alphaFeedback

WorksPhysics and Astronomy

Quantum Noise from Massive Lorentz–Violating Gravitons: Interferometer Signatures in Very Special Linear Gravity

AI contributions
Not recorded for this paper
View details

Abstract

In this work we analyse under the Very Special Linear Gravity framework, which introduces a gauge invariant massive graviton with two polarizations, possible signatures of gravitons in a classical gravitational detector. Following the Vernon approach we found dissipative terms consistent with other works and extra terms of order of the graviton mass squared. The model also presents a characteristic feature when a squeezed state is considered. In such case, a contribution that distinguishes the sign of the squeezing phase is present.

Introduction

The first observation of gravitational waves (GWs) by LIGO [1] established interferometers as a tool for testing gravity in the dynamical regime and motivated the study of possible signatures of quantum gravity in detectors. Coupling a detector to quantized metric perturbations induces fluctuations in the separation of its test masses, with correlations that depend on the gravitational field state [2]. These fluctuations can therefore carry information about the quantization of the field, although identifying a measurable noise contribution and establishing its quantum origin are separate tasks.

In the weak-field regime, quantization of gravity introduces the graviton, a spin-2 particle that is massless in the standard description. Massive spin-2 fields were first studied by Fierz and Pauli [3] and later became central to theories of massive gravity. In the Lorentz-invariant Fierz-Pauli theory, a massive graviton carries five physical degrees of freedom, rather than the two of linearized general relativity. Its linear coupling to sources exhibits the van Dam–Veltman–Zakharov discontinuity: the massless limit does not reproduce the predictions of general relativity [4, 5]. Generic nonlinear extensions can also introduce the Boulware–Deser ghost [6]. Nonlinear Vainshtein screening [7], relevant in DGP [8, 9] and dRGT gravity [10], can recover general-relativistic predictions near sources. Avoiding the ghost is a separate consistency requirement of the nonlinear theory.

These features need not accompany every graviton mass once Lorentz symmetry is relaxed. Very Special Relativity (VSR), introduced in 2006, replaces Lorentz symmetry by a subgroup, here SIM(2)SIM(2) [11]. Developed independently of the graviton-mass problem, VSR also offers a possible origin of neutrino masses without additional right-handed neutrino fields [12]. The subgroup preserves a preferred null direction nμn^\mu up to rescaling. Ratios such as nμ/(n⋅∂)n^\mu/(n \cdot\partial) are invariant under this rescaling and allow nonlocal operators compatible with VSR while breaking Lorentz symmetry.

Such operators allow mass terms for gauge fields without breaking gauge invariance. These constructions have been studied for non-Abelian fields [13], electroweak theory [14], photons [15, 16], Kalb–Ramond fields [17] and Maxwell–Chern–Simons theory [18, 19]. Their extension to the graviton gives Very Special Linear Gravity, a theory with two physical graviton polarizations and dispersion relation ω2=∣k∣2+mg2\omega^2 = |\mathbf{k}|^2 + m_g^2 [20, 21, 22]. The preferred direction produces an anisotropic tidal response, and the construction recovers linearized general relativity as mg→0m_g \to0.

A massive graviton with only two polarizations raises the question of which distinct signatures it could produce in GW detector arms and whether these effects could be observed. We address this question through the detector’s response to a quantized gravitational field. The usual in-out formulation computes transition amplitudes between specified asymptotic states. Here, instead, we are interested in the dynamics of the detector for a given initial state of the gravitational field, without selecting a final state. There are different equivalent ways to work in such cases. One, which has received increasing attention in some fields, is the Schwinger–Keldysh approach, which provides a real-time description [23, 24]. For a general treatment we refer the reader to [25, 26, 27]. A second, closely related approach, which we use in this work, is the Feynman-Vernon influence functional [28]. We closely follow the treatment in Vernon’s thesis [29] to integrate out the gravitational field and obtain an effective action for the detector. The resulting dynamics of the detector include dissipative and a noise term induced by the gravitational field. Our aim is to characterize the corrections to both due to the graviton mass mgm_g and their possible observational signatures.

Therefore, the outline of this work is as follows: Section II introduces the graviton and detector-arm actions in VSR. Section III presents the effective action for the gravitational detector using the Feynman-Vernon method. Section IV gives the detector equations of motion and noise correlations for vacuum, thermal and squeezed initial states. Section V summarizes the results and their observational scale with some comments. The longer calculations and intermediate steps are collected in four appendices. We use c=ℏ=1c = \hbar= 1, ημν=diag⁡(−1,+1,+1,+1)\eta_{\mu\nu} = \operatorname{diag}(-1,+1,+1,+1), kμ=(ω,k)k^\mu= (\omega,\mathbf{k}), k2=−mg2k^2 = -m_g^2, and nμ=(1,n)n^\mu= (1,\mathbf{n}) with ∣n∣=1\lvert\mathbf{n}\rvert= 1.

Action Calculation

VSR action for linearised gravity

The most general quadratic SIM(2)SIM(2)-invariant action for a graviton hμνh_{\mu\nu}, which reproduces the Fierz-Pauli form in the massless limit was found in [20] and it reads

Sh=164πG∫d4x hμν(x) Oμνρσ hρσ(x),(1)S_h = \frac{1}{64\pi G}\int d^4x\,h_{\mu\nu}(x)\,\mathcal{O}^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}\,h_{\rho\sigma}(x), \tag*{(1)}

where the operator O\mathcal{O} is given by

Oμναβ=∂μ∂νηαβ+∂α∂βημν−12(∂μ∂αηνβ+∂μ∂βηνα+∂ν∂βημα+∂ν∂αημβ)−ημνηαβ∂2+12(ημαηνβ+ημβηνα)∂2−mg2NμNν∂α∂β+mg22NμNα∂ν∂β+mg22NμNβ∂ν∂α+mg22NνNα∂μ∂β+mg22NνNβ∂μ∂α−mg2NαNβ∂μ∂ν+(mg2NμNνηαβ−mg22NμNαηνβ−mg22NμNβηνα−mg22NνNβημα−mg22ημβNνNα+mg2NαNβημν)∂2−mg2ημν(Nα∂β+∂αNβ)+mg22ημα(Nν∂β+∂νNβ)+mg22ημβ(Nν∂α+∂νNα)+mg22ηνα(Nμ∂β+∂μNβ)+mg22ηνβ(Nμ∂α+∂μNα)−mg2ηαβ(Nμ∂ν+∂μNν)+mg2ημνηαβ−mg22ημαηνβ−mg22ημβηνα,(2)\begin{aligned} \mathcal{O}_{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}={}&\partial_\mu\partial_\nu\eta_{\alpha\beta}+\partial_\alpha\partial_\beta\eta_{\mu\nu} -\frac{1}{2}\left(\partial_\mu\partial_\alpha\eta_{\nu\beta}+\partial_\mu\partial_\beta\eta_{\nu\alpha}+\partial_\nu\partial_\beta\eta_{\mu\alpha}+\partial_\nu\partial_\alpha\eta_{\mu\beta}\right)-\eta_{\mu\nu}\eta_{\alpha\beta}\partial^2\\ &+\frac{1}{2}\left(\eta_{\mu\alpha}\eta_{\nu\beta}+\eta_{\mu\beta}\eta_{\nu\alpha}\right)\partial^2 -m_g^2N_\mu N_\nu\partial_\alpha\partial_\beta+\frac{m_g^2}{2}N_\mu N_\alpha\partial_\nu\partial_\beta+\frac{m_g^2}{2}N_\mu N_\beta\partial_\nu\partial_\alpha\\ &+\frac{m_g^2}{2}N_\nu N_\alpha\partial_\mu\partial_\beta+\frac{m_g^2}{2}N_\nu N_\beta\partial_\mu\partial_\alpha-m_g^2N_\alpha N_\beta\partial_\mu\partial_\nu\\ &+\left(m_g^2N_\mu N_\nu\eta_{\alpha\beta}-\frac{m_g^2}{2}N_\mu N_\alpha\eta_{\nu\beta}-\frac{m_g^2}{2}N_\mu N_\beta\eta_{\nu\alpha}-\frac{m_g^2}{2}N_\nu N_\beta\eta_{\mu\alpha}-\frac{m_g^2}{2}\eta_{\mu\beta}N_\nu N_\alpha+m_g^2N_\alpha N_\beta\eta_{\mu\nu}\right)\partial^2\\ &-m_g^2\eta_{\mu\nu}\left(N_\alpha\partial_\beta+\partial_\alpha N_\beta\right)+\frac{m_g^2}{2}\eta_{\mu\alpha}\left(N_\nu\partial_\beta+\partial_\nu N_\beta\right)+\frac{m_g^2}{2}\eta_{\mu\beta}\left(N_\nu\partial_\alpha+\partial_\nu N_\alpha\right)\\ &+\frac{m_g^2}{2}\eta_{\nu\alpha}\left(N_\mu\partial_\beta+\partial_\mu N_\beta\right)+\frac{m_g^2}{2}\eta_{\nu\beta}\left(N_\mu\partial_\alpha+\partial_\mu N_\alpha\right)-m_g^2\eta_{\alpha\beta}\left(N_\mu\partial_\nu+\partial_\mu N_\nu\right)\\ &+m_g^2\eta_{\mu\nu}\eta_{\alpha\beta}-\frac{m_g^2}{2}\eta_{\mu\alpha}\eta_{\nu\beta}-\frac{m_g^2}{2}\eta_{\mu\beta}\eta_{\nu\alpha}, \tag*{(2)} \end{aligned}

and here mgm_g is the graviton mass in VSR. Also, we defined

Nμ≡nμn⋅∂.(3)N^\mu\equiv\frac{n^\mu}{n\cdot\partial}. \tag*{(3)}

Notice that when the VSR parameter mgm_g goes to zero, we recover the standard action for linear gravity. In order to single out the physical degrees of freedom from this action we choose the natural gauge in VSR

∂μhμν=nμhμν=0,h=h μμ=0,(4)\partial^\mu h_{\mu\nu}=n^\mu h_{\mu\nu}=0,\qquad h=h^\mu_{\ \mu}=0, \tag*{(4)}

With this choice, the action (1) reduces to

Sh=164πG∫d4x[hμν∂2hμν−mg2hμνhμν],(5)S_h=\frac{1}{64\pi G}\int d^4x\left[h_{\mu\nu}\partial^2h^{\mu\nu}-m_g^2h_{\mu\nu}h^{\mu\nu}\right], \tag*{(5)}

which gives the correct Klein-Gordon equation in the mostly-plus convention, i.e.,

(∂2−mg2)hμν=0,with ∂2=−∂02+∇⃗ 2.(6)(\partial^2-m_g^2)h_{\mu\nu}=0,\qquad\text{with }\partial^2=-\partial_0^2+\vec{\nabla}^{\,2}. \tag*{(6)}

Here, we emphasize that, although we have chosen a specific gauge to simplify the algebraic manipulation of the action, the physical observables and the underlying theory remain strictly gauge invariant. Using integration by parts, we can write (5) as

Sh=164πG∫d4x[hμνh¨μν−∇⃗hμν⋅∇⃗hμν−mg2hμνhμν],(7)S_h=\frac{1}{64\pi G}\int d^4x\left[h_{\mu\nu}\ddot{h}^{\mu\nu}-\vec{\nabla}h_{\mu\nu}\cdot\vec{\nabla}h^{\mu\nu}-m_g^2h_{\mu\nu}h^{\mu\nu}\right], \tag*{(7)}

which corresponds to the action for the graviton to be used.

Detector action

In addition, we consider the action for a gravitational wave detector. We start from the equation for the geodesic distance ξ⃗\vec{\xi} among two test particles of mass m0m_0. Choosing a frame comoving with one of the two particles, we have

∂s2ξi=−Ri00jξj.(8)\partial_s^2 \xi^i=-R_{i00j}\xi^j . \tag*{(8)}

This equation can be obtained from the action

Sdet=12m0∫dt(ξ˙iξ˙i−ξiRi00jξj),(9)S_{\mathrm{det}}=\frac{1}{2}m_0\int dt\left(\dot{\xi}^i\dot{\xi}^i-\xi^iR_{i00j}\xi^j\right), \tag*{(9)}

where we have directly included the standard kinetic contribution proportional to the mass of the particle. Using the expression for the linearised Riemann tensor

Ri00j=−12(h00,ij+hij,00−h0i,0j−h0j,0i),(10)R_{i00j}=-\frac{1}{2}\left(h_{00,ij}+h_{ij,00}-h_{0i,0j}-h_{0j,0i}\right), \tag*{(10)}

we can write the action for the detector as

References

  1. [1]B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 061102 (2016), arXiv:1602.03837 [gr-qc].
  2. [2]M. Parikh, F. Wilczek, and G. Zahariade, Phys. Rev. D 104, 046021 (2021).
  3. [3]M. Fierz and W. Pauli, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 173, 211 (1939).
  4. [4]H. van Dam and M. J. G. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B 22, 397 (1970).
  5. [5]V. I. Zakharov, JETP Lett. 12, 312 (1970).
  6. [6]D. G. Boulware and S. Deser, Phys. Rev. D 6, 3368 (1972).
  7. [7]A. I. Vainshtein, Phys. Lett. B 39, 393 (1972).
  8. [8]G. R. Dvali, G. Gabadadze, and M. Porrati, Phys. Lett. B 485, 208 (2000), arXiv:hep-th/0005016.DOI
  9. [9]G. R. Dvali, G. Gabadadze, and M. Porrati, Phys. Lett. B 484, 112 (2000), arXiv:hep-th/0002190.DOI
  10. [10]C. de Rham, G. Gabadadze, and A. J. Tolley, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 231101 (2011), arXiv:1011.1232 [hep-th].DOI
  11. [11]A. G. Cohen and S. L. Glashow, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 021601 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0601236.DOI
  12. [12]A. G. Cohen and S. L. Glashow, (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0605036.DOI
  13. [13]J. Alfaro and V. O. Rivelles, Phys. Rev. D 88, 085023 (2013), arXiv:1305.1577 [hep-th].DOI
  14. [14]J. Alfaro, P. González, and R. Ávila, Phys. Rev. D 91, 105007 (2015).
  15. [15]S. Cheon, C. Lee, and S. J. Lee, Phys. Lett. B 679, 73 (2009), arXiv:0904.2065 [hep-th].
  16. [16]J. Alfaro and A. Soto, Phys. Rev. D 100, 055029 (2019).
  17. [17]R. V. Maluf and G. J. Olmo, Phys. Rev. D 108, 095022 (2023), arXiv:2306.14309 [hep-th].DOI
  18. [18]F. M. Belchior and R. V. Maluf, Phys. Lett. B 855, 138794 (2024).
  19. [19]F. M. Belchior and R. V. Maluf, (2026), arXiv:2601.18621 [hep-th].arxiv.org/abs/2601.18621
  20. [20]J. Alfaro and A. Santoni, Phys. Lett. B 829, 137080 (2022), arXiv:2204.05485 [gr-qc].DOI
  21. [21]A. Santoni, J. Alfaro, and A. Soto, Phys. Rev. D 108, 044072 (2023), arXiv:2306.02464 [gr-qc].DOI
  22. [22]A. Bonilla, A. Santoni, R. C. Nunes, and J. Levi Said, Phys. Lett. B 864, 138938 (2025), arXiv:2503.12195 [gr-qc].DOI
  23. [23]J. S. Schwinger, J. Math. Phys. 2, 407 (1961).
  24. [24]L. V. Keldysh, Sov. Phys. JETP 20, 1018 (1965).
  25. [25]A. Kameney, Field Theory of Non-Equilibrium Systems (Cambridge University Press, 2011).
  26. [26]E. A. Calzetta and B.-L. B. Hu, Nonequilibrium Quantum Field Theory (Oxford University Press, 2009).
  27. [27]J. Rammer, Quantum field theory of non-equilibrium states (2007).
  28. [28]R. Feynman and F. Vernon, Annals of Physics 24, 118 (1963).
  29. [29]F. L. Vernon, The theory of a general quantum system interacting with a linear dissipative system, Ph.D. thesis, Caltech (1959).
  30. [30]A. G. Abac et al. (LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA), (2026), arXiv:2603.19020 [gr-qc].arxiv.org/abs/2603.19020
  31. [31]M. Colpi et al. (LISA), (2024), arXiv:2402.07571 [astro-ph.CO].arxiv.org/abs/2402.07571
  32. [32]S. Kanno and J. Soda, Phys. Rev. D 99, 084010 (2019).
  33. [33]S. Kanno, Phys. Rev. D 100, 123536 (2019).
  34. [34]V. Mukhanov and S. Winitzki, Introduction to Quantum Effects in Gravity (Cambridge University Press, 2007).DOI
  35. [35]P. Dorlis, N. E. Mavromatos, S. Sarkar, and S.-N. Vlachos, Phys. Rev. D 113, 026023 (2026), arXiv:2507.23475 [gr-qc].arxiv.org/abs/2507.23475
  36. [36]P. Dorlis, N. E. Mavromatos, S. Sarkar, and S.-N. Vlachos, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 151501 (2025), arXiv:2507.01689 [gr-qc].DOI
  37. [37]N. E. Mavromatos and S. Sarkar, (2026), arXiv:2606.24613 [gr-qc].arxiv.org/abs/2606.24613

Paper details

vlnc:W_gxyzwn9g
v1 · latestHistory (1)

published · Fresh — added to the Hub within the last 30 days

added ·

Usage

views · 0

downloads · 0

A view counts once per browser per day, a download each time the PDF is requested.

CC BY 4.0

Original source

  • Physics and Astronomy

Not recorded for this paper · View statement →

Looking for related papers…
Contents