pith. sign in

arxiv: 2106.09210 · v2 · submitted 2021-06-17 · ✦ hep-ph · physics.atom-ph

Comagnetometer probes of dark matter and new physics

W. A. Terrano , M. V. Romalis This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 13:48 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph physics.atom-ph
keywords comagnetometrydark matternew physicselectric dipole momentsLorentz invarianceaxionsspin interactionsprecision measurements
0
0 comments X

The pith

Comagnetometers reach 10^{-26} eV sensitivity to probe new physics coupling to spin.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes that comagnetometry suppresses magnetic interactions of spins while measuring their energy differences at levels down to 10^{-26} eV, making it the most sensitive technique in absolute energy units. This capability opens experimental access to non-standard-model effects such as electric dipole moments, Lorentz invariance violations, Goldstone bosons, CP-violating forces, and axionic dark matter. A sympathetic reader would care because the method uses existing technology and projects several orders of magnitude further improvement based on signal-to-noise considerations alone. The review covers multiple implementations optimized for different targets and evaluates sources of systematic error that could limit gains.

Core claim

Modern comagnetometry suppresses the magnetic interactions of the spins, making searches for non-standard-model interactions possible while reaching sensitivities in the 10^{-26} eV range. New physics scenarios which can be probed include EDMs, violations of Lorentz invariance, Goldstone bosons of new high-energy symmetries, CP-violating long-range forces, and axionic dark matter. There is room for several orders of magnitude in further improvement based purely on signal-to-noise ratio with existing technology, although several sources of systematic error and instability may limit improvements.

What carries the argument

Comagnetometry, a technique using multiple spin species to cancel common-mode magnetic field effects while retaining sensitivity to other spin-dependent interactions.

If this is right

  • EDM searches gain new reach without requiring new particle accelerators.
  • Axionic dark matter signals become detectable through spin precession at frequencies set by the axion mass.
  • Lorentz invariance violations can be constrained at energy scales beyond those accessible by other precision tests.
  • CP-violating long-range forces between spins can be bounded or discovered.
  • Goldstone bosons from broken high-energy symmetries produce testable spin-dependent potentials.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same cancellation principle could be adapted to other multi-species quantum sensors to extend sensitivity in related precision measurements.
  • If systematics are mastered, the approach provides a low-cost route to test high-energy symmetry breaking without collider-scale infrastructure.
  • Overlap with atomic clock and magnetometry communities may accelerate shared techniques for drift suppression.
  • Future work could quantify how the projected gains translate into specific bounds on axion-photon or axion-fermion couplings.

Load-bearing premise

That systematic errors and instabilities can be controlled sufficiently to allow the signal-to-noise-limited sensitivity improvements projected in the paper.

What would settle it

A laboratory demonstration that a dominant systematic, such as residual magnetic gradients or temperature-induced drifts, sets a hard floor above 10^{-26} eV that cannot be further suppressed with current methods.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2106.09210 by M. V. Romalis, W. A. Terrano.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The progress in comagnetometer energy sensitivity since Hughes and Drever. These results are for the energy of a spin due to its absolute orientation. The largest improvements came with the ability to create relatively pure ensemble quantum states via optical pumping, in the 1980s, and with the implementation of quantum magnetometers for the read-out systems in the 2000s. References, from top-left to botto… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We discuss the use of comagnetometry in studying new physics that couples to fermionic spin. Modern comagnetometry is -- in absolute energy units -- the most sensitive experimental technique for measuring the energy difference between quantum states, reaching sensitivities in the $10^{-26}\,$eV range. The technique suppresses the magnetic interactions of the spins, making searches for non-standard-model interactions possible. Many implementations have been developed and optimized for various uses. New physics scenarios which can be probed with comagnetometers include: EDMs, violations of Lorentz invariance, Goldstone bosons of new high-energy symmetries, CP-violating long-range forces, and axionic dark matter. We consider the prospects for improvements in the technique, and show -- based purely on signal-to-noise ratio with existing technology -- that there is room for several orders of magnitude in further improvement. We also evaluate several sources of systematic error and instability that may limit improvements.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reviews the application of comagnetometry to searches for new physics that couples to fermionic spin. It states that modern comagnetometry achieves the highest sensitivity to quantum-state energy differences in absolute units (10^{-26} eV), suppresses magnetic couplings to enable non-SM searches, enumerates target scenarios (EDMs, Lorentz violation, Goldstone bosons, CP-violating long-range forces, axionic dark matter), and projects several orders of magnitude further improvement on the basis of signal-to-noise ratio using existing technology while evaluating sources of systematic error and instability.

Significance. If the stated sensitivities and the SNR-based projections hold after the systematics evaluation, the work would be a useful reference for the community by positioning comagnetometry as a leading low-energy probe of spin-dependent new physics and dark matter. The explicit evaluation of systematics directly addresses the key assumption that further gains remain feasible, strengthening the paper's utility for experimental planning. The manuscript gives appropriate credit to the development of the technique across multiple implementations.

minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that 'many implementations have been developed and optimized for various uses' would be clearer if accompanied by a short parenthetical list of representative techniques or a forward reference to the relevant section.
  2. The manuscript would benefit from a summary table comparing achieved sensitivities, systematic budgets, and target physics across the different comagnetometer implementations discussed.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive assessment of the manuscript, including its utility as a reference for the community and appropriate credit to prior work. The recommendation is for minor revision, but the report contains no enumerated major comments to address point by point.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

The paper is a discussion/review of comagnetometry techniques and their applications to new physics searches. It states experimental sensitivities (e.g., 10^{-26} eV) and projects SNR-limited improvements based on existing technology and explicit evaluation of systematics, without any derivations, equations, fitted parameters, or predictions that reduce to inputs by construction. No self-citations are invoked as load-bearing uniqueness theorems or ansatzes. The central claims rest on external experimental results and direct error analysis rather than internal self-reference.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is a review and discussion paper; the abstract introduces no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5687 in / 1070 out tokens · 21215 ms · 2026-05-24T13:48:24.553456+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Dark Matter

    hep-ph 2024-06 unverdicted novelty 2.0

    A review summarizing current observational, experimental, and theoretical results on dark matter.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

118 extracted references · 118 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 10 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Magnetic moment of the proton,

    I. Estermann, R. Frisch, and O. Stern, “Magnetic moment of the proton,” Nature 132, 169–170 (1933)

    work page 1933

  2. [2]

    A new method of measuring nuclear magnetic moment,

    I. I. Rabi, J. R. Zacharias, S. Millman, and P. Kusch, “A new method of measuring nuclear magnetic moment,” Phys. Rev. 53, 318–318 (1938)

    work page 1938

  3. [3]

    The nuclear induction experiment,

    F. Bloch, W. W. Hansen, and M. Packard, “The nuclear induction experiment,” Phys. Rev. 70, 474–485 (1946)

    work page 1946

  4. [4]

    Nuclear magnetic resonance absorption in hydrogen gas,

    E. M. Purcell, R. V. Pound, and N. Bloembergen, “Nuclear magnetic resonance absorption in hydrogen gas,” Phys. Rev. 70, 986–987 (1946)

    work page 1946

  5. [5]

    Upper limit for the anisotropy of inertial mass from nuclear resonance experiments,

    V. W. Hughes, H. G. Robinson, and V. Beltran-Lopez, “Upper limit for the anisotropy of inertial mass from nuclear resonance experiments,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 4, 342–344 (1960)

    work page 1960

  6. [6]

    A search for anisotropy of inertial mass using a free precession technique,

    R. W. P. Drever, “A search for anisotropy of inertial mass using a free precession technique,” The Philosophical Magazine: A Journal of Theoretical Experimental and Applied Physics 6, 683–687 (1961), https://doi.org/10.1080/14786436108244418

    work page doi:10.1080/14786436108244418 1961

  7. [7]

    Search for new physics with atoms and molecules,

    M. S. Safronova, D. Budker, D. DeMille, D. F. J. Kimball, A. Derevianko, and C. W. Clark, “Search for new physics with atoms and molecules,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 025008 (2018)

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    Limits on new long range nuclear spin-dependent forces set with a K-3He co-magnetometer

    G. Vasilakis, J. M. Brown, T. W. Kornack, and M. V. Romalis, “Limits on New Long Range Nuclear Spin-Dependent Forces Set with a K-He3 Comagnetometer,” Physical Review Letters 103, 261801 (2009), arXiv:0809.4700 [physics.atom-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  9. [9]

    Reduced limit on the permanent electric dipole moment of 199Hg,

    B. Graner, Y. Chen, E. G. Lindahl, and B. R. Heckel, “Reduced limit on the permanent electric dipole moment of 199Hg,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 161601 (2016)

    work page 2016

  10. [10]

    Limits for spatial anisotropy by use of nuclear-spin-polarized9Be+ ions,

    J. D. Prestage, J. J. Bollinger, W. M. Itano, and D. J. Wineland, “Limits for spatial anisotropy by use of nuclear-spin-polarized9Be+ ions,” Phys. Rev. Lett.54, 2387–2390 (1985)

    work page 1985

  11. [11]

    New limits on spatial anisotropy from optically-pumped sup201hg and 199Hg,

    S. K. Lamoreaux, J. P. Jacobs, B. R. Heckel, F. J. Raab, and E. N. Fortson, “New limits on spatial anisotropy from optically-pumped sup201hg and 199Hg,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 3125– 3128 (1986)

    work page 1986

  12. [12]

    Results of a new test of local lorentz invariance: A search for mass anisotropy in 21Ne,

    T. E. Chupp, R. J. Hoare, R. A. Loveman, E. R. Oteiza, J. M. Richardson, M. E. Wagshul, and A. K. Thompson, “Results of a new test of local lorentz invariance: A search for mass anisotropy in 21Ne,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 1541–1545 (1989)

    work page 1989

  13. [13]

    New limits on local lorentz invariance from hg and cs magnetometers,

    C. J. Berglund, L. R. Hunter, D. Krause, Jr., E. O. Prigge, M. S. Ronfeldt, and S. K. Lamoreaux, “New limits on local lorentz invariance from hg and cs magnetometers,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 1879–1882 (1995)

    work page 1995

  14. [14]

    Limit on lorentz and cpt violation of the neutron using a two-species noble-gas maser,

    D. Bear, R. E. Stoner, R. L. Walsworth, V. A. Kosteleck´ y, and C. D. Lane, “Limit on lorentz and cpt violation of the neutron using a two-species noble-gas maser,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 5038–5041 (2000)

    work page 2000

  15. [15]

    New limit on Lorentz and CPT-violating neutron spin interactions

    J. M. Brown, S. J. Smullin, T. W. Kornack, and M. V. Romalis, “New Limit on Lorentz- and CPT-Violating Neutron Spin Interactions,” Physical Review Letters 105, 151604 (2010), arXiv:1006.5425 [physics.atom-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  16. [16]

    New limit on lorentz-invariance- and cpt-violating neutron spin interactions using a free-spin-precession 3He-129Xe comagnetometer,

    F. Allmendinger, W. Heil, S. Karpuk, W. Kilian, A. Scharth, U. Schmidt, A. Schnabel, Y. Sobolev, and K. Tullney, “New limit on lorentz-invariance- and cpt-violating neutron spin interactions using a free-spin-precession 3He-129Xe comagnetometer,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 110801 (2014)

    work page 2014

  17. [17]

    Order of magnitude smaller limit on the electric dipole moment of the electron,

    J. Baron, W. C. Campbell, D. DeMille, J. M. Doyle, G. Gabrielse, Y. V. Gurevich, P. W. Hess, N. R. Hutzler, E. Kirilov, I. Kozyryev, B. R. O’Leary, C. D. Panda, M. F. Parsons, E. S. Petrik, B. Spaun, A. C. Vutha, and A. D. West, “Order of magnitude smaller limit on the electric dipole moment of the electron,” Science 343, 269–272 (2014), http://science.sc...

    work page 2014

  18. [18]

    Precision measurement of the electron’s electric dipole moment using 18 trapped molecular ions,

    W. B. Cairncross, D. N. Gresh, M. Grau, K. C. Cossel, T. S. Roussy, Y. Ni, Y. Zhou, J. Ye, and E. A. Cornell, “Precision measurement of the electron’s electric dipole moment using 18 trapped molecular ions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 153001 (2017)

    work page 2017

  19. [19]

    Improved limit on the electric dipole moment of the electron,

    ACME Collaboration, V. Andreev, D. G. Ang, D. DeMille, J. M. Doyle, G. Gabrielse, J. Haefner, N. R. Hutzler, Z. Lasner, C. Meisenhelder, B. R. O’Leary, C. D. Panda, A. D. West, E. P. West, and X. Wu, “Improved limit on the electric dipole moment of the electron,” Nature 562, 355–360 (2018)

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    Electric dipole moments of atoms, molecules, nuclei, and particles,

    T. E. Chupp, P. Fierlinger, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, and J. T. Singh, “Electric dipole moments of atoms, molecules, nuclei, and particles,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 015001 (2019)

    work page 2019

  21. [21]

    Preferred-Frame and CP-Violation Tests with Polarized Electrons

    B. R. Heckel, E. G. Adelberger, C. E. Cramer, T. S. Cook, S. Schlamminger, and U. Schmidt, “Preferred-frame and CP-violation tests with polarized electrons,” Phys. Rev. D 78, 092006 (2008), arXiv:0808.2673 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  22. [22]

    Short-range spin-dependent interactions of electrons: a probe for exotic pseudo-Goldstone bosons

    h. Terrano, E. G. Adelberger, J. G. Lee, and B. R. Heckel, “Short-Range, Spin-Dependent Interactions of Electrons: A Probe for Exotic Pseudo-Goldstone Bosons,” Physical Review Letters 115, 201801 (2015), arXiv:1508.02463 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  23. [23]

    Modulation of a light beam by precessing absorbing atoms,

    H. G. Dehmelt, “Modulation of a light beam by precessing absorbing atoms,” Phys. Rev. 105, 1924–1925 (1957)

    work page 1924

  24. [24]

    Principles of operation of the rubidium vapormagnetometer,

    A. L. Bloom, “Principles of operation of the rubidium vapormagnetometer,” Appl. Opt. 1, 61–68 (1962)

    work page 1962

  25. [25]

    Spin-exchange optical pumping of noble-gas nuclei,

    T. G. Walker and W. Happer, “Spin-exchange optical pumping of noble-gas nuclei,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 69, 629–642 (1997)

    work page 1997

  26. [26]

    Electric dipole moments of nucleons, nuclei, and atoms: The standard model and beyond,

    J. Engel, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, and U. van Kolck, “Electric dipole moments of nucleons, nuclei, and atoms: The standard model and beyond,” Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 71, 21–74 (2013), fundamental Symmetries in the Era of the LHC

    work page 2013

  27. [27]

    Frequency shifts of the magnetic-resonance spectrum of mixtures of nuclear spin-polarized noble gases and vapors of spin-polarized alkali-metal atoms,

    S. R. Schaefer, G. D. Cates, T.-R. Chien, D. Gonatas, W. Happer, and T. G. Walker, “Frequency shifts of the magnetic-resonance spectrum of mixtures of nuclear spin-polarized noble gases and vapors of spin-polarized alkali-metal atoms,” Phys. Rev. A 39, 5613–5623 (1989)

    work page 1989

  28. [28]

    3He−129Xe comagnetometery using 87Rb detection and decoupling,

    M. E. Limes, D. Sheng, and M. V. Romalis, “ 3He−129Xe comagnetometery using 87Rb detection and decoupling,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 033401 (2018)

    work page 2018

  29. [29]

    New limit on the permanent electric dipole moment of 129Xe using 3He comagnetometry and squid detection,

    N. Sachdeva and I. Fan, “New limit on the permanent electric dipole moment of 129Xe using 3He comagnetometry and squid detection,” 123, 143003 (2019)

    work page 2019

  30. [30]

    A restriction on the existence of a new type of fundamental interaction (the

    E. B. Aleksandrov, A. A. Ansel’m, Y. V. Pavlov, and R. M. Umarkhodzhaev, “A restriction on the existence of a new type of fundamental interaction (the ”arion” long-range interaction) in an experiment on spin precession of mercury nuclei,” Sov. Phys. JETP 58, 1103 (1983)

    work page 1983

  31. [31]

    Search for a coupling of the earth’s gravitational field to nuclear spins in atomic mercury,

    B. J. Venema, P. K. Majumder, S. K. Lamoreaux, B. R. Heckel, and E. N. Fortson, “Search for a coupling of the earth’s gravitational field to nuclear spins in atomic mercury,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 135–138 (1992)

    work page 1992

  32. [32]

    New constraints on time-reversal asymmetry from a search for a permanent electric dipole moment of 199Hg,

    S. K. Lamoreaux, J. P. Jacobs, B. R. Heckel, F. J. Raab, and N. Fortson, “New constraints on time-reversal asymmetry from a search for a permanent electric dipole moment of 199Hg,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 2275–2278 (1987)

    work page 1987

  33. [33]

    Testing time-reversal symmetry using 199Hg,

    J. P. Jacobs, W. M. Klipstein, S. K. Lamoreaux, B. R. Heckel, and E. N. Fortson, “Testing time-reversal symmetry using 199Hg,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 3782–3785 (1993)

    work page 1993

  34. [34]

    Limit on the electric-dipole moment of 199Hg using synchronous optical pumping,

    J. P. Jacobs, W. M. Klipstein, S. K. Lamoreaux, B. R. Heckel, and E. N. Fortson, “Limit on the electric-dipole moment of 199Hg using synchronous optical pumping,” Phys. Rev. A 52, 3521–3540 (1995)

    work page 1995

  35. [35]

    New limit on the permanent electric dipole moment of 199Hg,

    M. V. Romalis, W. C. Griffith, J. P. Jacobs, and E. N. Fortson, “New limit on the permanent electric dipole moment of 199Hg,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 2505–2508 (2001)

    work page 2001

  36. [36]

    Improved limit on the permanent electric dipole moment of 199Hg,

    W. C. Griffith, M. D. Swallows, T. H. Loftus, M. V. Romalis, B. R. Heckel, and E. N. Fortson, “Improved limit on the permanent electric dipole moment of 199Hg,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 101601 (2009). 19

    work page 2009

  37. [37]

    Limits on local lorentz invariance in mercury and cesium,

    S. K. Peck, D. K. Kim, D. Stein, D. Orbaker, A. Foss, M. T. Hummon, and L. R. Hunter, “Limits on local lorentz invariance in mercury and cesium,” Phys. Rev. A 86, 012109 (2012)

    work page 2012

  38. [38]

    Limits on spin-mass couplings within the axion window,

    A. N. Youdin, D. Krause, Jr., K. Jagannathan, L. R. Hunter, and S. K. Lamoreaux, “Limits on spin-mass couplings within the axion window,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2170–2173 (1996)

    work page 1996

  39. [39]

    Using the earth as a polarized electron source to search for long-range spin-spin interactions,

    L. Hunter, J. Gordon, S. Peck, D. Ang, and J.-F. Lin, “Using the earth as a polarized electron source to search for long-range spin-spin interactions,” Science 339, 928–932 (2013), https://science.sciencemag.org/content/339/6122/928.full.pdf

    work page 2013

  40. [40]

    Using geoelectrons to search for velocity-dependent spin-spin interactions,

    L. R. Hunter and D. G. Ang, “Using geoelectrons to search for velocity-dependent spin-spin interactions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 091803 (2014)

    work page 2014

  41. [41]

    Precision frequency mea- surements with polarized 3He, 21Ne, and 129Xe atoms,

    T. E. Chupp, E. R. Oteiza, J. M. Richardson, and T. R. White, “Precision frequency mea- surements with polarized 3He, 21Ne, and 129Xe atoms,” Phys. Rev. A 38, 3998–4003 (1988)

    work page 1988

  42. [42]

    Spin-exchange-pumped 3He and 129Xe zeeman masers,

    T. E. Chupp, R. J. Hoare, R. L. Walsworth, and B. Wu, “Spin-exchange-pumped 3He and 129Xe zeeman masers,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 2363–2366 (1994)

    work page 1994

  43. [43]

    Demonstration of a two species noble gas maser,

    R. E. Stoner, M. A. Rosenberry, J. T. Wright, T. E. Chupp, E. R. Oteiza, and R. L. Walsworth, “Demonstration of a two species noble gas maser,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3971– 3974 (1996)

    work page 1996

  44. [44]

    Improved frequency stability of the dual-noble-gas maser,

    D. Bear, T. E. Chupp, K. Cooper, S. DeDeo, M. Rosenberry, R. E. Stoner, and R. L. Walsworth, “Improved frequency stability of the dual-noble-gas maser,” Phys. Rev. A 57, 5006–5008 (1998)

    work page 1998

  45. [45]

    Atomic electric dipole moment measurement using spin exchange pumped masers of 129Xe and 3He,

    M. A. Rosenberry and T. E. Chupp, “Atomic electric dipole moment measurement using spin exchange pumped masers of 129Xe and 3He,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 22–25 (2001)

    work page 2001

  46. [46]

    Limits on anomalous spin-spin couplings between neutrons,

    A. G. Glenday, C. E. Cramer, D. F. Phillips, and R. L. Walsworth, “Limits on anomalous spin-spin couplings between neutrons,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 261801 (2008)

    work page 2008

  47. [47]

    Fundamentals of spin-exchange optical pumping,

    T. G. Walker, “Fundamentals of spin-exchange optical pumping,” Journal of Physics: Con- ference Series 294, 012001 (2011)

    work page 2011

  48. [48]

    Laboratory search for a long-range t-odd, p-odd interaction from axionlike particles using dual-species nuclear magnetic resonance with polarized 129Xe and 131Xe gas,

    M. Bulatowicz, R. Griffith, M. Larsen, J. Mirijanian, C. B. Fu, E. Smith, W. M. Snow, H. Yan, and T. G. Walker, “Laboratory search for a long-range t-odd, p-odd interaction from axionlike particles using dual-species nuclear magnetic resonance with polarized 129Xe and 131Xe gas,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 102001 (2013)

    work page 2013

  49. [49]

    Ultra-sensitive magnetometry based on free precession of nuclear spins,

    C. Gemmel, W. Heil, S. Karpuk, K. Lenz, C. Ludwig, Y. Sobolev, K. Tullney, M. Burghoff, W. Kilian, S. Knappe-Gr¨ uneberg, W. M¨ uller, A. Schnabel, F. Seifert, L. Trahms, and S. Baeßler, “Ultra-sensitive magnetometry based on free precession of nuclear spins,” The European Physical Journal D 57, 303–320 (2010)

    work page 2010

  50. [50]

    Limit on lorentz and cpt violation of the bound neutron using a free precession 3He/129Xe comagnetometer,

    C. Gemmel, W. Heil, S. Karpuk, K. Lenz, Y. Sobolev, K. Tullney, M. Burghoff, W. Kilian, S. Knappe-Gr¨ uneberg, W. M¨ uller, A. Schnabel, F. Seifert, L. Trahms, and U. Schmidt, “Limit on lorentz and cpt violation of the bound neutron using a free precession 3He/129Xe comagnetometer,” Phys. Rev. D 82, 111901 (2010)

    work page 2010

  51. [51]

    Constraints on Spin-Dependent Short-Range Interaction between Nucleons

    K. Tullney, F. Allmendinger, M. Burghoff, W. Heil, S. Karpuk, W. Kilian, S. Knappe- Gr¨ uneberg, W. M¨ uller, U. Schmidt, A. Schnabel, F. Seifert, Y. Sobolev, and L. Trahms, “Constraints on Spin-Dependent Short-Range Interaction between Nucleons,” Physical Re- view Letters 111, 100801 (2013), arXiv:1303.6612 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  52. [52]

    Measurement of the permanent electric dipole moment of the 129Xe atom,

    F. Allmendinger, I. Engin, W. Heil, S. Karpuk, H.-J. Krause, B. Niederl¨ ander, A. Of- fenh¨ ausser, M. Repetto, U. Schmidt, and S. Zimmer, “Measurement of the permanent electric dipole moment of the 129Xe atom,” Phys. Rev. A 100, 022505 (2019)

    work page 2019

  53. [53]

    Dynamics of two overlapping spin ensembles interacting by spin exchange,

    T. W. Kornack and M. V. Romalis, “Dynamics of two overlapping spin ensembles interacting by spin exchange,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 253002 (2002)

    work page 2002

  54. [54]

    Nuclear spin gyroscope based on an atomic comagnetometer,

    T. W. Kornack, R. K. Ghosh, and M. V. Romalis, “Nuclear spin gyroscope based on an atomic comagnetometer,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 230801 (2005)

    work page 2005

  55. [55]

    Improved limits on spin-mass interactions,

    J. Lee, A. Almasi, and M. Romalis, “Improved limits on spin-mass interactions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 161801 (2018). 20

    work page 2018

  56. [56]

    New limits on anomalous spin-spin interactions,

    A. Almasi, J. Lee, H. Winarto, M. Smiciklas, and M. V. Romalis, “New limits on anomalous spin-spin interactions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 201802 (2020)

    work page 2020

  57. [57]

    A new test of local Lorentz invariance using $^{21}$Ne-Rb-K comagnetometer

    M. Smiciklas, J. M. Brown, L. W. Cheuk, S. J. Smullin, and M. V. Romalis, “New Test of Local Lorentz Invariance Using a ˆ{21}Ne-Rb-K Comagnetometer,” Physical Review Letters 107, 171604 (2011), arXiv:1106.0738 [physics.atom-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  58. [58]

    Spin precession experiments for light axionic dark matter,

    P. W. Graham, D. E. Kaplan, J. Mardon, S. Rajendran, h. Terrano, L. Trahms, and T. Wilka- son, “Spin precession experiments for light axionic dark matter,” Phys. Rev. D 97, 055006 (2018)

    work page 2018

  59. [59]

    Axion-like relics: new constraints from old comagnetometer data,

    I. M. Bloch, Y. Hochberg, E. Kuflik, and T. Volansky, “Axion-like relics: new constraints from old comagnetometer data,” Journal of High Energy Physics 2020, 167 (2020)

    work page 2020

  60. [60]

    On the possibility of electric dipole moments for elementary particles and nuclei,

    E. M. Purcell and N. F. Ramsey, “On the possibility of electric dipole moments for elementary particles and nuclei,” Phys. Rev. 78, 807–807 (1950)

    work page 1950

  61. [61]

    Symmetry breaking through bell-jackiw anomalies,

    G. ’t Hooft, “Symmetry breaking through bell-jackiw anomalies,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 37, 8–11 (1976)

    work page 1976

  62. [62]

    Violation of cp invariance, ? asymmetry, and baryon asymmetry of the universe,

    A. D. Sakharov, “Violation of cp invariance, ? asymmetry, and baryon asymmetry of the universe,” Sov. Phys. JETP Lett. 5, 24 (1967)

    work page 1967

  63. [63]

    Search for a permanent electric dipole moment on the 129Xe atom,

    T. G. Vold, F. J. Raab, B. Heckel, and E. N. Fortson, “Search for a permanent electric dipole moment on the 129Xe atom,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 2229–2232 (1984)

    work page 1984

  64. [64]

    Probing exotic phenomena at the interface of nuclear and particle physics with the electric dipole moments of diamagnetic atoms: A unique window to hadronic and semi-leptonic CP violation

    N. Yamanaka, B. K. Sahoo, N. Yoshinaga, T. Sato, K. Asahi, and B. P. Das, “Probing exotic phenomena at the interface of nuclear and particle physics with the electric dipole moments of diamagnetic atoms: A unique window to hadronic and semi-leptonic CP violation,” European Physical Journal A 53, 54 (2017), arXiv:1703.01570 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  65. [65]

    First measurement of the atomic electric dipole moment of 225Ra,

    R. H. Parker, M. R. Dietrich, M. R. Kalita, N. D. Lemke, K. G. Bailey, M. Bishof, J. P. Greene, R. J. Holt, W. Korsch, Z.-T. Lu, P. Mueller, T. P. O’Connor, and J. T. Singh, “First measurement of the atomic electric dipole moment of 225Ra,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 233002 (2015)

    work page 2015

  66. [66]

    Improved limit on the 225Ra electric dipole moment,

    M. Bishof, R. H. Parker, K. G. Bailey, J. P. Greene, R. J. Holt, M. R. Kalita, W. Korsch, N. D. Lemke, Z.-T. Lu, P. Mueller, T. P. O’Connor, J. T. Singh, and M. R. Dietrich, “Improved limit on the 225Ra electric dipole moment,” Phys. Rev. C 94, 025501 (2016)

    work page 2016

  67. [67]

    Electric dipole moments: A global analysis,

    T. Chupp and M. Ramsey-Musolf, “Electric dipole moments: A global analysis,” Phys. Rev. C 91, 035502 (2015)

    work page 2015

  68. [68]

    Measurability of nuclear electric dipole moments,

    L. I. Schiff, “Measurability of nuclear electric dipole moments,” Phys. Rev. 132, 2194–2200 (1963)

    work page 1963

  69. [69]

    Nuclear schiff moment and time-invariance violation in atoms,

    V. V. Flambaum and J. S. M. Ginges, “Nuclear schiff moment and time-invariance violation in atoms,” Phys. Rev. A 65, 032113 (2002)

    work page 2002

  70. [70]

    Large-scale shell-model calculations of nuclear schiff moments of 129Xe and 199Hg,

    K. Yanase and N. Shimizu, “Large-scale shell-model calculations of nuclear schiff moments of 129Xe and 199Hg,” Phys. Rev. C 102, 065502 (2020)

    work page 2020

  71. [71]

    P,T -odd interactions in atomic 129Xe and phenomenological appli- cations,

    T. Fleig and M. Jung, “ P,T -odd interactions in atomic 129Xe and phenomenological appli- cations,” Phys. Rev. A 103, 012807 (2021)

    work page 2021

  72. [72]

    A search for anisotropy of inertia,

    G. Cocconi and E. Salpeter, “A search for anisotropy of inertia,” Il Nuovo Cimento (1955-

    work page 1955

  73. [73]

    Restricted proof that the weak equivalence principle implies the einstein equivalence principle,

    A. P. Lightman and D. L. Lee, “Restricted proof that the weak equivalence principle implies the einstein equivalence principle,” Phys. Rev. D 8, 364–376 (1973)

    work page 1973

  74. [74]

    Cosmic ray and neutrino tests of special relativity,

    S. Coleman and S. L. Glashow, “Cosmic ray and neutrino tests of special relativity,” Physics Letters B 405, 249–252 (1997)

    work page 1997

  75. [75]

    CPT violation and the standard model,

    D. Colladay and V. A. Kosteleck´ y, “CPT violation and the standard model,” Phys. Rev. D 55, 6760–6774 (1997)

    work page 1997

  76. [76]

    Constraints on lorentz violation from clock-comparison experiments,

    V. A. Kosteleck´ y and C. D. Lane, “Constraints on lorentz violation from clock-comparison experiments,” Phys. Rev. D 60, 116010 (1999). 21

    work page 1999

  77. [77]

    cpt violation implies violation of lorentz invariance,

    O. W. Greenberg, “ cpt violation implies violation of lorentz invariance,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 231602 (2002)

    work page 2002

  78. [78]

    Universal dynamics of spontaneous lorentz violation and a new spin-dependent inverse-square law force,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, H.-C. Cheng, M. Luty, and J. Thaler, “Universal dynamics of spontaneous lorentz violation and a new spin-dependent inverse-square law force,” Journal of High Energy Physics 2005, 029–029 (2005)

    work page 2005

  79. [79]

    Energy conservation and the principle of equivalence,

    M. P. Haugan, “Energy conservation and the principle of equivalence,” Annals of Physics 118, 156–186 (1979)

    work page 1979

  80. [80]

    Limits on lorentz invariance violation from coulomb interactions in nuclei and atoms,

    V. V. Flambaum and M. V. Romalis, “Limits on lorentz invariance violation from coulomb interactions in nuclei and atoms,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 142501 (2017)

    work page 2017

Showing first 80 references.