 h † i −i x T i x T S ˆ S ˆ 2mn P 2mn =TrS ρˆfinU0(T )ˆρiniU0 (T ) TrP xeˆ ρˆinie
2 2 2 2 ! pˆx T pˆx pˆx T pˆx −i 2m T P i 2m T ∗ −i 2m T P i 2m T + χgµαT W TrP xeˆ n ρˆini xˆ + pˆx e n + W TrP xeˆ n xˆ + pˆx ρˆinie n 2mn 2mn 2 + O (gµαT ) h i p 1 + 4d2p2 T 2 T 2 S ˆ S ˆ † x0 2 x0 − =TrS ρˆfinU0(T )ˆρiniU0 (T ) T + 2χgµαT d + 2 2 ReW χgµα ImW mn 4d 2mn 2mn 2 + O (gµαT ) . (38) Here, we used the following relations [the assumption 2 in Eq. (11)]: P P 2 P 2 TrP ρˆini = 1 , TrP xˆρˆini = 0 , TrP xˆ ρˆini = d , 1 + 4d2p2 i Tr pˆ ρˆP = p , Tr pˆ2 ρˆP = x0 , Tr xˆpˆ ρˆP = , (39) P x ini x0 P x ini 4d2 P x ini 2 and
pˆ2 pˆ2 −i x T T −i x T x,ˆ e 2mn = pˆxe 2mn , (40) mn 2 total from [ˆx, pˆx] = 2ipˆx. Note that the neutron passing probability at the post-selection is expressed by Tr ρˆfin . Using Eq. (37), we obtain 1 Tr ρˆtotal ≈ 2 + δ2 1 . (41) fin 4 This corresponds to reduction of the neutron beam intensity after the post-selection. Eventually, we obtain an expectation value of the position shift of the neutron after the post-selection as (see Fig.1),
P W TrP [ˆxρˆfin] ∆x ≡ P TrP [ˆρfin] 8 " # p 1 T 2 T 2 x0 2 − O 2 = T + 2χgµαT d + 2 ReW χgµα ImW + (gµαT ) . (42) mn 2d 2mn 2mn
2 2 Note that the (T/2mn) /2d term in the third term is numerically negligible. In the limit of npx0,y0 → 0, we obtain the following analytical formula of the expected position shift:
!2 E0 W W W O 2 2 y 2 ∆x = ∆x (EDM) + ∆x (BG) + , δ , 0 , (gµαT ) , (43) Ex with
0 W 2 1 − 3 0 2 1 − Ey 0 0 0 0 ∆ (EDM) = − χgµαT d δ cos 2gµE T + χαd sin gµE T 2gµE T cos gµE T − sin gµE T , x x 0 2 x x x x 2 (Ex) (44) 0 0 W T 1 − Ey 2 0 2 1 − 3 Ey 0 0 0 ∆ (BG) =α δ sin gµE T − αd δ 2gµE T cos 2gµE T − sin 2gµE T . (45) x 0 2 x 0 2 x x x mn 8 (Ex) 4 (Ex)
W W Here, the ∆x (EDM) corresponds to the EDM signal, while the ∆x (BG) is the shift by the background effect which W stems from the neutron magnetic moment (the relativistic E × v effect). The relativistic effects ∆x (BG) mimic the W neutron EDM signal ∆x (EDM). 0 0 Surprisingly, we find that such the relativistic effect is dropped in small T region when Ey Ex and/or δ ≈ 0. For instance, when one takes δ = 0 in the post-selection, the expected position shift is
0 W 2 1 − Ey 0 0 0 0 ∆ (EDM)|δ→0 = χαd sin gµE T 2E gµT cos gµE T − sin gµE T , x 0 2 x x x x (Ex) W ∆x (BG)|δ→0 = 0 . (46) In this limit which one can realize by setting the first and second polarizers to be turned the opposite directions, the P background shift from the relativistic E × v effect is dropped. Note that for large T region, the expansion ofρ ˆfin with W respect to gµαT does not work, and suppression of ∆x (BG) no longer occurs. 0 We observe that a dimensionless combination gµExT is given by
v E0 T g E0T ' −1.0 × 10−1 n x , (47) µ x 103 m · sec−1 107 V · m−1 10−2 sec
0 where we define the neutron velocity vn as p0 = mnvn. For |gµExT | 1 region, the expected position shift in Eqs. (44) and (45) is given by
0 W 2 1 − 3 0 2 2 1 − Ey 0 2 ∆ (EDM) ' − χgµαT d δ 1 − 2(gµE T ) + χαd gµE T , (48) x x 0 2 x 2 (Ex) 0 0 W T 1 − Ey 0 2 2 1 − 3 Ey 0 3 ∆ (BG) 'α δ gµE T + 2αd δ (gµE T ) . (49) x 0 2 x 0 2 x mn 8 (Ex) 3 (Ex)
0 0 Using |Ey /Ex| 1 and 1, eventually we obtain an approximation formula,
χg αT d2δ αT d2δ ∆W ≈ ∆W (EDM) ≈ − µ = −d . (50) x x 2 n 2
As we will show in the next section, choosing suitable of the deviation of the neutron position from x = 0 as 0 0 W 2 input parameters such like , δ, T, and Ey /Ex, the weak ∆x up to corrections of O (gµαT ) , we will also give value ReW can be significantly amplified, and it is just the full-order result in AppendixB. In the leading-order the weak value amplification. analysis in Eq. (42), the EDM signal induced by χ can be enhanced by large value of αT d2. We find, however, Although we analytically obtain the expectation value 9
1000 ϵ=0 100 ϵ=10-4 100 -2 ϵ=10 ϵ=0 ϵ=10-1 10 ϵ=10-4 10 ϵ=10-2 ϵ=10-1 eW | | Re
eW | | Re 1 1
0.10 0.1
0.01 0 0.2π 0.4π 0.6π 0.8π π 1 10 100 1000 104 0 δ Ey (V/m)
0 FIG. 2. Left: the weak value ReW in Eq. (31) as a function of δ with Ey = 10 V/m fixed. Right: the weak value ReW as 0 −3 0 7 −26 a function of Ey with δ = 0.01π fixed. In both panels, we take T = 10 sec, Ex = 10 V/m, and dn = 10 e cm, and vary −4 −2 −1 = 0, 10 , 10 , and 10 . The black dotted line corresponds to |ReW | = 1, which is the eigenvalue ofσ ˆx. that the EDM signal is not amplified by the large value given by the eigenvalue of the spin operator of the EDM 2 of αT d in the full-order analysis, because an additional direction hψ|σˆx|ψi, in addition to the classical motion damping factor appears as we will discuss in the next [the first term in Eq. (42)]. In this setup, |ψi is set as section. |+yi omitting the impurity , so that a zero eigenvalue It is important to distinguish the neutron EDM signal is obtained as h+y|σˆx|+yi = 0, which implies that the from the background shift. Since the background effect beam shift occurs only by the classical motion. As you depends on many parameters and is complicated in our can see in the left panel of Fig.2, the weak value W setup, we evaluate it numerically in the next section. is significantly suppressed around δ = π. Also, one can Before closing this section, let us comment on a special consider a different setup: δ = π with |ψi = |+xi. In this setup in which Eˆ = 0 with pre- and post-selections. In case, the beam shift is given by h+x|σˆx|+xi = 1 term in W such a case, ∆x = (px0/mn)T is predicted. Therefore, addition to the classical motion. The black dotted line the first term Eq. (42) can be subtracted by using data in Fig.2 shows this latter setup. of a setup where the external electric field is turned off. It is shown that the weak value amplification, |ReW | > −2 1, occurs when . 10 , and the amplification is max- imized for small δ regions. As you can see, two orders IV. NUMERICAL RESULTS of magnitude amplification is possible by small and δ. 0 In the right panel, Ey dependence of the weak value is In this section, we show numerical results with varying investigated, where δ = 0.01π is fixed. It is found that 0 many input parameters. Here and hereafter, we assume Ey dependence is negligible. Note that we also observed the following neutron beam velocity: 0 that the weak value is insensitive to T , Ex, and dn for |g E0T | 1 region [see Eq. (47)]. Above results show v = 103 m/sec , n = n = 0 , n = 1 , (51) µ x n px0 py0 pz0 that the weak value amplification can be controlled by and the neutron beam size only the polarization angle δ and the selection impurity in the pre- and post-selections. d = 0.1 m , (52) Here, we comment about a weak-measurement approx- where vn and d are reasonable values in the J-PARC imation, which is evaluation up to the first order of χ. −26 −7 neutron beam experiment [70, 71], while ideal values of For dn = 10 e cm, the parameter χ is 1.49 × 10 , npx0,y0 are taken. and the real part of the weak value Re W is smaller than First, we show the weak value ReW in Eq. (31) in 103 according to the left panel of Fig.2. Consequently, Fig.2. In both panel, the black dotted lines represent our evaluation based on the weak-measurement approx- ReW = ±1, which corresponds to the eigenvalues ofσ ˆx. imation is valid. Hence, the weak value gives amplification of the signals Next, we compare the leading-order approximation for the regions with |ReW | > 1. In the left panel, we with respect to gµαT , which is shown in the previous investigate δ and dependence, where T = 10−3 sec, section, with the full-order analysis. Since equations for 0 7 0 −26 Ex = 10 V/m, Ey = 10 V/m, and dn = 10 e cm are the full-order analysis are lengthy, we put them on Ap- taken. pendixB. From the second term of Eq. (42), the expected Here, we classify the weak measurement in the setup. position shift of the center-of-mass of the neutron bunch Taking δ = π (α = 0 in Ref. [52]) corresponds to an ordi- is nearly proportional to αT d2 within the leading-order nary indirect measurement, where the final beam shift is approximation. Thus, it is expected that one can amplify 10
1000 1000 Leading Leading 100 100 Full Full 10 10
( μ m ) | 1 ( μ m ) | 1 W x W x | Δ 0.100 | Δ 0.100
0.010 0.010
0.001 0.001 10-5 10-4 0.001 0.010 10-5 10-4 0.001 0.010 T(sec) T(sec)
W FIG. 3. The expected position shift of the center-of-mass of the neutron bunch ∆x is shown as a function of T . The solid W −25 lines stand for the EDM signal parts ∆x (EDM) with dn = 10 e cm, while the dashed lines are for the background effects W ∆x (BG). The blue and red lines represent the leading-order calculations and the full-order ones. In the left and right panels, 0 6 7 −3 0 8 2 we take Ex = 10 and 10 V/m, respectively. In both panels, = 0, δ = 10 , Ey = 10 V/m, and α = 10 V/m are taken. the EDM signal by adopting a large value of αT d2. This 1 fact is, however, incorrect in the full-order analysis. As shown in AppendixB, the full-order results include a 2 2 2 2 damping factor exp −(gµαT ) [d + (T/2mn) /4d ]/2 0.100 -25 dn=10 ℯcm with respect to αT d2 appeared in Eqs. (B17) and (B18). 10-24 Since this damping factor becomes significant for a region of 0.010 10-26 10-23 g αT d > 1 , (53) µ δ 5×10-27 10-22 the EDM signal cannot be amplified by the large value 0.001 of αT d2. This factor comes from a Gaussian integral,
-21 Z 2 10 1 x 1 2 2 i(gµαT )x − 2 − 2 (gµαT ) d dx√ e e 2d = e , (54) -4 2πd2 10 10-20 and makes the transition probability in Eq. (37) finite even when δ → 0 and the ideal experimental setup limit -5 0 0 10 -8 -6 -4 are taken: Ey /Ex → 0, npx0,y0 → 0, and → 0. 10 10 10 0.01 In Fig.3, we show the expected position shift of the ϵ W center-of-mass of the neutron bunch ∆x as a function of T . In both panels, the solid lines stand for the EDM FIG. 4. The potential sensitivity to the neutron EDM as W signal parts ∆x (EDM), which are proportional to χ, functions of the selection impurity and the polarization an- with d = 10−25 e cm. On the other hand, the dashed gle δ in the pre- and post-selections. Here, we take T = n 0 7 0 8 2 W 0.01 sec, Ex = 10 V/m, Ey = 10 V/m, and α = 10 V/m . lines are for the background effects ∆x (BG), which are χ independent. The blue and red lines correspond to the leading-order calculations and the full-order ones, re- −3 0 spectively. We take = 0, δ = 10 , Ey = 10 V/m, while the background effect is sensitive. Note that the 8 2 0 6 7 0 α = 10 V/m , and Ex = 10 (10 ) V/m for the left background effect is also scaled by Ey [see Eq. (49)]. (right) panel. Finally, we show a potential sensitivity of the weak It is shown that, the leading- and the full-order cal- measurement that can probe the neutron EDM signal. culations are well consistent with each other in small T In this setup, the neutron EDM can be probed by precise W W regions. On the other hand, ∆x is significantly sup- measurement of ∆x . In current technology, it is possible pressed for large T regions. This figures also show that to measure the neutron position by several methods with the background effects in small T region are smaller than spatial resolutions of 100 nm [72], 1 µm [73], 2 µm [74], the EDM signal contributions by several orders of magni- 5 µm [75, 76], 22 µm, [77], and 50 µm [78]. These spa- tude, which has been shown analytically in the previous tial resolutions determine the potential sensitivity to the section. In order to suppress the background effects, we neutron EDM signal. The detector schemes of Refs. [75– adopt T = 0.01 sec in following estimations. We also find 78] are examined for the neutron beam, and a thermal 0 that the EDM signal contribution is insensitive to Ex, neutron is examined in Ref. [74]. On the other hand, the 11 ones of Refs. [72, 73] are examined for the UCN, but they in Eq. (41), and εeff is the detection efficiency at the can also be utilized for cold neutron (neutron beam) with detector. Then, the statistical condition is small detection efficiency [79]. Recently, the detector scheme of Ref. [72] has been improved [79], and the de- 1010n2 tection efficiency becomes O(1%) with spatial resolution N0 > . (56) of 1–2 µm for the cold neutron. Although the emitted 2εeff neutron beam size is significantly larger than the spatial resolution of the detector, it would not raise a matter. Since the O(109) neutrons can be generated per second in 2 Rather, the spatial resolution should be compared with the experiment [71], a required time is t > 5n /(εeff ) sec. the statistical uncertainty of the beam size, which will be Even if the detection efficiency for the neutron beam is discussed in the end of this section. O(1%) [73, 79], the statistical condition for n = 2 is W By requiring a condition |∆x | > 1 µm as a reference satisfied by O(2000/) seconds neutron beam. value, we show the sensitivity to the neutron EDM in W Fig.4, where ∆ x includes both the EDM signal and the background shift, and the full-order formalism is used. Here, notice that the information necessary for this anal- V. CONCLUSIONS ysis is only a time-averaged shift of the center-of-mass of the neutrons passing the post-selection. The sensi- tivity is shown as a contour on the –δ plane, here we In this paper, we proposed a novel approach in a search 0 7 0 take T = 0.01 sec, Ex = 10 V/m, Ey = 10 V/m, and for the neutron EDM by applying the weak measure- α = 108 V/m2. Based on parameters in Refs. [45, 80] and ment, which is independent from the Ramsey method. discussions with an experimentalist at the J-PARC [79], Although the relativistic E × v effect provides a severe these parameters are chosen. In the Fig.4, the red systematic uncertainty in the neutron EDM experiment (dashed) line corresponds to the current (improved) neu- in which the neutron beam is used, we find such a con- tron EDM bound in Eq. (1) [Eq. (2)], and the larger dn tribution is numerically irrelevant in the weak measure- region is excluded. Moreover, we find the background ment. This is quite unexpected result, and we believe effect is negligible on this plane. that this fact would provide a new virtue of the weak We show that the impurity effect changes the sensitiv- measurement. ity drastically, and find that the neutron EDM signal can To investigate a potential sensitivity to the neutron −5 be probed for a very small impurity region, < 10 . It EDM search, we included the effect from the selection is two orders of magnitude smaller than the current tech- impurities in the pre- and post-selections. Our study −4 nology, e.g., = (6 ± 1stat. ± 3sys.) × 10 [81], which is showed that the size of the impurity crucially determines shown as the vertical blue dotted line in Fig.4: the setup the sensitivity. with = 6×10−4 and δ = 0.1 = 5.7◦ could probe a region We found that the weak measurement can reach up d > 3 × 10−25 e cm. n to d > 3 × 10−25 e cm within the current technology. We comment on contributions from nonzero n and n px0 This is one order of magnitude less sensitive that the n values. We find that if n are smaller than 10−5, py0 px0,y0 current neutron EDM bound, where the UCNs based on these effects do not appear in above numerical evalua- the Ramsey method are used. tions. We also find that the effect of npy0 is more sig- In addition, our approach could provide a new possi- nificant than npx0 : O(1) contributions are produced for −4 bility to measure the weak value of the neutron spin po- npy0 ∼ 10 region. We also comment on a statistical condition for mea- larization from the background effect. This fact makes W our study fascinating in the point of view of the quantum suring non-zero ∆x , where we compare the spatial reso- lution of the detector with the statistical uncertainty of mechanics. the neutron beam. In such an experiment, one has to re- The detailed study about the Fisher information based ject a null hypothesis of the neutron beam following the on Ref. [82] would be one of future directions of this Gaussian distribution with the average position 0 and study, where one can explore whether the weak-value the variance d2. If one measures the time-averaged shift amplification in the neutron EDM measurement outper- of the center-of-mass of the neutrons by N neutrons, the forms the conventional Ramsey method one. Also, the W statistical condition for measuring√ non-zero ∆x at nσ perturbative effects from the Gaussian beam profile [83] W level is expressed as ∆x > n · d/ N . If one considers could give additional systematic error in the weak mea- W a case that a resolution of 1 µm for ∆x and d = 0.1 m, surement [84]. 10 2 the condition is N > 10 n . In this setup, the number Although the small impurity, < 10−5, for probing of neutrons N is the neutron EDM is difficult at the present time, we hope several improvements on the experimental technol- N'N0 · 2 · εeff , (55) ogy, e.g., the sensitivity can be amplified by α and the W where N0 represents the number of emitted neutrons, 2 resolution of ∆x measurement, and anticipate that this is the neutron passing probability at the post-selection kind of experiment will be performed in future. 12
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Ibe, Go Mishima, Yael Shadmi, Yotam Soreq, and Yaniv Weiss. D.U. would like to thank all the members of Insti- We are grateful to Marvin Gerlach for collaboration in tute for Theoretical Particle Physics (TTP) at Karlsruhe the early stage of this project. We would like to thank Institute of Technology, especially Matthias Steinhauser, Joseph Avron, Yuji Hasegawa, Masataka Iinuma, Oded for kind hospitality during the stay. D.U. also appreciates Kenneth, and Izumi Tsutsui for worthwhile discussions of being invited to conferences of the weak value and weak the weak measurements. We also thank Kenji Mishima measurement at KEK. The work of T.K. is supported by for helpful discussions about current neutron beam ex- the Israel Science Foundation (Grant No. 751/19) and by periments. We greatly appreciate many valuable conver- the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) sations with our colleagues, Gauthier Durieux, Masahiro KAKENHI Grant Number 19K14706.
Appendix A: External electric field with gradient
In this appendix, we consider a general setup of the external electric field with spatial gradients. Let us consider an external electric field with gradients ∂Eˆ/∂x = (αx, αy, 0): ˆ 0 0 E(x) = Ex + αxx, Ey + αyx, 0 , (A1)
0 where Ex,y and αx,y are constants. Note that the setup is insensitive to Ez component and its relativistic effect. When one considers a rotation of the coordinate that all spatial dependence go to single electric filed component, the following Eˆ with a coordinate x0 are obtained:
0 0 2 2 αxEx + αyEy + (αx + αy)x ˆ 0 0 0 T ˆ T 1 0 0 E (x , y ) = RE = q −αyEx + αxEy (A2) 2 2 αx + αy 0 √ 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 (αxEx + αyEy ) + αxx − αyy αx+αy √ 1 0 0 = 2 2 (−αyEx + αxEy ) , (A3) αx+αy 0 and 0 x αxx + αyy 0 0 1 x ≡ y = Rx = q −αyx + αxy , (A4) 0 2 2 z αx + αy z where the rotation matrix R is cos θ sin θ 0 αx R = − sin θ cos θ 0 , with cos θ = q . (A5) 2 2 0 0 1 αx + αy
The spatial dependence of y0 in Eˆ 0(x0, y0) would provide us with a spatial displacement of the neutron along y0 axis. In order to obtain the experimental setup in Eq. (10), αy αx are thus required.
W Appendix B: Full-order calculation for ∆x
W In this appendix, we give building blocks of the full-order calculation for ∆x with respect to gµαT . The expected position shift of the center-of-mass of the neutron bunch is defined as [see Eqs. (37), (38), and (42) for the leading-order analysis]:
h T totali Tr xˆ + pˆx ρˆ W 2mn fin ∆x = total , (B1) Tr ρˆfin with
total h S −iT Hˆ S iT Hˆ i Tr ρˆfin = hGpx0 |TrS ρˆfine ρˆinie |Gpx0 i , (B2) 13 T total T h S −iT Hˆ S iT Hˆ i Tr xˆ + pˆx ρˆfin = hGpx0 | xˆ + pˆx TrS ρˆfine ρˆinie |Gpx0 i . (B3) 2mn 2mn
In the full-order analysis, we discard only O(χ2) contributions. Using Eqs. (15)–(17) for the time evolution operator, S −iT Hˆ S iT Hˆ TrS[ˆρfine ρˆinie ] is expanded as
pˆ2 h S −iT Hˆ S iT Hˆ i −iT x 1 2 2 2 0 2 2 TrS ρˆ e ρˆ e =e 2mn − Eˆ (−1 + (1 − 2) cos(δ)) cos (EˆxgµT ) − (E np − Eˆxnp ) sin (EˆxgT ) fin ini ˆ2 x y x0 y0 2Ex − ˆ2 0 2 2 2 ˆ − − 2 0 − ˆ 2 2 ˆ (Ex + (Ey ) )npz0 sin (ExgµT ) (1 2) (Ey npx0 Exnpy0 ) cos(δ) sin (ExgµT ) − − 2 − ˆ 0 ˆ 0 2 2 ˆ (1 2) ( Ex + Ey )(Ex + Ey )npz0 cos(δ) sin (ExgµT ) 2 ˆ 0 ˆ 2 ˆ 2 ˆ 0 ˆ − 2(1 − 2) Ex(Ey npx0 − Exnpy0 )npz0 sin(δ) sin (ExgµT ) + (1 − 2) ExEy npz0 sin(δ) sin(2ExgµT ) 1 0 2 2 0 2 − χ − 2EˆxE np sin (EˆxgµT ) − 2(1 − 2) EˆxE np cos(δ) sin (EˆxgµT ) ˆ2 y z0 y z0 2Ex pˆ2 +iT x 2 ˆ2 ˆ 2mn 2 + (1 − 2) Ex sin(δ) sin(2ExgµT ) e + O(χ ) , (B4)
ˆ ˆ 0 where Ex is defined as Ex = Ex + α (ˆx + T pˆx/2mn). To calculate Eqs. (B2) and (B3), the following building blocks are needed:
pˆ2 pˆ2 −iT x 2 +iT x 1 hG |e 2mn cos Eˆ g T e 2mn |G i = [f (2g ) + f (−2g ) + 2] , (B5) px0 x µ px0 4 1 µ 1 µ pˆ2 pˆ2 −iT x 2 +iT x 1 hG |e 2mn sin Eˆ g T e 2mn |G i = − [f (2g ) + f (−2g ) − 2] , (B6) px0 x µ px0 4 1 µ 1 µ pˆ2 pˆ2 Z gµ Z g1 −iT x 1 2 +iT x 2 hGp |e 2mn sin EˆxgµT e 2mn |Gp i = T dg1 dg2 [f1(2g2) + f1(−2g2)] , (B7) x0 ˆ2 x0 Ex 0 0 pˆ2 pˆ2 Z gµ −iT x 1 +iT x T 2mn 2 ˆ 2mn hGpx0 |e sin ExgµT e |Gpx0 i = dg1 [f1(2g1) − f1(−2g1)] , (B8) Eˆx 2i 0 pˆ2 pˆ2 −iT x +iT x 1 hG |e 2mn sin 2Eˆ g T e 2mn |G i = [f (2g ) − f (−2g )] , (B9) px0 x µ px0 2i 1 µ 1 µ pˆ2 pˆ2 Z gµ −iT x 1 +iT x 2mn ˆ 2mn hGpx0 |e sin 2ExgµT e |Gpx0 i = T dg1 [f1(2g1) + f1(−2g1)] , (B10) Eˆx 0 pˆ2 pˆ2 T −iT x +iT x 1 T 2mn 2 ˆ 2mn hGpx0 | xˆ + pˆx e cos ExgµT e |Gpx0 i = f2(2gµ) + f2(−2gµ) + px0 , (B11) 2mn 4 2mn
pˆ2 pˆ2 T −iT x +iT x 1 T 2mn 2 ˆ 2mn hGpx0 | xˆ + pˆx e sin ExgµT e |Gpx0 i = − f2(2gµ) + f2(−2gµ) − px0 , (B12) 2mn 4 2mn
pˆ2 pˆ2 Z gµ Z g1 T −iT x 1 2 +iT x 2 hGp | xˆ + pˆx e 2mn sin EˆxgµT e 2mn |Gp i = T dg1 dg2 [f2(2g2) + f2(−2g2)] , (B13) x0 ˆ2 x0 2mn Ex 0 0 pˆ2 pˆ2 Z gµ T −iT x 1 +iT x T 2mn 2 ˆ 2mn hGpx0 | xˆ + pˆx e sin ExgµT e |Gpx0 i = dg1 [f2(2g1) − f2(−2g1)] , (B14) 2mn Eˆx 2i 0 pˆ2 pˆ2 T −iT x +iT x 1 2mn ˆ 2mn hGpx0 | xˆ + pˆx e sin 2ExgµT e |Gpx0 i = [f2(2gµ) − f2(−2gµ)] , (B15) 2mn 2i
pˆ2 pˆ2 Z gµ T −iT x 1 +iT x 2mn ˆ 2mn hGpx0 | xˆ + pˆx e sin 2ExgµT e |Gpx0 i = T dg1 [f2(2g1) + f2(−2g1)] , (B16) 2mn Eˆx 0 with
pˆ2 pˆ2 −iT x ˆ +iT x 2mn iExgµT 2mn f1(gµ) ≡ hGpx0 |e e e |Gpx0 i
(g αT )2 h 2i 0 T µ 2 1 T i gµE T −gµαT px0 − d + 2 ( ) = e ( x 2mn )e 2 4d 2mn , (B17)
pˆ2 pˆ2 −iT x T ˆ +iT x 2mn iExgµT 2mn f2(gµ) ≡ hGpx0 |e xˆ + pˆx e e |Gpx0 i 2mn 14
( " 2#) (g αT )2 h 2i 0 T µ 2 1 T T 2 1 T i gµE T −gµαT px0 − d + 2 ( ) − ( x 2mn ) 2 4d 2mn = (px0 + gµαT ) + igµαT d + 2 e e . 2mn 4d 2mn (B18)
Combining Eqs. (B2)–(B18), one can numerically calculate the expected position shift of the center-of-mass of the neutron bunch at the full order. See e.g., Refs. [53, 85] for detailed discussions of the damping factors in Eqs. (B17) and (B18).
[1] M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, “CP Violation in the [16] J. Polchinski and M. B. Wise, “The Electric Dipole Mo- Renormalizable Theory of Weak Interaction,” Prog. ment of the Neutron in Low-Energy Supergravity,” Phys. Theor. Phys. 49, 652–657 (1973). Lett. 125B, 393–398 (1983). [2] N. F. Ramsey, “Electric-Dipole Moments of Particles,” [17] M. Dugan, B. Grinstein, and L. J. Hall, “CP Violation Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 32, 211–233 (1982). in the Minimal N=1 Supergravity Theory,” Nucl. Phys. [3] E. P. Shabalin, “Electric Dipole Moment of Quark in a B255, 413–438 (1985). Gauge Theory with Left-Handed Currents,” Sov. J. Nucl. [18] J. M. Arnold, B. Fornal, and M. B. Wise, “Phenomenol- Phys. 28, 75 (1978), [Yad. Fiz.28,151(1978)]. ogy of scalar leptoquarks,” Phys. Rev. D88, 035009 [4] I. B. Khriplovich, “Quark Electric Dipole Moment (2013), arXiv:1304.6119 [hep-ph]. and Induced θ Term in the Kobayashi-Maskawa [19] K. Fuyuto, M. Ramsey-Musolf, and T. Shen, “Elec- Model,” Phys. Lett. B173, 193–196 (1986), [Yad. tric Dipole Moments from CP-Violating Scalar Lepto- Fiz.44,1019(1986)]. quark Interactions,” Phys. Lett. B788, 52–57 (2019), [5] A. Czarnecki and B. Krause, “Neutron electric dipole arXiv:1804.01137 [hep-ph]. moment in the standard model: Valence quark contribu- [20] W. Dekens, J. de Vries, M. Jung, and K. K. Vos, tions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 4339–4342 (1997), arXiv:hep- “The phenomenology of electric dipole moments in ph/9704355 [hep-ph]. models of scalar leptoquarks,” JHEP 01, 069 (2019), [6] I. B. Khriplovich and A. R. Zhitnitsky, “What Is the arXiv:1809.09114 [hep-ph]. Value of the Neutron Electric Dipole Moment in the [21] T. Appelquist, M. Piai, and R. Shrock, “Lepton dipole Kobayashi-Maskawa Model?” Phys. Lett. 109B, 490–492 moments in extended technicolor models,” Phys. Lett. (1982). B593, 175–180 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0401114 [hep-ph]. [7] B. H. J. McKellar, S. R. Choudhury, X.-G. He, and [22] T. Appelquist, M. Piai, and R. Shrock, “Quark dipole S. Pakvasa, “The Neutron Electric Dipole Moment in operators in extended technicolor models,” Phys. Lett. the Standard K−m Model,” Phys. Lett. B197, 556–560 B595, 442–452 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0406032 [hep-ph]. (1987). [23] A. D. Sakharov, “Violation of CP Invariance, C asym- [8] J. Dragos, T. Luu, A. Shindler, J. de Vries, and metry, and baryon asymmetry of the universe,” Pisma A. Yousif, “Confirming the Existence of the strong CP Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 5, 32–35 (1967), [Usp. Fiz. Problem in Lattice QCD with the Gradient Flow,” Phys. Nauk161,no.5,61(1991)]. Rev. C 103, 015202 (2021), arXiv:1902.03254 [hep-lat]. [24] M. B. Gavela, P. Hernandez, J. Orloff, and O. Pene, [9] T. Mannel and N. Uraltsev, “Loop-Less Electric Dipole “Standard model CP violation and baryon asymme- Moment of the Nucleon in the Standard Model,” Phys. try,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A9, 795–810 (1994), arXiv:hep- Rev. D85, 096002 (2012), arXiv:1202.6270 [hep-ph]. ph/9312215 [hep-ph]. [10] S. Weinberg, “Gauge Theory of CP Violation,” Phys. [25] K. Fuyuto, J. Hisano, and E. Senaha, “Toward Rev. Lett. 37, 657 (1976). verification of electroweak baryogenesis by electric [11] N. G. Deshpande and E. Ma, “Comment on Weinberg’s dipole moments,” Phys. Lett. B755, 491–497 (2016), Gauge Theory of CP Nonconservation,” Phys. Rev. D16, arXiv:1510.04485 [hep-ph]. 1583 (1977). [26] J. M. Pendlebury et al., “Revised experimental upper [12] S. Weinberg, “Larger Higgs Exchange Terms in the Neu- limit on the electric dipole moment of the neutron,” Phys. tron Electric Dipole Moment,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 2333 Rev. D92, 092003 (2015), arXiv:1509.04411 [hep-ex]. (1989). [27] N. F. Ramsey, “A New Molecular Beam Resonance [13] S. M. Barr and A. Zee, “Electric Dipole Moment of the Method,” Phys. Rev. 76, 996 (1949). Electron and of the Neutron,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 21–24 [28] N. F. Ramsey, “A Molecular Beam Resonance Method (1990), [Erratum: Phys. Rev. Lett.65,2920(1990)]. with Separated Oscillating Fields,” Phys. Rev. 78, 695– [14] J. R. Ellis, S. Ferrara, and D. V. Nanopoulos, “CP Vio- 699 (1950). lation and Supersymmetry,” Phys. Lett. 114B, 231–234 [29] G. Pignol, “The new measurement of the neutron EDM,” (1982). PSI user’s meeting, PSI Villigen, 28 January 2020. [15] W. Buchmuller and D. Wyler, “CP Violation and R In- [30] C. Abel et al. (nEDM), “Measurement of the permanent variance in Supersymmetric Models of Strong and Elec- electric dipole moment of the neutron,” Phys. Rev. Lett. troweak Interactions,” Proceedings, DESY Workshop on 124, 081803 (2020), arXiv:2001.11966 [hep-ex]. Electroweak Interactions at High Energies: Hamburg, [31] J. H. Smith, E. M. Purcell, and N. F. Ramsey, “Exper- Germany, September 28-30, 1982, Phys. Lett. 121B, 321 imental limit to the electric dipole moment of the neu- (1983), [,277(1982)]. tron,” Phys. Rev. 108, 120–122 (1957). 15
[32] J. K. Baird, P. D. Miller, W. B. Dress, and N. F. Ramsey, [48] V. V. Fedorov et al., “Measurement of the neutron elec- “Improved upper limit to the electric dipole moment of tric dipole moment by crystal diffraction,” Nucl. Instrum. the neutron,” Phys. Rev. 179, 1285–1291 (1969). Meth. A 611, 124–128 (2009), arXiv:0907.1153 [nucl-ex]. [33] W. B. Dress, P. D. Miller, J. M. Pendlebury, Paul Perrin, [49] V. V. Fedorov et al., “Perspectives for nEDM search by and Norman F. Ramsey, “Search for an Electric Dipole crystal diffraction. Test experiment and results,” Nucl. Moment of the Neutron,” Phys. Rev. D15, 9 (1977). Phys. A 827, 538c–540c (2009). [34] N. F. Ramsey, “Neutron magnetic resonance experi- [50] V. V. Fedorov et al., “Measurement of the neutron ments,” Physica BC137, 223 (1986). electric dipole moment via spin rotation in a non- [35] R. Feynman, R. Leighton, and M. Sands, “The Feyn- centrosymmetric crystal,” Phys. Lett. B 694, 22–25 man’s Lectures on Physics,” (1964), Volume II. (2011), arXiv:1009.0153 [hep-ex]. [36] I. S. Altarev et al., “Search for the neutron electric dipole [51] Y. Aharonov, P. G. Bergmann, and J. L. Lebowitz, moment,” Phys. Atom. Nucl. 59, 1152–1170 (1996), [Yad. “Time symmetry in the quantum process of measure- Fiz.59N7,1204(1996)]. ment,” Phys. Rev. 134, B1410–B1416 (1964). [37] C. A. Baker et al., “An Improved experimental limit on [52] Y. Aharonov, D. Z. Albert, and L. Vaidman, “How the the electric dipole moment of the neutron,” Phys. Rev. result of a measurement of a component of the spin of Lett. 97, 131801 (2006), arXiv:hep-ex/0602020 [hep-ex]. a spin-1/2 particle can turn out to be 100,” Phys. Rev. [38] T. M. Ito, “Plans for a Neutron EDM Experiment Lett. 60, 1351–1354 (1988). at SNS,” 2nd Meeting of the APS Topical Group on [53] J. Lee and I. Tsutsui, “Merit of amplification by Hadronic Physics (GHP2006) Nashville, Tennesse, Oc- weak measurement in view of measurement uncertainty,” tober 22-24, 2006, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 69, 012037 (2007), Quantum Studies: Mathematics and Foundations 1, arXiv:nucl-ex/0702024 [NUCL-EX]. 65–78 (2014). [39] M. G. D. van der Grinten et al. (CryoEDM), “CryoEDM: [54] S. Sponar, T. Denkmayr, H. Geppert, H. Lemmel, A cryogenic experiment to measure the neutron elec- A. Matzkin, and Y. Hasegawa, “Weak values obtained tric dipole moment,” Particle physics with slow neutrons. in matter-wave interferometry,” Phys. Rev. A92, 062121 Proceedings, International Workshop, Grenoble, France, (2015), arXiv:1404.2125 [quant-ph]. May 29-31, 2008, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A611, 129–132 [55] N. W. M. Ritchie, J. G. Story, and Randall G. Hulet, (2009). “Realization of a measurement of a “weak value”,” Phys. [40] A. P. Serebrov et al., “Ultracold-neutron infrastructure Rev. Lett. 66, 1107–1110 (1991). for the PNPI/ILL neutron EDM experiment,” Nucl. In- [56] G. J. Pryde, J. L. O’Brien, A. G. White, T. C. Ralph, strum. Meth. A611, 263–266 (2009). and H. M. Wiseman, “Measurement of quantum weak [41] S. K. Lamoreaux and R. Golub, “Experimental searches values of photon polarization,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, for the neutron electric dipole moment,” J. Phys. G36, 220405 (2005). 104002 (2009). [57] Y. Aharonov, S. Popescu, and J. Tollaksen, “A time- [42] C. A. Baker et al., “The search for the neutron electric symmetric formulation of quantum mechanics,” Physics dipole moment at the Paul Scherrer Institute,” Proceed- Today 63, 27–32 (2010). ings, 2nd International Workshop on Physics of funda- [58] A. G. Kofman, S. Ashhab, and F. Nori, “Nonpertur- mental Symmetries and Interactions at low energies and bative theory of weak pre- and post-selected measure- the precision frontier (PSI2010): PSI, Villigen, Switzer- ments,” Phys. Rep. 520, 43–133 (2012), arXiv:1109.6315 land, October 11-14, 2010, Phys. Procedia 17, 159–167 [quant-ph]. (2011). [59] Y. Aharonov and L. Vaidman, “Complete description of [43] Y. Masuda et al., “Neutron electric dipole moment mea- a quantum system at a given time,” Journal of Physics surement with a buffer gas comagnetometer,” Phys. Lett. A: Mathematical and General 24, 2315–2328 (1991). A376, 1347 (2012). [60] K. Yokota, T. Yamamoto, M. Koashi, and N. Imoto, “Di- [44] I. Altarev et al., “A next generation measurement of the rect observation of hardy’s paradox by joint weak mea- electric dipole moment of the neutron at the FRM II,” surement with an entangled photon pair,” New Journal 5th International Workshop on From Parity Violation of Physics 11, 033011 (2009). to Hadronic Structure and More (PAVI11) Rome, Italy, [61] O. Hosten and P. Kwiat, “Observation of the spin hall September 5-9, 2011, Nuovo Cim. C035N04, 122–127 effect of light via weak measurements,” Science 319, 787– (2012). 790 (2008). [45] F. M. Piegsa, “New Concept for a Neutron Electric [62] P. B. Dixon, D. J. Starling, A. N. Jordan, and J. C. How- Dipole Moment Search using a Pulsed Beam,” Phys. Rev. ell, “Ultrasensitive beam deflection measurement via in- C88, 045502 (2013), arXiv:1309.1959 [physics.ins-det]. terferometric weak value amplification,” Phys. Rev. Lett. [46] V. V. Fedorov, E. G. Lapin, E. Lelievre-Berna, V. V. 102, 173601 (2009), arXiv:0906.4828 [quant-ph]. Nesvizhevsky, A. K. Petukhov, S. Y. Semenikhin, [63] I. M. Duck, P. M. Stevenson, and E. C. G. Sudar- T. Soldner, F. Tasset, and V. V. Voronin, “The Laue shan, “The Sense in Which a “Weak Measurement” of diffraction method to search for a neutron EDM. Exper- a Spin 1/2 Particle’s Spin Component Yields a Value imental test of the sensitivity,” Nucl. Instrum. Meth. B 100,” Phys. Rev. D 40, 2112–2117 (1989). 227, 11–15 (2005). [64] L. Vaidman, “Comment on “How the result of a sin- [47] V. V. Fedorov, E. G. Lapin, S. Y. Semenikhin, gle coin toss can turn out to be 100 heads”,” (2014), V. V. Voronin, E. Lelievre-Berna, V. Nesvizhevsky, arXiv:1409.5386 [quant-ph]. A. Petoukhov, T. Soldner, and F. Tasset, “First obser- [65] J. Dressel, “Weak values as interference phenomena,” vation of the neutron spin rotation for Laue diffraction Phys. Rev. A 91, 032116 (2015), arXiv:1410.0943 [quant- in a deformed noncentrosymmetric crystal,” Int. J. Mod. ph]. Phys. A 23, 1435–1445 (2008). 16
[66] L. Qin, W. Feng, and X.-Q. Li, “Simple understand- color center formation in lif crystals,” Nucl. Instrum. ing of quantum weak values,” Scientific Reports 6, 20286 Meth. A622, 637–641 (2010). (2016), arXiv:1505.00595 [quant-ph]. [76] P. Trtik and E. H. Lehmann, “Progress in high-resolution [67] M. Pospelov and A. Ritz, “Electric dipole moments as neutron imaging at the paul scherrer institut - the neu- probes of new physics,” Annals Phys. 318, 119–169 tron microscope project,” Journal of Physics: Conference (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0504231 [hep-ph]. Series 746, 012004 (2016). [68] K. Ishikawa and T. Shimomura, “Generalized S-matrix in [77] H. Shishido et al., “High-Speed Neutron Imaging Using mixed representations,” Prog. Theor. Phys. 114, 1201– a Current-Biased Delay-Line Detector of Kinetic Induc- 1234 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0508303 [hep-ph]. tance,” Phys. Rev. Applied 10, 044044 (2018). [69] K. Ishikawa and K. Oda, “Particle decay in Gaussian [78] K. Kuroda, “A new trend in photomultiplier techniques wave-packet formalism revisited,” PTEP 2018, 123B01 and its implications in future collider experiments,” Nucl. (2018), arXiv:1809.04285 [hep-ph]. Instrum. Meth. A277, 242–250 (1989). [70] K. Mishima et al., “Design of neutron beamline for funda- [79] K. Mishima, private communication. mental physics at J-PARC BL05,” Nucl. Instrum. Meth. [80] W. B. Dress, P. D. Miller, J. M. Pendlebury, P. Perrin, A600, 342–345 (2009). and N. F. Ramsey, “Search for an Electric Dipole Mo- [71] K. Nakajima et al., “Materials and Life Science Experi- ment of the Neutron,” Phys. Rev. D 15, 9 (1977). mental Facility (MLF) at the Japan Proton Accelerator [81] T. Yoshioka et al., “Polarization ofverycoldneutronusin- Research Complex II: Neutron Scattering Instruments,” gapermanentmagnetquadrupole,” International Work- Quantum Beam Sci. 1, 9 (2017). shop on Neutron Optics: NOP2010 Alpe d’Huez, France, [72] N. Naganawa et al., “A Cold/Ultracold Neutron Detector March 17-19, 2010, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A634, S17– using Fine-grained Nuclear Emulsion with Spatial Reso- S20 (2011). lution less than 100 nm,” Eur. Phys. J. C78, 959 (2018), [82] J. Harris, R. W. Boyd, and J. S. Lundeen, “Weak Value arXiv:1803.00452 [physics.ins-det]. Amplification Can Outperform Conventional Measure- [73] T. Jenke et al., “Ultracold neutron detectors based on ment in the Presence of Detector Saturation,” Phys. Rev. 10B converters used in the qBounce experiments,” Pro- Lett. 118, 070802 (2017). ceedings, 13th Vienna Conference on Instrumentation [83] C. Clark, R. Barankov, M. Huber, M. Arif, D. Cory, and (VCI 2013): Vienna, Austria, February 11-15, 2013, D. Pushin, “Controlling neutron orbital angular momen- Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A732, 1–8 (2013). tum,” Nature 525, 504–506 (2015). [74] D. S. Hussey, J. M. LaManna, E. Baltic, and D. L. [84] Y. Turek, H. Kobayashi, T. Akutsu, C.-P. Sun, and Jacobson, “Neutron imaging detector with 2 µm spa- Y. Shikano, “Post-selected von neumann measurement tial resolution based on event reconstruction of neutron with hermite–gaussian and laguerre–gaussian pointer capture in gadolinium oxysulfide scintillators,” Nucl. In- states,” New J. Phys. 17, 083029 (2015), arXiv:1410.3189 strum. Meth. A866, 9–12 (2017). [quant-ph]. [75] M. Matsubayashi, A. Faenov, T. Pikuz, Y. Fukuda, and [85] K. Kawana and D. Ueda, “Amplification of gravitational Y. Kato, “Neutron imaging of micron-size structures by motion via Quantum weak measurement,” PTEP 2019, 041A01 (2019), arXiv:1804.09505 [quant-ph].