Toward the Observation of Entangled Pairs in BEC analogue Expanding Universes

Adri\`a Delhom; \'Alvaro Parra-L\'opez; Ivan Agullo

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Toward the Observation of Entangled Pairs in BEC analogue Expanding Universes

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that entanglement from cosmological pair creation can be observed in a specific 2D BEC analogue, at about 2σ with current capabilities and above 3.3σ with modest improvements.

desk verdict Solid, useful feasibility study for BEC analogue entanglement; the headline sigma numbers are only as good as the loss model, and the end-of-sequence loss approximation is currently the weakest load-bearing piece. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.09596 v2 pith:KJABTD27 submitted 2024-11-14 gr-qc cond-mat.quant-gas

Ivan Agullo , Adrià Delhom , Álvaro Parra-López This is my paper · ORCID

classification gr-qccond-mat.quant-gas PACS 03.75.Kk04.62.+v03.65.Ud

keywords Bose-EinsteincondensateanaloguegravitycosmologicalpaircreationentanglementwitnessCauchy-Schwarzinequalityphononpairsexpandinguniversesimulationquantumfieldtheoryincurvedspacetimedensitycontrasttomography

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Pair creation by expanding spacetimes is a longstanding prediction of quantum field theory, but laboratory analogues have so far seen only its classical signals. The paper tries to close that gap by quantifying the entanglement carried by phonon pairs created in a two-dimensional Bose-Einstein condensate whose scattering length is engineered to mimic an expanding universe. Using the platform and parameters of a current 39K experiment, it claims the entangled pairs can be witnessed at about 2σ significance with existing capabilities, and at 3.3σ or better if the initial temperature drops from 12 nK to 8 nK or measurement precision improves. The central practical move is to replace a single linear expansion ramp with a sequence of expansion-contraction cusps, whose resonances enhance pair production enough to overcome thermal noise and losses. If correct, this would provide direct evidence that pair creation is a genuinely quantum process and not merely classical amplification.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Gaussian covariance matrix of each $(k,-k)$ mode pair, reconstructed from time-series measurements of the density contrast through a Hankel transform of weight zero. The final state is parameterized by the spectrum $S_k = B_k + A_k\cos(2\omega_k^f(t-t_f)+\theta_k)$, so all predictions reduce to the amplitude $A_k$, offset $B_k$, and phase $\theta_k$. Entanglement is decided by the Cauchy-Schwarz witness $\Delta_k = A_k^2 - (B_k - 1/2)^2 > 0$, which for these two-mode Gaussian states is exactly equivalent to logarithmic negativity through the symplectic eigenvalue $\tilde{\nu}_{\min} = 2(B_k - A_k) < 1$. The mechanism that makes detection feasible is the multi-cusp expansion history: quasi-periodic variation of the scale factor $a(t)\propto 1/\sqrt{\alpha_s(t)}$ resonantly boosts the Bogoliubov coefficients $\alpha_k,\beta_k$ (the mode-mixing amplitudes) far above the single-ramp case, while the phase $\theta_k = \mathrm{Arg}(\alpha_k\beta_k)$ remains independent of temperature and losses. Losses enter as independent beam-splitter channels per cusp with total efficiency $\eta_0^n$, acting on the covariance parameters as $B_k\to\eta B_k + (1-\eta)/2$ and $A_k\to\eta A_k$.

What would settle it

Run the proposed multi-cusp protocol at the identified optimum ($T=12$ nK, $\eta_0\simeq0.95$, 5% relative error, $k\approx1.02\,\mu$m$^{-1}$), reconstruct $A_k$ and $B_k$ from Hankel-transformed density-contrast correlations, and compute $\Delta_k=A_k^2-(B_k-1/2)^2$; if the measured $\Delta_k$ is not positive by roughly $2\sigma$, the central claim fails. A complementary check is to compare one-cusp and multi-cusp runs: if the degradation of entanglement with $n$ is stronger than the $\eta_0^n$ geometric prediction, the loss model is the place where the argument breaks.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms: in the hydrodynamic regime of a disk-shaped, radially homogeneous condensate, a scale-factor history made of $n$ smooth expansion-contraction cusps generates phonon pairs in modes $(k,-k)$ that are entangled, and the entanglement survives realistic decoherence. The entanglement is witnessed by the Cauchy-Schwarz quantity $\Delta_k = A_k^2 - (B_k - 1/2)^2$ built from the offset $B_k$ and amplitude $A_k$ of the post-expansion density-contrast spectrum $S_k = B_k + A_k\cos(2\omega_k^f(t-t_f)+\theta_k)$. For an optimal configuration (initial scattering length $\alpha_{s,i}\simeq350\,a_B$ at peak $\alpha_{s,f}=400\,a_B$, cusp half-duration $\delta\simeq0.4$ ms, hold time $\Delta t_{\rm hold}\simeq0.75$ ms, $n\simeq8$--$12$, per-cusp efficiency $\eta_0\simeq0.95$, $T\simeq12$ nK, relative measurement error 5%, and $k$ near $k_\xi\simeq1.02$--$1.04\,\mu$m$^{-1}$) the witness is positive at about $2\sigma$ with current capabilities and above $3.3\sigma$ when $T=8$ nK or precision improves. The phase $\theta_k$ is insensitive to temperature and losses, so its agreement with theory identifies the expansion history as the source, while entanglement depends on $A_k$ and $B_k$, which is why temperature and losses are the decisive experimental factors.

Load-bearing premise

The predicted significance rests on the assumption that every loss and detector inefficiency acts as an independent, efficiency-$\eta_0$ thinning of the signal that leaves the phonon state Gaussian; if real losses are correlated, non-Gaussian, or stronger than about 5% per expansion cusp, the reported $2\sigma$ and $3.3\sigma$ significance levels would shrink and could disappear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A single linear expansion ramp $a(t)\propto t$ produces too little entanglement to observe: at temperatures around 10 nK entanglement appears only marginally inside the hydrodynamic regime, and losses push it below detectability.
The optimal detection window is near the edge of the hydrodynamic regime, $k\approx k_\xi$, so experiments should tune the resonance position (via $\Delta t_{\rm hold}$ and $\delta$) to sit inside $k<k_\xi$.
Because $\theta_k$ is independent of temperature and losses, agreement in phase across repeated runs can certify that the observed correlations come from the expansion history, while $A_k$ and $B_k$ alone determine the entanglement witness.
Modest upgrades, such as lowering the temperature from 12 nK to 8 nK or improving the relative error in $A_k$ and $B_k$ from 5% to about 3%, raise the significance from roughly $2\sigma$ to $3$--$4\sigma$; a stricter hydrodynamic cut at 5% dispersion nonlinearity would require about 6 nK for $3\sigma$.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Beyond the paper, the same covariance-matrix recipe should transfer to other analogue platforms where the state is Gaussian, such as optical or polariton analogues, provided $A_k$ and $B_k$ can be measured with the quoted precision; the loss and noise channels would differ, but the reconstruction logic would not.
The paper's reconstruction can in principle test Gaussianity with higher-order correlation functions, so the protocol contains an internal check on the loss model that the authors do not fully exploit; a positive detection would be much harder to explain classically if the three- and four-point correlations also match Gaussian predictions.
A clean control experiment suggested by the parameter scan would be to keep the optimal configuration fixed and sweep $\Delta t_{\rm hold}$ to move the resonance across $k$, mapping the witness $\Delta_k$ as a function of wavenumber and checking that the peak appears where the resonance predicts.
If real losses prove non-Gaussian or correlated, the degradation of $\Delta_k$ with increasing cusp number $n$ would itself measure the per-cusp efficiency $\eta_0$, turning the proposed detection run into its own loss characterization.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Short version: this is a solid feasibility study, not a discovery paper, and the most quoted numbers are weaker than the abstract suggests. The genuinely new piece is the multi-cusp expansion-contraction protocol for the 2D Viermann BEC setup, with resonance tuning and a parameter scan that gives ~2σ now and 3.3–4σ with modest improvements. The analytic machinery—acoustic metric, Bogoliubov coefficients, Gaussian covariance matrices, equivalence of LN and the Cauchy-Schwarz witness, and the A_k/B_k/θ_k tomography—is standard, internally consistent, and presented clearly. Credit where due: the authors flag the loss model as the most speculative part in the Outlook, and they use conservative choices for the hydrodynamic cutoff and measurement precision.

The soft spots are in the quantitative claims. The 2σ and 3.3σ numbers are model-based forecasts, not measurements. They assume 5% measurement precision, 12 nK initial temperature, and a Gaussian loss channel. The stress-test concern lands: the text applies Eq. (54) as a single loss channel with total efficiency η0^n, effectively end-of-sequence. Real losses happen between cusps, and vacuum noise injected early is amplified by subsequent squeezing. Those two situations do not commute. With n=9–12 and η0 between 0.85 and 0.95, this ordering effect could be sizable and could degrade the predicted significance below 2σ. The Outlook flags Gaussianity but not the ordering issue. The authors should either model per-cusp losses explicitly or show the end-of-sequence approximation is valid for their parameters. A second, smaller caveat: maximizing significance over k without a trials correction means the quoted sigmas are optimistic. No code or data artifacts are provided, which makes the error budget hard to audit; that is a practical weakness, not a conceptual one.

The citation pattern looks normal; the references cover the relevant analogue-gravity, QFTCS, and entanglement literature, and self-citations are to the authors' own related framework papers. I found no sign of circular fitting: the covariance matrix is computed forward from Bogoliubov coefficients.

Bottom line: for the analogue-gravity and QFTCS communities, this is a useful, concrete experimental target paper. It deserves a serious referee, not a desk reject, but the referee should push hard on the loss-model ordering and ask for either interspersed-loss numerics or a softer claim in the abstract. I would read it again after that revision.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a Gaussian-state framework for quantifying entanglement produced by phonon pair creation in two-dimensional Bose-Einstein condensates used as analogues of expanding universes. It connects the acoustic-metric description to Bogoliubov coefficients, covariance matrices, and two entanglement witnesses (logarithmic negativity and a Cauchy-Schwarz inequality), and examines the effects of thermal noise and losses. The authors apply this framework to the multi-cusp expansion/contraction histories proposed for the Heidelberg (Viermann-type) 39K BEC platform, optimize over experimental parameters, and claim that entanglement could be detected at about 2σ with current capabilities and above 3.3σ with modest improvements in temperature or measurement precision.

Significance. If the quantitative predictions hold, this would be a valuable step toward establishing the quantum (entangled) nature of cosmological pair creation in an analogue system, an important goal in analogue gravity and QFTCS. The analytic derivation from the acoustic metric to covariance matrices and entanglement witnesses is standard and internally consistent, and the paper makes concrete, falsifiable predictions for the Cauchy-Schwarz witness Δ_k and logarithmic negativity as functions of k for specific parameter sets. The proposed multi-cusp resonant enhancement is physically well motivated and clearly explained. The paper does not provide code or data, but the numerical procedure (solve the mode equation, extract Bogoliubov coefficients, apply Eqs. (45)-(56)) is described in sufficient detail to be reproduced. However, the central quantitative significance claims depend on two assumptions that are not adequately stress-tested: the treatment of losses as a single end-of-sequence channel, and the use of unpublished experimental parameters as 'current capabilities'.

major comments (3)

[Sections V.D-V.E, Eqs. (54)-(56)] The loss model applies a single beam-splitter channel after the entire n-cusp evolution: Eq. (54) transforms the final covariance matrix as σ_out → η σ_out + (1−η) σ_vac, and Section V.E then sets the total efficiency to η0^n. Realistic losses occur continuously and are interspersed with the squeezing operations of each cusp, and loss channels do not commute with squeezing. For two cusps, the interspersed-loss map gives σ_final = η^2 S_2 S_1 σ_in S_1^T S_2^T + η(1−η) S_2 I S_2^T + (1−η) I, which differs from the end-of-sequence expression η^2 S_tot σ_in S_tot^T + (1−η^2) I by the term η(1−η)(S_2 I S_2^T − I). Vacuum noise entering after early cusps is amplified by subsequent cusps, so the end-of-sequence approximation can overestimate the entanglement witness Δ_k. Since the paper's central 2σ and 3.3σ claims are controlled by this model, the authors should either simulate losses per cusp explicitly (and report the resulting significance values), or provide a quantitative justification for why the end-of-sequence approximation is accurate for n=9–12 and η0=0.85–0.95. The Outlook flags only the Gaussianity assumption as speculative, not this ordering issue.
[Section VI, optimization procedure] The reported significance X_max is the maximum of X_k over a grid of wavenumbers k (step 0.01 μm−1), αs_i (13 values), Δthold (16 values), and n (12 values), in addition to the chosen T, η0, and δ. The abstract and Section VI quote this maximum as the detection significance. If the same data were used to select the best k and parameters, the effective number of independent trials would inflate the apparent significance; a maximum over a multidimensional grid is not a 2σ detection for a pre-specified observable. The authors should state explicitly that the quoted significance is for a configuration chosen a priori from the theory, and either report the number of independent configurations scanned or apply a look-elsewhere correction to calibrate the headline numbers.
[Sections III and VI; Ref. [75]] The 'current capabilities' underpinning the ≈2σ claim are T=12 nK and ε_r=5%, attributed to Ref. [75], which is unpublished ('To appear'). In contrast, Section III describes the published experiment of Ref. [1] with T=60(10) nK. Since the paper's own results (e.g., Fig. 2 and the temperature dependence in Eqs. (46)-(53)) show that higher temperatures strongly suppress entanglement, the quantitative claim about current capabilities may not hold for the published platform. The authors should either present the detectability analysis for the published parameters of Ref. [1] as well, or clearly qualify the abstract and Section VI as contingent on the updated but as-yet-unpublished setup of Ref. [75].

minor comments (5)

[Eq. (53)] The expression for Δ_k appears to be mis-typeset: it should read Δ_k = B_k − ((1+2N_k^in)^2 + 1)/4 to be consistent with Eq. (52) and to reproduce Δ_k = |β_k|^2 in the zero-temperature vacuum limit.
[Section VI] The scanning step for αs_i is written as 'step 10 µm' in one place; since αs_i is a scattering length in Bohr radii, the step should be '10 a_B'.
[Section III vs Section VI] The manuscript reports T=60(10) nK for the experiment in Ref. [1] but later uses T=12 nK as 'current' with a reference to [75]; a brief sentence explaining that 12 nK refers to the updated setup of Ref. [75] would avoid apparent inconsistency.
[Section V.A] The statement that 'values of δ as small as 0.1 ms are achievable' is an experimental assumption; please provide a reference or mark it explicitly as a projection.
[Section IV.B] The claim that state reconstruction 'does not require any additional assumptions or extra knowledge about the experiment, such as temperature, losses, or detector efficiencies' is slightly overstrong, because the relations in Eq. (38) assume the hydrodynamic regime and the linear equations of motion; rephrasing to acknowledge those assumptions would be more precise.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the entanglement predictions are computed forward from the mode equation and external experimental inputs, with no target observable fed back into the model.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The paper models a multi-cusp expansion history, solves the mode equation (17) with IN/OUT boundary conditions (25)-(26), derives Bogoliubov coefficients, builds the covariance matrix via Eq. (45), and then evaluates the entanglement witnesses Delta_k and LN_k from Eqs. (52) and (50). No step fits the target entanglement significance from data or defines a witness in terms of the prediction it is supposed to make. The quantitative claims depend on inputs such as temperature T, per-cusp efficiency eta_0, relative measurement error epsilon_r, and the expansion parameters; these are stated as external experimental assumptions from [1], [75], and [83], not as outputs of the entanglement calculation. The loss model in Eqs. (54)-(56) is a standard beam-splitter model with a stated total efficiency eta_0^n; even if the treatment of interspersed versus end-of-sequence losses raises a legitimate correctness concern, it is not circular because the eta_0^n factor is an input assumption, not a quantity inferred from the predicted entanglement. The self-citations, including [72], [75], [82], and [83], involve overlapping authors, but they supply background formalism, standard decoherence arguments, and experimental parameter values that are externally grounded; no load-bearing uniqueness theorem or unverified premise imported from the authors' prior work is used to force the conclusion. The Outlook's caveat that "the most speculative aspect of our work lies in the model of losses we employ" is an honest limitation, not evidence that the derivation reduces to its inputs. Therefore no circular step is identifiable.

Assumptions & free parameters 9 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central calculation is a forward computation: Bogoliubov coefficients fix the covariance matrix, and the covariance matrix fixes the entanglement witnesses. No parameter is fitted to the predicted observables. The free parameters listed above are experimental design and environment inputs, chosen or assumed from current capabilities. The most consequential assumption is the Gaussian loss model, which the authors explicitly flag as speculative. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (9)

Initial temperature T = 12 nK (baseline), 8 nK (upgraded)
Sets thermal occupation of the initial phonon state (Eq. (46)). Value is assumed from experimental capabilities, not fitted to the target; entanglement degrades with T.
Loss efficiency per cusp η0 = 0.95 (scanned 0.85-0.98)
Beam-splitter loss parameter in Eq. (54); total efficiency η0^n. Not measured; the paper's own most speculative input.
Relative measurement error ε_r = 5% (scanned 1-6%)
Assumed precision for reconstructing A_k and B_k; directly converted into the significance X_k via error propagation.
Initial scattering length at cusp valley αs,i = 350 aB (optimal; scan 260-380 aB)
Controls the expansion/contraction ratio per cusp and the hydrodynamic cutoff kξ; optimized for detectability.
Cusp peak scattering length αs,f = 400 aB
Fixed maximum scattering length; only the ratio with αs,i affects particle production.
Hold time between cusps Δthold = 0.75 ms (optimal; scan 0-1.5 ms)
Sets the resonance positions in k; optimized in Section VI.
Cusp steepness δ = 0.4 ms (optimal; scan 0.1-1.0 ms)
Controls the smoothness and duration of each expansion-contraction cusp; optimized.
Number of cusps n = 8 or 12 (optimal; scan 1-12)
More cycles enhance resonant pair production but increase total losses; optimized against η0^n.
Wavenumber k probed = ≈1.02 µm^-1 (near kξ)
Significance-maximizing mode within the hydrodynamic regime; Xmax is the maximum over k.

assumptions (7)

domain assumption In the hydrodynamic regime, phonon perturbations of the BEC obey the massless Klein-Gordon equation on the acoustic metric (Eqs. (10)-(11)).
This is the core mapping between BEC dynamics and quantum fields in curved spacetime; valid only for wavelengths much larger than the healing length, as discussed in Section II.B and used throughout the paper.
domain assumption The quantum state of each (k, -k) phonon pair is Gaussian, and remains Gaussian under linear evolution and the loss channel.
Justifies full tomography from two-point density correlations (Section IV.B) and the covariance-matrix computation; the loss model in Section V.D preserves Gaussianity by construction.
domain assumption The initial state of the phonons is thermal at T = 12 nK (or 8 nK in the upgraded scenario).
Sets the thermal occupancy N_k^in in Eq. (46); the value is taken from current experimental capabilities reported in companion work and private communication, not derived here.
domain assumption Losses and detector inefficiencies are described by an independent Gaussian beam-splitter channel per expansion cusp with efficiency η0, giving total efficiency η0^n.
Used in Eqs. (54)-(56) to degrade the covariance matrix; the authors explicitly call this the most speculative aspect of the work in the Outlook.
domain assumption The condensate and its state are homogeneous and isotropic, so correlations depend only on distance and modes decouple into independent (k, -k) pairs.
Used in Section IV.B to define the spectrum S_k through a Hankel transform and to reduce the entanglement analysis to two-mode subsystems.
ad hoc to paper The multi-cusp scattering-length profiles of Eq. (44) can be realized experimentally with δ as small as 0.1 ms.
The proposed expansion histories are the paper's design; realizability is asserted on the basis of techniques in [1] and [75], but not demonstrated in the present work.
standard math Bogoliubov coefficients are obtained by numerical solution of the mode equation (17) with asymptotic IN/OUT conditions.
The numerical method is standard and the paper gives the equations and normalization conditions, but no code or numerical implementation details are provided.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Toward the Observation of Entangled Pairs in BEC analogue Expanding Universes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KJABTD27

@misc{pith2026241109596,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Toward the Observation of Entangled Pairs in BEC analogue Expanding Universes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KJABTD27}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.09596}
}

abstract

Pair creation is a fundamental prediction of quantum field theory in curved spacetimes. While classical aspects of this phenomenon have been observed, the experimental confirmation of its quantum origin remains elusive. In this article, we quantify the entanglement produced by pair creation in two dimensional Bose-Einstein Condensate (BEC) analogues of expanding universes and examine the impact of various experimental factors, including decoherence from thermal noise and losses. Our analysis evaluates the feasibility of detecting entanglement in these systems and identifies optimal experimental configurations for achieving this goal. Focusing on the experimental setup detailed in \cite{Viermann:2022wgw}, we demonstrate that entanglement can be observed in these BEC analogues at a significance level of $\sim 2\sigma$ with current capabilities, and at $\gtrsim 3.3\sigma$ with modest improvements. Achieving this would provide unequivocal evidence of the quantum nature of pair creation and validate one of the most iconic predictions of quantum field theory in curved spacetimes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.09596 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. LN [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. Number density of produced particles [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (7 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Number density of produced particles [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Particle number density [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. Particle number density [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7. Contour plots in experimental parameter space of the maximum significance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: FIG. 8. Significance at which entanglement can be detected, as a function of relative error [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_8.png]

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: FIG. 9. ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_9.png]

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: FIG. 10. LN [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_10.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

Connecting Gravity and Quantum Physics: Primordial Black Holes and Accelerated Evolution of the Universe
gr-qc 2024-11 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

The paper asserts a photon Bose-Einstein condensate model of primordial black holes and uses it to derive cosmic dark matter, dark energy, and baryogenesis, but the derivations rest on ad hoc assumptions and contradic...
Analogue gravity with Bose-Einstein condensates
gr-qc 2025-12 conditional novelty 2.0 of 10

Phonons in a Bose–Einstein condensate behave as a massless scalar field on an acoustic spacetime; these notes derive that mapping in detail and apply it to superradiance and analogue Hawking radiation.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

93 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

[75]

Sparn, E

M. Sparn, E. Kath, N. Liebster, J. Duchene, C. F. Schmidt, M. Tolosa-Sime´ on,´Alvaro Parra-L´ opez, S. Flo- erchinger, H. Strobel, and M. K. Oberthaler, Experimen- tal particle production in time-dependent spacetimes: a one-dimensional scattering problem (2024), To appear

work page 2024
[1]

Viermann et al

C. Viermann et al. , Quantum field simulator for dy- namics in curved spacetime, Nature 611, 260 (2022), arXiv:2202.10399 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

arXiv 2022
[2]

Schr¨ odinger, The proper vibrations of the expanding universe, Physica 6, 899 (1939)

E. Schr¨ odinger, The proper vibrations of the expanding universe, Physica 6, 899 (1939)

1939
[3]

Parker, Particle creation in expanding universes, Phys

L. Parker, Particle creation in expanding universes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 21, 562 (1968)

1968
[4]

Parker, Quantized fields and particle creation in ex- panding universes

L. Parker, Quantized fields and particle creation in ex- panding universes. 1., Phys. Rev. 183, 1057 (1969)

1969
[5]

Parker, Quantized fields and particle creation in ex- panding universes

L. Parker, Quantized fields and particle creation in ex- panding universes. 2., Phys. Rev. D 3, 346 (1971), [Erra- tum: Phys.Rev.D 3, 2546–2546 (1971)]

1971
[6]

Hawking, Stephen W, Black hole explosions?, Nature 248, 30 (1974)

1974
[7]

S. W. Hawking, Black hole explosions, Nature 248, 30 (1974)

1974

Show all 93 references

[8]

R. M. Wald, On Particle Creation by Black Holes, Com- mun. Math. Phys. 45, 9 (1975)

1975
[9]

A. A. Starobinskii, Amplification of waves during reflec- tion from a rotating ”black hole”, Sov. Phys. JETP 64, 48 (1973)

1973
[10]

W. G. Unruh, Second quantization in the Kerr metric, Phys. Rev. D 10, 3194 (1974)

1974
[11]

S. A. Fulling, Nonuniqueness of canonical field quanti- zation in Riemannian space-time, Phys. Rev. D 7, 2850 (1973)

1973
[12]

P. C. W. Davies, Scalar particle production in Schwarzschild and Rindler metrics, J. Phys. A 8, 609 (1975)

1975
[13]

W. G. Unruh, Notes on black hole evaporation, Phys. Rev. D 14, 870 (1976)

1976
[14]

W. G. Unruh, Experimental black hole evaporation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 46, 1351 (1981)

1981
[15]

T. G. Philbin, C. Kuklewicz, S. Robertson, S. Hill, F. K¨ onig, and U. Leonhardt, Fiber-Optical Analog of the Event Horizon, Science 319, 1367 (2008)

2008
[16]

Weinfurtner, E

S. Weinfurtner, E. W. Tedford, M. C. J. Penrice, W. G. Unruh, and G. A. Lawrence, Measurement of Stimulated Hawking Emission in an Analogue System, Physical Re- view Letters 106, 021302 (2011)

2011
[17]

Weinfurtner, E

S. Weinfurtner, E. W. Tedford, M. C. J. Penrice, W. G. Unruh, and G. A. Lawrence, Classical aspects of Hawking radiation verified in analogue gravity experiment, Lect. Notes Phys. 870, 167 (2013), arXiv:1302.0375 [gr-qc]

2013 arXiv
[18]

Boiron, A

D. Boiron, A. Fabbri, P. E. Larr´ e, N. Pavloff, C. I. West- brook, and P. Zin, Quantum signature of analog Hawk- ing radiation in momentum space, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 025301 (2015), arXiv:1406.5229 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

2015 arXiv
[19]

Euv´ e, F

L.-P. Euv´ e, F. Michel, R. Parentani, T. G. Philbin, and G. Rousseaux, Observation of noise correlated by the Hawking effect in a water tank, Physical Review Letters 117, 121301 (2016)

2016
[20]

J. R. Mu˜ noz de Nova, K. Golubkov, V. I. Kolobov, and J. Steinhauer, Observation of thermal Hawking radiation 19 and its temperature in an analogue black hole, Nature 569, 688 (2019)

2019
[21]

Drori, Y

J. Drori, Y. Rosenberg, D. Bermudez, Y. Silberberg, and U. Leonhardt, Observation of Stimulated Hawking Ra- diation in an Optical Analogue, Physical Review Letters 122, 010404 (2019)

2019
[22]

Shi, R.-Q

Y.-H. Shi, R.-Q. Yang, Z. Xiang, Z.-Y. Ge, H. Li, Y.-Y. Wang, K. Huang, Y. Tian, X. Song, D. Zheng, K. Xu, R.-G. Cai, and H. Fan, Quantum simulation of Hawk- ing radiation and curved spacetime with a superconduct- ing on-chip black hole, Nature Communications 14, 3263 (2023)

2023
[23]

Falque, A

K. Falque, A. Delhom, Q. Glorieux, E. Giacobino, A. Bramati, and M. J. Jacquet, Polariton Fluids as Quan- tum Field Theory Simulators on Tailored Curved Space- times, (2023), arXiv:2311.01392 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

2023 arXiv
[24]

C. R. Almeida and M. J. Jacquet, Analogue gravity and the Hawking effect: historical perspective and literature review, Eur. Phys. J. H 48, 15 (2023), arXiv:2212.08838 [physics.hist-ph]

2023 arXiv
[25]

Torres, S

T. Torres, S. Patrick, A. Coutant, M. Richartz, E. W. Tedford, and S. Weinfurtner, Rotational superradiant scattering in a vortex flow, Nature Physics 13, 833 (2017)

2017
[26]

Braidotti, R

M.-C. Braidotti, R. Prizia, C. Maitland, F. Marino, A. Prain, I. Starshynov, N. Westerberg, E. M. Wright, and D. Faccio, Measurement of Penrose Superradiance in a Photon Superfluid, Physical Review Letters 128, 013901 (2022)

2022
[27]

Eckel, A

S. Eckel, A. Kumar, T. Jacobson, I. Spielman, and G. Campbell, A Rapidly Expanding Bose-Einstein Con- densate: An Expanding Universe in the Lab, Physical Review X 8, 021021 (2018)

2018
[28]

Banik, M

S. Banik, M. Gutierrez Galan, H. Sosa-Martinez, M. An- derson, S. Eckel, I. B. Spielman, and G. K. Camp- bell, Accurate Determination of Hubble Attenuation and Amplification in Expanding and Contracting Cold- Atom Universes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 090401 (2022), arXiv:2107.0809...

2022 arXiv
[29]

ˇSvanˇ cara, P

P. ˇSvanˇ cara, P. Smaniotto, L. Solidoro, J. F. Mac- Donald, S. Patrick, R. Gregory, C. F. Barenghi, and S. Weinfurtner, Rotating curved spacetime signatures from a giant quantum vortex, Nature 628, 66 (2024), arXiv:2308.10773 [gr-qc]

2024 arXiv
[30]

Jaskula, G

J.-C. Jaskula, G. B. Partridge, M. Bonneau, R. Lopes, J. Ruaudel, D. Boiron, and C. I. Westbrook, Acous- tic Analog to the Dynamical Casimir Effect in a Bose- Einstein Condensate, Physical Review Letters 109, 220401 (2012)

2012
[31]

Barcelo, S

C. Barcelo, S. Liberati, and M. Visser, Analogue gravity, Living Rev. Rel. 8, 12 (2005), arXiv:gr-qc/0505065

2005 arXiv
[32]

Busch, I

X. Busch, I. Carusotto, and R. Parentani, Spectrum and entanglement of phonons in quantum fluids of light, Phys. Rev. A 89, 043819 (2014), arXiv:1311.3507 [cond- mat.quant-gas]

2014 arXiv
[33]

Busch and R

X. Busch and R. Parentani, Quantum entanglement in analogue Hawking radiation: When is the final state nonseparable?, Phys. Rev. D 89, 105024 (2014), arXiv:1403.3262 [gr-qc]

2014 arXiv
[34]

J. R. M. de Nova, F. Sols, and I. Zapata, Violation of cauchy-schwarz inequalities by spontaneous hawking ra- diation in resonant boson structures, Phys. Rev. A 89, 043808 (2014)

2014
[35]

J. R. M. de Nova, F. Sols, and I. Zapata, Entanglement and violation of classical inequalities in the Hawking ra- diation of flowing atom condensates, New J. Phys. 17, 105003 (2015), arXiv:1509.02224 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

2015 arXiv
[36]

Robertson, F

S. Robertson, F. Michel, and R. Parentani, Control- ling and observing nonseparability of phonons created in time-dependent 1D atomic Bose condensates, Phys. Rev. D 95, 065020 (2017), arXiv:1611.03904 [cond-mat.quant- gas]

2017 arXiv
[37]

Tian, S.-Y

Z. Tian, S.-Y. Ch¨ a, and U. R. Fischer, Roton en- tanglement in quenched dipolar Bose-Einstein conden- sates, Phys. Rev. A 97, 063611 (2018), arXiv:1711.07685 [quant-ph]

2018 arXiv
[38]

Robertson, F

S. Robertson, F. Michel, and R. Parentani, Assessing de- grees of entanglement of phonon states in atomic Bose gases through the measurement of commuting observ- ables, Phys. Rev. D 96, 045012 (2017), arXiv:1705.06648 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

2017 arXiv
[39]

M. J. Jacquet and F. Koenig, The influence of space- time curvature on quantum emission in optical ana- logues to gravity, SciPost Phys. Core 3, 005 (2020), arXiv:2001.05807 [gr-qc]

2020 arXiv
[40]

Agullo, A

I. Agullo, A. J. Brady, and D. Kranas, Quantum Aspects of Stimulated Hawking Radiation in an Optical Analog White-Black Hole Pair, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 091301 (2022), arXiv:2107.10217 [gr-qc]

2022 arXiv
[41]

Isoard, N

M. Isoard, N. Milazzo, N. Pavloff, and O. Giraud, Bi- partite and tripartite entanglement in a Bose-Einstein acoustic black hole, Phys. Rev. A 104, 063302 (2021), arXiv:2102.06175 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

2021 arXiv
[42]

Syu, D.-S

W.-C. Syu, D.-S. Lee, and C.-Y. Lin, Analogous Hawking radiation and quantum entanglement in two-component Bose-Einstein condensates: The gapped excitations, Phys. Rev. D 106, 044016 (2022), arXiv:2204.10790 [hep- th]

2022 arXiv
[43]

Delhom, K

A. Delhom, K. Guerrero, P. Calizaya Cabrera, K. Falque, A. Bramati, A. J. Brady, M. J. Jacquet, and I. Agullo, Entanglement from superradiance and rotating quan- tum fluids of light, Phys. Rev. D 109, 105024 (2024), arXiv:2310.16031 [gr-qc]

2024 arXiv
[44]

Ciliberto, S

G. Ciliberto, S. Emig, N. Pavloff, and M. Isoard, Vio- lation of Bell inequalities in an analog black hole, Phys. Rev. A 109, 063325 (2024), arXiv:2404.16497 [quant-ph]

2024
[45]

Gooding, A

C. Gooding, A. Sachs, R. B. Mann, and S. Weinfurtner, Vacuum entanglement probes for ultra-cold atom sys- tems, New J. Phys. 26, 105001 (2024), arXiv:2308.07892 [quant-ph]

2024 arXiv
[46]

Steinhauer, Observation of quantum Hawking radia- tion and its entanglement in an analogue black hole, Nat

J. Steinhauer, Observation of quantum Hawking radia- tion and its entanglement in an analogue black hole, Nat. Phys. 12, 959 (2016)

2016
[47]

Leonhardt, Questioning the recent observation of quantum Hawking radiation, Annalen Phys

U. Leonhardt, Questioning the recent observation of quantum Hawking radiation, Annalen Phys. 530, 1700114 (2018), arXiv:1609.03803 [gr-qc]

2018 arXiv
[48]

Questioning the Recent Observation of Quantum Hawking Radiation

J. Steinhauer, Comment on “Questioning the Recent Observation of Quantum Hawking Radiation” [Ann. Phys. (Berlin) 2018, 530, 1700114], Annalen Phys. 530, 1700459 (2018)

2018
[49]

C.-A. Chen, S. Khlebnikov, and C.-L. Hung, Observation of Quasiparticle Pair Production and Quantum Entangle- ment in Atomic Quantum Gases Quenched to an Attrac- tive Interaction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 060404 (2021), arXiv:2102.11215 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

2021 arXiv
[50]

M. J. Jacquet, S. Weinfurtner, and F. K¨ onig, The next generation of analogue gravity experiments, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 378, 20190239 (2020), 20 arXiv:2005.04027 [gr-qc]

2020 arXiv
[51]

Martin and V

J. Martin and V. Vennin, Quantum Discord of Cosmic Inflation: Can we Show that CMB Anisotropies are of Quantum-Mechanical Origin?, Phys. Rev. D 93, 023505 (2016), arXiv:1510.04038 [astro-ph.CO]

2016 arXiv
[52]

Green and R

D. Green and R. A. Porto, Signals of a Quan- tum Universe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 251302 (2020), arXiv:2001.09149 [hep-th]

2020 arXiv
[53]

Ashtekar, A

A. Ashtekar, A. Corichi, and A. Kesavan, Emergence of classical behavior in the early universe, Phys. Rev. D 102, 023512 (2020), arXiv:2004.10684 [gr-qc]

2020 arXiv
[54]

Agullo, B

I. Agullo, B. Bonga, and P. R. Metidieri, Does infla- tion squeeze cosmological perturbations?, JCAP 09, 032, arXiv:2203.07066 [gr-qc]

arXiv
[55]

A. J. Brady, I. Agullo, and D. Kranas, Symplectic cir- cuits, entanglement, and stimulated Hawking radiation in analogue gravity, Phys. Rev. D 106, 105021 (2022), arXiv:2209.11317 [gr-qc]

2022 arXiv
[56]

Bhardwaj, I

A. Bhardwaj, I. Agullo, D. Kranas, J. H. Wilson, and D. E. Sheehy, Entanglement in an expanding toroidal Bose-Einstein condensate, Phys. Rev. A 109, 013305 (2024), arXiv:2307.07560 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

2024 arXiv
[57]

Barcel´ o, S

C. Barcel´ o, S. Liberati, and M. Visser, Analogue gravity from Bose-Einstein condensates, Class. Quantum Gravity 18, 1137 (2001)

2001
[58]

Barcel´ o, S

C. Barcel´ o, S. Liberati, and M. Visser, Analogue Models for FR W Cosmologies, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 12, 1641 (2003)

2003
[59]

Barcel´ o, S

C. Barcel´ o, S. Liberati, and M. Visser, Probing semiclas- sical analog gravity in Bose-Einstein condensates with widely tunable interactions, Phys. Rev. A 68, 053613 (2003)

2003
[60]

Cosmological

P. O. Fedichev and U. R. Fischer, “Cosmological” quasi- particle production in harmonically trapped superfluid gases, Phys. Rev. A 69, 033602 (2004)

2004
[61]

U. R. Fischer and R. Sch¨ utzhold, Quantum simulation of cosmic inflation in two-component Bose-Einstein con- densates, Phys. Rev. A 70, 063615 (2004)

2004
[62]

Uhlmann, Y

M. Uhlmann, Y. Xu, and R. Sch¨ utzhold, Aspects of cos- mic inflation in expanding Bose-Einstein condensates, New J. Phys. 7, 248 (2005)

2005
[63]

E. A. Calzetta and B. L. Hu, Early Universe Quantum Processes in BEC Collapse Experiments, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 44, 1691 (2005)

2005
[64]

P. Jain, S. Weinfurtner, M. Visser, and C. W. Gardiner, Analog model of a Friedmann-Robertson-Walker universe in Bose-Einstein condensates: Application of the classical field method, Phys. Rev. A 76, 033616 (2007)

2007
[65]

Sch¨ utzhold, Recreating Fundamental Effects in the Laboratory?, Adv

R. Sch¨ utzhold, Recreating Fundamental Effects in the Laboratory?, Adv. Sci. Lett. 2, 121 (2009)

2009
[66]

Prain, S

A. Prain, S. Fagnocchi, and S. Liberati, Analogue cos- mological particle creation: Quantum correlations in ex- panding Bose-Einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. D 82, 105018 (2010)

2010
[67]

Bili´ c and D

N. Bili´ c and D. Toli´ c, FR W universe in the laboratory, Phys. Rev. D 88, 105002 (2013)

2013
[68]

Ch¨ a and U

S.-Y. Ch¨ a and U. R. Fischer, Probing the scale invari- ance of the inflationary power spectrum in expanding quasi-two-dimensional dipolar condensates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 130404 (2017), [Addendum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 118, 179901 (2017)], arXiv:1609.06155 [cond-mat.quant- gas]

2017 arXiv
[69]

J. M. Gomez Llorente and J. Plata, Expanding ring- shaped Bose-Einstein condensates as analogs of cosmo- logical models: Analytical characterization of the in- flationary dynamics, Phys. Rev. A 100, 043613 (2019), arXiv:1910.11373 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

2019 arXiv
[70]

Bhardwaj, D

A. Bhardwaj, D. Vaido, and D. E. Sheehy, Inflationary Dynamics and Particle Production in a Toroidal Bose- Einstein Condensate, Phys. Rev. A 103, 023322 (2021), arXiv:2009.05611 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

2021 arXiv
[71]

Eckel and T

S. Eckel and T. Jacobson, Phonon redshift and Hub- ble friction in an expanding BEC, SciPost Phys. 10, 064 (2021), arXiv:2009.04512 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

2021 arXiv
[72]

Tolosa-Sime´ onet al

M. Tolosa-Sime´ onet al. , Curved and expanding space- time geometries in Bose-Einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. A 106, 033313 (2022), arXiv:2202.10441 [cond- mat.quant-gas]

2022 arXiv
[73]

Pitaevskii and S

L. Pitaevskii and S. Stringari, Bose-Einstein Condensa- tion and Superfluidity (Oxford University Press, 2016)

2016
[74]

Serafini, Quantum continuous variables: a primer of theoretical methods (CRC press, 2017)

A. Serafini, Quantum continuous variables: a primer of theoretical methods (CRC press, 2017)

2017
[76]

C. F. Schmidt, A. Parra-L´ opez, M. Tolosa-Sime´ on, M. Sparn, E. Kath, N. Liebster, J. Duchene, H. Stro- bel, M. K. Oberthaler, and S. Floerchinger, Cosmologi- cal particle production in a quantum field simulator as a quantum mechanical scattering problem, Phys. Rev. D [Accep...

2024
[77]

Peres, Separability criterion for density matrices, Physical Review Letters 77, 1413 (1996)

A. Peres, Separability criterion for density matrices, Physical Review Letters 77, 1413 (1996)

1996
[78]

M. B. Plenio, Logarithmic negativity: A full entangle- ment monotone that is not convex, Physical Review Let- ters 95, 090503 (2005)

2005
[79]

Busch and R

X. Busch and R. Parentani, Quantum entanglement in analogue Hawking radiation: When is the final state non- separable?, Physical Review D 89, 105024 (2014)

2014
[80]

Peres, Separability criterion for density matri- ces, Phys

A. Peres, Separability criterion for density matri- ces, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1413 (1996), arXiv:quant- ph/9604005

1996
[81]

M. B. Plenio, Logarithmic Negativity: A Full Entangle- ment Monotone That is not Convex, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 090503 (2005), arXiv:quant-ph/0505071

2005 arXiv
[82]

Agullo, A

I. Agullo, A. J. Brady, and D. Kranas, Robustness of entanglement in Hawking radiation for optical systems immersed in thermal baths, Phys. Rev. D 107, 085009 (2023), arXiv:2211.10306 [gr-qc]

2023 arXiv
[83]

P. C. with M. Oberthaler’s group,
[84]

S´ anchez-Kuntz, A

N. S´ anchez-Kuntz, A. Parra-L´ opez, M. Tolosa-Sime´ on, T. Haas, and S. Floerchinger, Scalar quantum fields in cosmologies with 2 + 1 spacetime dimensions, Phys. Rev. D 105, 105020 (2022)

2022
[85]

Bianchi and A

E. Bianchi and A. Satz, Entropy of a subalgebra of ob- servables and the geometric entanglement entropy, Phys. Rev. D 99, 085001 (2019), arXiv:1901.06454 [hep-th]

2019 arXiv
[86]

Martin and V

J. Martin and V. Vennin, Real-space entanglement of quantum fields, Phys. Rev. D 104, 085012 (2021), arXiv:2106.14575 [hep-th]

2021 arXiv
[87]

J. e. Martin and V. Vennin, Real-space entanglement in the Cosmic Microwave Background, JCAP 10, 036, arXiv:2106.15100 [gr-qc]

arXiv
[88]

Espinosa-Portal´ es and V

L. Espinosa-Portal´ es and V. Vennin, Real-space Bell inequalities in de Sitter, JCAP 07 (07), 037, 21 arXiv:2203.03505 [quant-ph]

arXiv
[89]

Agullo, B

I. Agullo, B. Bonga, E. Mart ´ ın-Mart ´ ınez, S. Nadal- Gisbert, T. R. Perche, J. Polo-G´ omez, P. Ribes-Metidieri, and B. de S. L. Torres, The multimode nature of space- time entanglement in QFT, (2024), arXiv:2409.16368 [quant-ph]

2024 arXiv
[90]

Brahma and A

S. Brahma and A. N. Seenivasan, Gravity-induced entan- glement as a probe of spacetime curvature, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 32, 2342020 (2023), arXiv:2310.17311 [gr-qc]

2023 arXiv
[91]

Brahma and A

S. Brahma and A. N. Seenivasan, Probing the curvature of the cosmos from quantum entanglement due to gravity, (2023), arXiv:2311.05483 [gr-qc]

2023 arXiv
[92]

H. K, S. Barman, and D. Kothawala, Universal role of curvature in vacuum entanglement, Phys. Rev. D 109, 065017 (2024), arXiv:2311.15019 [gr-qc]

2024 arXiv
[93]

Ribes-Metidieri, I

P. Ribes-Metidieri, I. Agullo, and B. Bonga, Infla- tion does not create entanglement in local observables, (2024), arXiv:2409.16366 [gr-qc]

2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [75]

Sparn, E

M. Sparn, E. Kath, N. Liebster, J. Duchene, C. F. Schmidt, M. Tolosa-Sime´ on,´Alvaro Parra-L´ opez, S. Flo- erchinger, H. Strobel, and M. K. Oberthaler, Experimen- tal particle production in time-dependent spacetimes: a one-dimensional scattering problem (2024), To appear

work page 2024

[2] [1]

Viermann et al

C. Viermann et al. , Quantum field simulator for dy- namics in curved spacetime, Nature 611, 260 (2022), arXiv:2202.10399 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

arXiv 2022

[3] [2]

Schr¨ odinger, The proper vibrations of the expanding universe, Physica 6, 899 (1939)

E. Schr¨ odinger, The proper vibrations of the expanding universe, Physica 6, 899 (1939)

1939

[4] [3]

Parker, Particle creation in expanding universes, Phys

L. Parker, Particle creation in expanding universes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 21, 562 (1968)

1968

[5] [4]

Parker, Quantized fields and particle creation in ex- panding universes

L. Parker, Quantized fields and particle creation in ex- panding universes. 1., Phys. Rev. 183, 1057 (1969)

1969

[6] [5]

Parker, Quantized fields and particle creation in ex- panding universes

L. Parker, Quantized fields and particle creation in ex- panding universes. 2., Phys. Rev. D 3, 346 (1971), [Erra- tum: Phys.Rev.D 3, 2546–2546 (1971)]

1971

[7] [6]

Hawking, Stephen W, Black hole explosions?, Nature 248, 30 (1974)

1974

[8] [7]

S. W. Hawking, Black hole explosions, Nature 248, 30 (1974)

1974