Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Communications Science

New Quantum Receiver the First To Detect Entire Radio Frequency Spectrum (phys.org) 100

Posted by BeauHD from the first-of-its-kind dept.
A new quantum sensor can analyze the full spectrum of radio frequency and real-world signals, unleashing new potentials for soldier communications, spectrum awareness and electronic warfare. Phys.Org reports: Army researchers built the quantum sensor, which can sample the radio-frequency spectrum -- from zero frequency up to 20 GHz -- and detect AM and FM radio, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi and other communication signals. The Rydberg sensor uses laser beams to create highly-excited Rydberg atoms directly above a microwave circuit, to boost and hone in on the portion of the spectrum being measured. The Rydberg atoms are sensitive to the circuit's voltage, enabling the device to be used as a sensitive probe for the wide range of signals in the RF spectrum.

The Rydberg spectrum analyzer has the potential to surpass fundamental limitations of traditional electronics in sensitivity, bandwidth and frequency range. Because of this, the lab's Rydberg spectrum analyzer and other quantum sensors have the potential to unlock a new frontier of Army sensors for spectrum awareness, electronic warfare, sensing and communications -- part of the Army's modernization strategy. The peer-reviewed journal Physical Review Applied published the researchers' findings, Waveguide-coupled Rydberg spectrum analyzer from 0 to 20 GigaHerz, co-authored by Army researchers Drs. David Meyer, Paul Kunz, and Kevin Cox.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Quantum Receiver the First To Detect Entire Radio Frequency Spectrum More

New Quantum Receiver the First To Detect Entire Radio Frequency Spectrum

Comments Filter:

  • Typical slashdot comment (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward

    These idiots are clearing doing it wrong! Had they used Flimflam atoms instead of Rydberg atoms it would work at 100GHz.

  • I'll inform the amateur radio operators using frequencies above 20GHz to hand in their callsigns.

    • Hmm, a spectrum analyzer that goes up to 20 GHz nowadays costs as little as $3000.

      • Hmm, a spectrum analyzer that goes up to 20 GHz nowadays costs as little as $3000.

        And yet, organizations relying on accurate test equipment, stay away from the cheap stuff.

        We've spent more than that, on cables and test leads.

        • Iâ(TM)m no expert but I suspect your $3k spectom anslizer caâ(TM)t analize the entire spectrum at once but I might be wrong

          • Iâ(TM)m no expert but I suspect your $3k spectom anslizer caâ(TM)t analize the entire spectrum at once but I might be wrong

            Had more to do with errors. You'd be surprised at the "quality" crap being sold out there to connect to a $150K analyzer. We tried going cheap. Didn't work out so well.

          • You are not wrong. It surely does not. They all work via sweeps across the spectrum, as would an oscilloscope.

    • I'll inform the amateur radio operators using frequencies above 20GHz to hand in their callsigns.

      I'm thinking the Military just might have a justification beyond finding Smokey or the Bandit. (RIP, gents)

      • I'll inform the amateur radio operators using frequencies above 20GHz to hand in their callsigns.

        I'm thinking the Military just might have a justification beyond finding Smokey or the Bandit. (RIP, gents)

        While there is a common meme regarding Amateur Radio, that we are all all olde fartes sitting in the basement, tapping out Morse Code or voice on our 1960's Heathkit radios, yapping about conspiracy theories, and our latest medical issues, there is a whole lot more going on.

        Many of us are doing real research, or at the very least using SOA equipment. My Radio is a server with an RF front end, my "shack" looks more like a mission control than a 1930's science fiction set.

        At present, a number of us are p

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by narcc ( 412956 )

          Those of us who are familiar with programming are honing our algorithms to dig even deeper

          For sure, there's Joe Taylor and ... uh ... hmmm ...

          Well, I'm sure someone else is out there.

          (Whoever they are, maybe they can properly document WSPR, FT-8, and the other JT modes.)

          • Those of us who are familiar with programming are honing our algorithms to dig even deeper

            For sure, there's Joe Taylor and ... uh ... hmmm ...

            Well, I'm sure someone else is out there.

            (Whoever they are, maybe they can properly document WSPR, FT-8, and the other JT modes.)

            David H Freese W1HKJ does a lot of work - not all weak signal, but there are quite a few programmers doing stuff.

            But as for documentation, The stock answer is always a request to the requester to add to the documentation - you know, freeware and stuff.

            One little bit of interesting is that I know a number of Hams who claim that HamRadio Deluxe has the best codecs. In discussions with Dave, he notes that he wrote many of the codecs years ago for them, and that they are very early and not the many times im

          • Forgot to add, there is always https://www.ampr.org/ [ampr.org] Amateur Radio Digital Communications, which provides grants for Amateur Radio research.

        • >My Radio is a server with an RF front end
          >Those of us who are familiar with programming are honing our algorithms to dig even deeper To date, I've managed halfway around the world on a few mW.

          This all sounds legit interesting, and as someone who knows his way around an RF block I had no idea this was a pursuit in the amateur world. Care to dump some info?

          • >My Radio is a server with an RF front end >Those of us who are familiar with programming are honing our algorithms to dig even deeper To date, I've managed halfway around the world on a few mW.

            This all sounds legit interesting, and as someone who knows his way around an RF block I had no idea this was a pursuit in the amateur world. Care to dump some info?

            Check into the FlexRadio series of radios https://www.flexradio.com./ [www.flexradio.com] I have the 6600, which is their latest. You can have 4 different "slices" open at the same time, which allows you to Have huge amounts of spectrum on screen. The radio connects to a router either via wifi or wired ethernet. A big advantage of the server aspect is that you don't need the plethora of audio and serial cables like you do with a legacy radio. It uses what is called DAX which sends the audio via ethernet, And the same with CAT

            • That does seem like a nifty toy, and I thank you for the write up, but I suppose I should have been clearer. Getting halfway around the globe on a few mW. What's the thing?

              • That does seem like a nifty toy, and I thank you for the write up, but I suppose I should have been clearer. Getting halfway around the globe on a few mW. What's the thing?

                These modes are based in the work done for moonbounce radio.

                The transmitter and receiver are synchronized time wise. NTP or GPS time, exact match is best, but within a second is okay. The info you are sending is split into a number of separate tones over a over a small portion of a roughly 3 KHz bandwidth on a given frequency. It sounds a little like a deranged flutist. The transmitting station sends a start tone, then transmits the tones several times, and the receiving station stitches them together.

  • when i can buy one and plug it in to a USB or ethernet port on my laptop and view a spectrum and waterfall on my laptop???

    • The same place you buy a transmitter that spoofs a 4G tower. Might have to wait a few months, though.

      • i dont want a transmitter or transceiver, i just want a receiver with good filtering so its not picking up harmonics from all over the spectrum,

        • i dont want a transmitter or transceiver, i just want a receiver with good filtering so its not picking up harmonics from all over the spectrum,

          There are Software defined receivers that would probably fit your needs.

        • I was going to recommend the Maker class on SDR but it was earlier today. It does have a few links for equipment, but there are dozens of sites to get you started in SDR using inexpensive equipment. https://campus.make.co/event/a... [campus.make.co]

          --

  • it's all about NIST Traceability (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ka9dgx ( 72702 ) on Saturday February 06, 2021 @03:27AM (#61033606) Homepage Journal

    Wondering why this is better than a diode detector, I tracked down some actually relevant info

    "The Rydberg atoms convert an RF amplitude measurement into an optical frequency measurement, which is directly proportional to the strength of the field through Planck’s constant. This technique allows for self calibrated, directly SI-traceable E-field measurements over a large range of frequencies, from 0.1 1000 GHz. The spatial resolution of these measurements can be much smaller than the RF wavelength. This allows us to measure the field distribution inside a waveguide and determine the maximum field."

    Source: https://tsapps.nist.gov/public... [nist.gov]

    Like the increased accuracy of atomic clocks, the ability to tie power level calibrations back to fundamental physical units is useful, to be sure. It doesn't even hint at this in the original story.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      "The Rydberg atoms convert an RF amplitude measurement into an optical frequency measurement, which is directly proportional to the strength of the field through Planck’s constant.

      Well duh, everyone knows that.

  • Sorry but it can't be 0 Hz. 0.0000000000000000000000000000001 Hz maybe but even that's dubious .. are we getting to the Planck scale?

  • It's not an alien mind control device (Score:3)

    by Black Parrot ( 19622 ) on Saturday February 06, 2021 @03:54AM (#61033626)

    I don't know why, I just go a sudden urge to tell everyone that.

    • I don't know why, I just go a sudden urge to tell everyone that.

      And yet your theory is unconfirmed, since we don't have an alien brain to test it out on.

      Isn't science fun?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by sphealey ( 2855 )

        I don't know why, I just go a sudden urge to tell everyone that.

        And yet your theory is unconfirmed, since we don't have an alien brain to test it out on.
        Isn't science fun?

        I just heard a dull BOOM from the direction of West Pam Beach, Florida.

  • Can't be both (Score:3)

    by raynet ( 51803 ) on Saturday February 06, 2021 @04:00AM (#61033630) Homepage

    Which is it, entire spectrum or a specific range?

  • Why on earth would they use quantum physics to increase the range of the band scanning? We've had spectrum RF analyzers for years that has been able to scan up to 50 GHz in real-time.

    They mention very little of the actual resolution, of how much bandwidth of each scan/timing it takes etc. And so what if they made it realtime? I mean - they could name it "Quantum" Scan for all that I care, it's still just your average Spectrum Analyzer that's a bit speedier than the rest, and why exactly is it that they wou

    • Re: Snake oil... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by AcidFnTonic ( 791034 ) on Saturday February 06, 2021 @10:23AM (#61033996) Homepage

      You say real time but it's not.

      To make a geek analogy, it's like one core juggling tasks versus actually having a core for each task.

      They both seem "realtime" but the first actually has times where it's paused doing something else.

      The military specifically is trying to combat frequency hopping where basically a cryptographic algorithm determines which frequency to use at a given time and quickly hops across the entire spectrum sending each little bit in absolute super tiny units of time before flying to the next random frequency.

      This happens so fast that someone scanning the entire spectrum will not see anything unless they get lucky. While their receiver is doing a big for-loop over the spectrum, it's missing those super tiny bursts that are gone before it "gets there".

      This development is basically saying they can more accurately watch the entire band at one time, without using the modern time slicing method today which has a limit to how fast it can switch.

  • Only slightly better, however, than using slightly greasy solar atoms.

  • The same is try for any frequency measurement.

  • Sorry, but that is just an awful summary.

    Why is this new?
    How does it work in laymans terms?
    Why is it interesting?
    Does it have applications OUTSIDE the military ?!

  • Way to jump from zero to fucked-up in under ten words!

    Of all the things, you want to use it for ... more murder??

    • "soldier communications, spectrum awareness and electronic warfare."

      Is this what we all want to be really good at?

      How about..
      Interhuman communications, scientific spectrum analysis and electric sheep.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Now I remember why I don't post in certain articles here: they do tend to attract the worst of the worst.

        Why would you care about being modded down though? I've always figured I was on to something when I would incite a mod war of alternative Troll and insightful.

        The only time it got annoying was there was once someone in here going through every post I made to mod it down every time they got mod points. Seems like something that could be corrected.

    • For me, anything with the "quantum" label on it is pure marketing bullshit 99% of the times.

      The difference is that by slapping the label "quantum" on something, it is now in that uncertain state of "bullshit and not bullshit at the same time" until it is observed.

      99 out of 100 observations result in pure marketing bovine excrement.

  • and somewhat concerning. Just because a receiver and detect oscillation, doesn't necessarily mean it can provide other information than just the signal exists. Following that, there's much more work to be done before being able to understand the content of the signal.

    Then again..didn't we consider RF to end just under 30Thz?

  • I thought we defined quantum processes [or processors] as ones that operate in other than a binary manner. How does a quantum receiver interpret and express analogue RF oscillation.

    And I ask this as someone who's been playing with RF since I was a kid with a galenium and cat whisker receiver.

    thanks and 73 in advance.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Whibla ( 210729 )

      I thought we defined quantum processes [or processors] as ones that operate in other than a binary manner.

      In this instance I might interpret quantum as being in all states rather than just one (until it's measured). i.e. It's simultaneously monitoring the entire frequency spectrum, rather than just one small slice of it (e.g. frequency / wavelength defined by the position of your whisker on the rheostat)

      How does a quantum receiver interpret and express analogue RF oscillation.

      F'ked if I know. I struggled to read the summary, let alone comprehend it. I'll leave that part to those who understand this stuff without the apparent need for mind expanding drugs, or for those who have some.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by fred911 ( 83970 )

        ''I might interpret quantum as being in all states rather than just one (until it's measured).''

        I see. I guess I was actually wondering how it expresses the state if we happen to observe when it's neither state that classical computation expresses [on/off]. Then again, have we ever actually observed a state that is neither, we have seen the result of ''neither'' but never observed it.. or have we.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Whibla ( 210729 )

          I guess I was actually wondering how it expresses the state if we happen to observe when it's neither state that classical computation expresses [on/off].

          Honestly, I can't even pretend to understand the subject. If I had to take a stab at an explanation however I'd suggest that the 'quantum element' is related to the electrons in the outer shell of the atoms they're using. These have a number of potential states (?), and are, I assume, described mathematically using the wave function [wikipedia.org]. My brief reading around the subject seems to suggest that these electrons are particularly sensitive to electromagnetic waves (i.e. even a low power wave will disturb the elect

  • What's new? (Score:3)

    by GerryHattrick ( 1037764 ) on Saturday February 06, 2021 @10:11AM (#61033984)
    After I'd 'tickled the cat's whisker' in my boyhood crystal set, I guess it 'detected' the entire spectrum that had made it via the downlead from the aerial strung across the garden. Missed most of it, until science advanced me a 'transistor' in my teens.
  • This is interesting stuff of course but seems very odd that such a revolutionary piece of tech should be evaluated primarily for its use in killing people! Looking forward to a civilian consumer version to mess around with.

    • Re:Army?! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by markdavis ( 642305 ) on Saturday February 06, 2021 @11:53AM (#61034194)

      >"seems very odd that such a revolutionary piece of tech should be evaluated primarily for its use in killing people!"

      Killing people? Not sure how a receiver kills people, military or not. It is just a tool, among many that could be used for a variety of purposes. These include the military, who could just it to assist with defending against hostile forces.

      "Military use" is not automatically killing nor necessarily bad. And killing is sometimes necessary in defense- as you would discover if someone were threatening you or your loved ones with immediate, deadly bodily harm.

      Anyway, it is likely to have a wide variety of civilian/consumer use.

      • I think many people don't understand what Electronic Warfare means. The entire "Wizards War" of WWII with the newly invented radar, chaff, radar jammers, and repeaters is a lost moment in history to most. I think the cracking/stealing of the Enigma machine is one of the most important reasons of shortening WWII, followed closely by the P-51 and Electronic Warfare to secure the skies of the European theater.

        --
  • This is one component in a receiver, and there have been other solutions for broad spectrum radio receivers, along with the associated software. This is cool, and can be useful in many application, but missing from a complete system, as far as I can figure out, are the broad spectrum antennas, and a transmission method. the listed uses "potentials for soldier communications, spectrum awareness and electronic warfare" seem out of place for a receive only device.

  • The ability to receive all radio signals up to 20 GHz is nothing new in itself. The spectrum analyser at work will receive up to 6 GHz. Higher frequency capabilities are available, but we did not need this at work. Other than high frequency capability, there are factors such as low noise, high signal handling, etc., that make the difference between a fine instrument (very expensive) and something barely adequate for any real work.

  • A conventinoal 20GHz wide receiver is pretty big, but not impractical. We have receivers we build for radio astronomy that process a 4GHz bandwidth, but they can be combined so that a crate with 5 units could cover 20GHz. (about 8 rack U for 20GHz, so not huge) I presume the receiver described can do something different, but its not clear to me what that is.
    • Imagine a single receiver with the bandwidth to view the entire 20GHz spectrum with the same fidelity as the 4GHz narrow-band receivers. Potentially no overlap bands, no balancing issues, no IF interference, etc.

      --
      • We have overlaping band splitting filters and processing (the 4GHz systems are really an array of 500MHz systems) but if you interleave, you can capture the entire bandwidth. (this is few year old hardware, are next gen really does to single 4GHz, but can use the previous combining technique to get 20G without gaps. Its awkward and very data intensive (we need 400Gbit raw data for a 4GHz bandwidth) but it works. Dynamic range is ~137dBc/Hz, maybe the quantum system is better? You are right about things
  • Finally! Now we can tap into alien broadcasts.
    Hope it's cheaper than local cable rates!

Slashdot Top Deals

Love makes the world go 'round, with a little help from intrinsic angular momentum.

Close