The entire wiki reimagined as a visual magazine with video discovery · Watch your interests come alive
The entire wiki reimagined as a visual magazine with video discovery · Watch your interests come alive
Aerial view of Virgo
Aerial view of Virgo
Computer simulation of gravitational waves emitted by the orbital decay and merger of two black holes
Computer simulation of gravitational waves emitted by the orbital decay and merger of two black holes
Typical "chirp" of a gravitational-wave signal from the GW170817 event. The x axis represents time, and the y axis the frequency. The frequency increa
Typical "chirp" of a gravitational-wave signal from the GW170817 event. The x axis represents time, and the y axis the frequency. The frequency increase over time is typical of gravitational waves from binary compact objects, and its shape is primarily determined by the objects' mass.
Mirror from the initial Virgo detector, now an exposition model at the Virgo site
Mirror from the initial Virgo detector, now an exposition model at the Virgo site
Fig. 1: Electric field of a monochromatic light-wave versus phase, for five different quantum states. The fuzzy area illustrates the fact that the electric field strength is not precisely defined. The darker the color the higher the probability.
Fig. 1: Electric field of a monochromatic light-wave versus phase, for five different quantum states. The fuzzy area illustrates the fact that the ele
Fig. 3: Schematic of a laser interferometer for the detection of gravitational waves. Here, squeezed vacuum states are injected and overlapped with th
Fig. 3: Schematic of a laser interferometer for the detection of gravitational waves. Here, squeezed vacuum states are injected and overlapped with the bright field at the central beam splitter to improve the sensitivity.
Fig. 4: Photo voltages of a photo diode detecting light.
Fig. 4: Photo voltages of a photo diode detecting light.
Fig. 5: Measurement results on two EPR entangled light fields. The measurement values taken on one subsystem (at A) and on the other subsystem (at B)
Fig. 5: Measurement results on two EPR entangled light fields. The measurement values taken on one subsystem (at A) and on the other subsystem (at B) vary a lot, i.e. show a large local uncertainty. Comparing the data as shown here reveals correlations (top, blue) or anti-correlations (bottom, blue). In this example, correlations as well as anti-correlations are stronger than the vacuum state uncertainty (black).