Cited by 245Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesRelativity and Gravitational Theory

CPTand Lorentz tests in Penning traps

Open access
Bluhm, Robert, Kostelecký, V. Alan, Russell, Neil·1998·Physical Review D

Abstract

A theoretical analysis is performed of Penning-trap experiments testing $\mathrm{CPT}$ and Lorentz symmetry through measurements of anomalous magnetic moments and charge-to-mass ratios. Possible $\mathrm{CPT}$ and Lorentz violations arising from spontaneous symmetry breaking at a fundamental level are treated in the context of a general extension of the $\mathrm{SU}(3)\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}\mathrm{SU}(2)\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}\mathrm{U}(1)$ standard model and its restriction to quantum electrodynamics. We describe signals that might appear in principle, introduce suitable figures of merit, and estimate $\mathrm{CPT}$ and Lorentz bounds attainable in present and future Penning-trap experiments. Experiments measuring anomaly frequencies are found to provide the sharpest tests of $\mathrm{CPT}$ symmetry. Bounds are attainable of approximately ${10}^{\ensuremath{-}20}$ in the electron-positron case and of ${10}^{\ensuremath{-}23}$ for a suggested experiment with protons and antiprotons. Searches for diurnal frequency variations in these experiments could also limit certain types of Lorentz violation to the level of ${10}^{\ensuremath{-}18}$ in the electron-positron system and others at the level of ${10}^{\ensuremath{-}21}$ in the proton-antiproton system. In contrast, measurements comparing cyclotron frequencies are sensitive within the present theoretical framework to different kinds of Lorentz violation that preserve $\mathrm{CPT}.$ Constraints could be obtained on one figure of merit in the electron-positron system at the level of ${10}^{\ensuremath{-}16},$ on another in the proton-antiproton system at ${10}^{\ensuremath{-}24},$ and on a third at ${10}^{\ensuremath{-}25}$ using comparisons of ${\mathrm{H}}^{\mathrm{\ensuremath{-}}}$ ions with antiprotons.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physrevd.57.3932

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the mSME, the frequencies ωa and ωc both receive corrections.

    “However, the frequencies ωa and ωc both receive corrections [60].”

    From Modern Tests of Lorentz Invariance (2005) · cites this paper as [60]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. by D. B. Cline ͑World Scientific, Singapore, 1993͒, hep-th/ 9211116;
  2. ͓13͔ O. Bertolami et al., Phys. Lett. B 395, 178 ͑1997͒. ͓14͔ For a review of experimental issues relevant to Penning traps see, for example, R. S. Van Dyck, P. B. Schwinberg, and H. G. Dehmelt, in The Electron, edited by D. Hestenes and A. Weingarthofe ͑Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1991͒.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bluhm, R., Kostelecký, V. A., & Russell, N.
Affiliations
Colby College (US)
Venue
Physical Review D
Published
1998-04-01
Volume
57
Issue
7
Pages
3932-3943
ISSN
  • 0556-2821 (ISSN-L)
  • 1089-4918
OpenAlex
W2143825212
Cited by
245
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 13
FWCI
7.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion)
  • IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (9503756)
  • U.S. Department of Energy (DE‐FG02‐, FG0291ER40661, DEFG0291ER40661)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Particle physics theoretical and experimental studies
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Relativity and Gravitational Theory
Keywords
CPT symmetry, Lorentz violation, Penning trap, anomalous magnetic moment, charge-to-mass ratio, spontaneous symmetry breaking, quantum electrodynamics, H+ ions, antiprotons, figure of merit

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review