University of Trento, 38050 Povo (TN), Italy. Telephone: (39)0461 883906. Fax: (39)0461 882093. Email:
fontana@science.unitn.it.
Senior Consultant, GRAVWAVE LLC, 8123 Tuscany Avenue Playa del Rey, California 90293, USA. Telephone:
(310) 8234143. Email: bakerjr@attbi.com.
Copyright 2003 by Giorgio Fontana and R. M. L. Baker, Jr. Published by The MITRE Corporation with permission.
There has been a great interest in gravitational
radiation since Albert Einstein predicted its possible
existence in his General Theory of Relativity (GRT). The
appearance of wave propagation in GRT is a byproduct
of the finite speed of propagation of the gravitational
interaction within the principle of relativity [1]. The first
question is whether gravitational radiation is real or
simply an artefact of the theory. Joseph Weber concluded
that it was real and therefore capable of transferring
energy and momentum [2]. The discovery led to the
development of detectors for the gravitational radiation
emitted by natural celestial sources. Despite many
efforts, scientists conclude that Gravitational Radiation is
emitted by astrophysical systems only by means of
indirect observation [3], and scientists are still awaiting
the first direct detection of gravitational waves. ([4], [5],
and [6].) GRT is a very rich theory and a large number of
interesting phenomena have been predicted. Because the
gravitational interaction is very weak, only a few
predictions of the theory may be suitable subjects for
experimental investigation. So far all experiments have
confirmed the validity of the GRT.
Gravitational radiation is a general category or
outcome of the GRT. Sometimes we refer to
2
gravitational waves in Einsteins revolutionary
spacetime continuum or, alternatively, we refer to
instantons as the particle or quanta representation of
gravitational waves as suggested by Stephen Hawking [7]
or more conventionally as gravitons. Unfortunately,
this latter term has some serious disadvantages because it
only represents the effect of mass quadrupole transitions
in the near field as described by a linearized theory. In
this regard, we also make a distinction between waves
of gravity and gravitational waves. Waves of gravity
(an oscillating gravitational attractive field) can be
generated by a mass dipole; but a mass dipole cannot
efficiently generate gravitational waves, which are
waves in the spacetime continuum [2]. A mass dipole can
perturb other masses or collections of masses. This
oscillating gravitational field produces tides; gravitational
waves do not produce tides. By the way, if they did,
then their amplitude would be but a very small fraction of
a protons diameter.
Gravitational waves can be generated by, for
example, a spinning neutron star; but such a spinning star
does not produce on its own, perturbations on, say, a
companion star and has negligible tidal influence. This
can be interpreted as an example of transition from the
nearfield regime (localized waves of gravity on the order
of a wavelength) to the farfield regime (propagating
gravitational waves). So these two kinds of waves: waves
of gravity and gravitational waves are different. To be
sure both waves of gravity and gravitational waves are
properties of the fabric of spacetime, but one may be
analogous to the slope of that fabric and the other to the
rate of change of that slope.
This distinction prompted Stephen Hawking [7]
to coin the term instantons to characterize the
wave/particle in the spacetime fabric. Thus a graviton
should, in a perfect World, relate only to the waves of
gravity in the gravitational field not to gravitational
waves. We like this distinction and nomenclature since it
removes the misapprehension that the only force field
that can produce gravitational waves is gravitational,
whereas, in fact, nongravitational forces (much stronger
than gravitational) are the ones that can generate
gravitational waves in the laboratory (e.g., the third time
derivative oscillation of electrons in the HTSC of the
GASER). The term graviton is consistent with the near
field emission related to some spin 2 transition in a
linearized theory. Instead the term instanton, that we will
use throughout the paper, is more appropriate for
describing the more complex behavior of entities which
are produced by specific spin 2 transitions and propagate
at macroscopic distances. The situation is similar to
photon transitions. In atoms and nuclei transitions are
electric dipole or magnetic dipole, etc, the near field is
electric or magnetic, the far field is composed of photons
which may also behave like solitons in some nonlinear
materials.
Unfortunately, the real existence of gravitons or
instantons can be disputed, because no full quantum
theory of gravitation has been developed. It is also
uncertain if it will be developed in the future because the
nonlinear nature of GRT poses great challenges to the
mathematics. Nonetheless, linearized or simplified
versions of GRT admit a quantum treatment and
gravitons or instantons seem to exist in these linearized
theories. Today we have sufficient confidence with
gravitational radiation that we can begin speculating
about possible technological applications. In view of the
possible capability of its generation and detection,
gravitational radiation could offer an extraordinary
method of telecommunication. Please see [8], [9], and
Addendum A of [10]. Nonlinear effects might also
permit application to advanced propulsion techniques,
suitable for space travel [10] and [11].
Undoubtedly, the study of the properties of
gravitational radiation would be easily accomplished if a
compact and efficient laboratory source of this radiation
became available to experimenters. Most of the studies
on laboratory sources of gravitational radiation were
based on rotating bodies [12] or mechanical vibrations in
crystals or other suitable materials [13]. Other possible
approaches are based on direct electromagnetic to
gravitational field conversion [14]. With the exception of
a nearfield experiment [12], none of them can offer a
useful and easily detectable emission of gravitational
radiation. This is a consequence of the weakness of
gravity and the well known relations between the
gravitational field and the other fields, especially
electromagnetic, that are more easily produced than
gravitational waves [15], [16].
By including Einstein linearized field equations
in quantum mechanics, it has been shown that transitions
emitting instantons do exist [17]. Compared to photon
transitions, instanton transitions exhibit a very low
probability, making the emission of gravitational
radiation from quantum systems almost negligible, in
agreement with the behavior of classical systems. On the
other hand, stimulated emissions is possible in quantum
systems, and this effect has no analogy in classical
systems. Stimulated emission of instantons utilizing
strong electromagnetic forces (rather than weak
gravitational forces) is the working principle of the
GASER; therefore the GASER appears to be a promising
device for efficient production of gravitational radiation.
In lasers, coherence is given by the photon field in a
resonant cavity, in our GASER concept, coherence will
be provided by the collective wavefunction of Cooper
pairs in a superconductor to generate highfrequency
gravitational waves (HFGW).
3
2. PHOTON AND INSTANTON TRANSITIONS
The theory describing the emission of
gravitational radiation from quantum systems has been
developed by Halpern and Laurent [17]. Transition for
which the orbital quantum number L changes by 2 and
for which the total quantum number J changes by 0 or 2
are gravitational quadrupolar transitions, for which the
emission of photons (electromagnetic waves) is
forbidden and the emission of instantons (gravitational
waves) is allowed.
For comparison, the selection rules for photons
are those for which the orbital quantum number L
changes by 1 and for which the total quantum number J
changes by 0 or 1, etc. For instance, for an atom,
gravitational transitions are those between orbitals 3d and
one characterized by a lower energy among 3s, 2s and 1s.
It can be easily observed that in atomic systems
gravitational transitions compete with multiple photon
transitions, therefore methods for counteracting photon
transitions have to be developed. Reference [17] reports
about the possible use of superconducting mirrors around
the active material for avoiding the emission of
electromagnetic radiation, even if they are not considered
perfect enough.
Detailed analysis comparing the emission of
instantons to the emission of photons has shown that the
ratio of the transition probabilities for matrix elements of
equal structures is:
R = 8Gm
2
/e
2
, 1)
Where G is the universal constant of gravity, m is the
mass, and e is the charge of the emitting particle, R is of
the order of 1.6 10
36
for the proton [17] and of the order
of 4.8 10
43
for the electron. With J=2, the transition
probability per unit of time for the emission of instantons
is proportional to:
M
2
(df/c)
4
f 2)
This quantity increases with the square of the
moment of inertia Md
2
where d is the radius of gyration.
The frequency, f, is inversely proportional to the moment
of inertia; thus in the quantum theory, the smaller the
moment of inertia is, the higher the emission probability
becomes for instantons. Therefore, quantum systems
composed by couples of closely interacting electrons
seem favored for the emission of gravitational waves
respect to alternative approaches. As already stated, it is
certainly possible to increase further the emission of
gravitational radiation by using induced emission at
resonance. Because of the lack of mirrors or resonant
cavities suitable for gravitational radiation, and taking
into account the physical quantities involved, the
characteristic length, l, of the single pass molecular
GASER has been found to be [17]:
cm,
10
38
l 3)
where =
= = 5)
At the frequency of 1 THz we find that the linewidth is
about 3 10
8
and 3 10
17
.
The cross section , for the instanton is:
cm
e
m
h
e m
G
2 57 2 2
2
2 2
10 ) / (
) / ( 5 . 96
= = 6)
where h is Plancks constant and when multiplied by
typical solid state densities of 10
24
cm
3
gives the e
folding length for the instanton stimulated emission L
10
33
cm, about 100,000 times the estimated radius of the
universe. Again, the gravitational transitions have been
4
found to be smaller than the corresponding electric and magnetic transition by a factor that agrees with Eq. (1).
Transition 1/
Electric dipole 0.396
2
(32/81)
2
3
Electric quadrupole 1.68 a
2
(1/16)
2
5
Gravitational quadrupole 96.5 a
2
Gm
2
/e
2
(19/40)
2
(Gm
2
/e
2
)
5
Table 1 Crosssections and inverse lifetimes for electromagnetic and gravitational transitions (Harris).
Table 1 reports the results for cross section and
inverse lifetimes for electromagnetic and gravitational
transitions. =e
2
/hc =1/137 is the fine structure constant,
a, is the size of the emitting system, which has been
assumed to be the Bohr radius (h
2
/me
2
).
Fortunately, in the solid state the electron wave
functions may collapse to a single wavefunction giving
form to the wellknown phenomenon of super
conductivity. If superconducting electrons may be
involved in instanton emission the delta function in Eq.
(3) is no longer too rough of an approximation because
the state of the condensate is only marginally modified
by the emission. If the state emits an instanton it looses a
member at the same time. We also note that the size of
the quantum system is no longer the Bohr radius, but can
be the size of a big macroscopic object. For reasonable
predictions a full quantum treatment is therefore
required, which will be introduced in section 4.
Including the notion of wavefunction condensation
(Bose condensation) it is an interesting exercise to
describe the properties that the ideal GASER material
should provide:
1. A quantum system with two energy levels
characterized by a difference in orbital quantum
number of 2.
2. A quantum system possibly composed of densely
packed couples of closely interacting electrons.
3. A quantum system in which the two energy levels
are respectively populated by objects with exactly
the same wave function and the same energy in order
to have negligible linewidths, thus permitting
efficient stimulated emission.
4. A quantum system in which the two energy levels
are populated by quantum objects, for which the two
wave functions are orthogonal in order to prevent
photon transitions and tunneling.
5. A quantum system in which population inversion
can be achieved to initiate and sustain GASER
action.
We propose that a possible candidate material, capable of
fulfilling the enumerated requirements, is a cuprate high
temperature superconductor (HTSC) with orthorhombic
crystal structure, being the two quantum systems swave
and dwave Cooperpairs.
3. INSTANTON TRANSITIONS IN HTSCs AND THEIR POSSIBLE OCCURRENCE
The possibility of instanton transitions in HTSC
might appear too speculative. Instead the occurrence of
the instanton transition seems to be indirectly shown in
already published measurement data, we will simply
propose an interpretation of the available experimental
data that agree with our approach. Superconductivity is
characterized by a macroscopic quantum phasecoherent
state. In LowT
c
superconductors (Pb, Nb, Nb
3
Sn, etc)
the phononmediated electronelectron interaction
produces spinsinglet pairing with swave symmetry
according to Bardeen, Cooper, and Schrieffer (BCS)
[19]. In HighT
c
cuprate superconductors the structure of
Cooper pairs was extensively studied in recent years [20],
[21], [22], [23], [24] with the conclusion that there is a
predominant, but not exclusive, dwave pairing.
Tunneling experiments using Josephson junctions
between HTSC and LowT
c
superconductors have
consistently shown the presence of an admixture of s
wave and dwave pairing in the order parameter of
orthorhombic cuprate HTSCs.
In the phenomenological GinzburgLandau
theory of superconductivity, the order parameter is a
wave function and after the formalization of the
microscopic theory of superconductivity [19], Gorkov
[25] established the link between the old
phenomenological and the new theory. Near T
c
the
GinzburgLandau equations can be derived from the
BCS theory and the order parameter is identified with the
pair wavefunction, more precisely it has been defined as
the superposition of the wavefunctions of all the pairs.
Therefore, the admixture of swave and dwave pairing in
the order parameter seems to agree with the presence of a
superposition of wavefunctions of two populations of
Cooper pairs, one associated to the swave component of
the order parameter and the other associated to the d
wave component.
5
In [21] a best fit data analysis of a BSCCO
sample named mb232 is in agreement with the existence
of these two populations with critical temperatures of
28K for T
c,d
and 10 K for T
c,s
. Because of the Gorkov
result, the swave population is composed of Cooper pair
with total spin S=0 in agreement with BCS theory. BCS
theory suggests the possible existence of states with S0
with no energy gap respect to states with S=0, but
measurements [9] show the existence of an additional
state with S=2 and a measurable energy gap with respect
to the state with S=0 due to the different critical
temperatures. The two states could be attributed to pairs
confined in the CuO layers and to pairs not confined in
the layers. This is not in contradiction with BCS theory.
In fact, in anisotropic HTSC two pairing states have been
shown to exist, but only the state with the lower energy is
stable, the other state must be empty and it manifests its
existence only in experiments that create a direct
coupling to it with wavefunction selective Josephson
junctions.
Because pairs in the two states differ for the
total energy and the quantized angular momentum, we
now relate the measured properties of mixed order
parameters in HTSCs to the possible instanton
transitions. The difference of critical temperatures is a
measure of the energy gap. For the energy gap , BCS
predicts:
( )
(
(


.

\

T
T
T k
T
c
c B
2
2
cos 76 . 1
7)
For T< T
c,d
/2 and T< T
c,s
/2, the term under the square
root can be neglected, giving for the cited sample a
differential swave/dwave energy gap of 2.74 10
3
eV
and a line frequency for the gravitational transition of
660 GHz. On the other hand the coefficient 1.76 in Eq.
(7) has been measured to be as large as 3.6 for BSCCO,
this may increase the frequency of the HFGW up to
about 1.3 THz. The power emitted in the form of
gravitational radiation is formally related to the
recombination rate, corrected for the momentum
conserving reaction on the crystal lattice, which will be
converted to heat.
The condensation of both the swave component
and the dwave component ensures that the relative
energies of the pairs are almost not affected by thermal
fluctuations and impurities except for distances less than
the coherence length. On the other hand, the linewidth is
critical for achieving amplification, but no experimental
data is available on the residual relative fluctuations of
the pair energies. The strong correlation among pairs is
the main difference between superconductivity and other
forms of Bosecondensation such as superfluidity and
Bosecondensates of trapped atoms [26]. Because of the
strong correlation, fluctuations are averaged over the
pairs. In fact, the Josephson effect [27] and the large
literature on superconducting quantum interference
devices (SQUIDs) indicate that the coherence of the
wavefunction is maintained over very large distances,
with no apparent local splitting of the ground state into
fine structures or the appearance of drifts, which is also
prohibited by BCS theory itself. Being the dwave
component the one with the highest binding energy, it
represents the state with the highest population. To
achieve GASER action it is therefore necessary to
increase the density of the metastable swave component.
A possible mechanism for achieving population
inversion could be the electrical injection of swave
Cooper pairs with a Josephson junction made with Low
T
c
materials, which couple only to the swave component
of the HTSC. The s+d component can be removed by a
normal metal contact. The transport is performed in the
bulk superconductor and it requires no work; power is
required for the removal of s+d Cooper pairs and for the
creation of s Cooper pairs in the LowT
c
material.
Reference [21] presents detailed experimental data. It has
been found that in a Pb/BSCCO Josephson junction, T
c,Pb
is different from, T
c,s
in BSCCO, with a strong indication
that the swave component in BSCCO is not induced by
proximity to Pb. In addition, detailed discussion of
experimental results [21] indicates that second order
tunneling [28] may not play a substantial role in the
tunneling process: the swave component is present in
BSCCO, but only in the vicinity of the junction. This
behavior might be interpreted as a very short diffusion
length and consequently a highly efficient spin2
recombination.
So far, the observed Josephson tunneling
between BSCCO and Pb has suggested two
interpretations, the first one is the homogeneous presence
of a mixed order parameter in orthorhombic HTSCs, the
second one is the homogeneous presence of a mixed
order parameter in Pb [29]. A third possibility is the one
presented here, in our model a coherent gravitational
radiation field allows swave tunneling to an available
energy level of the Cooper pair condensate in BSCCO,
followed by a rapid transition of the pairs to the dominant
dwave symmetry; being the low probability of the
process compensated by the smallness of the linewidth,
which is directly related to coherence. The emission of
gravitational radiation could explain the observed
behavior of Pb/BSCCO Josephson junctions [21],
especially the fact that the degree of admixture of the
order parameter can dynamically depend on the
mentioned processes. As reported in the introduction,
multiple photon transitions and multipole electric/
magnetic transitions may compete with instanton
transitions. Therefore it must be established if
electromagnetic radiation can escape or, on the contrary,
it is trapped in the bulk superconductor as required by the
basic GASER theory [17].
6
Reported values of the surface resistance of
HTSCs at THz frequencies [30,31] seem to indicate that
if multipole electric/magnetic transitions could take place
in the bulk superconductor, then the associated
electromagnetic radiation could not escape the material
except for transitions localized not more than a few
hundred nanometers below the surface. References report
a surface resistance of YBa
2
Cu
3
O
7
(YBCO) thin films at
77K 1.3Thz of 1, that is about an order of magnitude
higher than that of gold at the same temperature,
penetration depths of the order of 200nm have also been
measured for YBCO.
4. STRUCTURE OF HTSC GASER AND PREDICTED PERFORMANCES
FIG. 1 Structure of the proposed HTSC GASER.
The structure of the proposed HTSC GASER is
shown in FIG. 1. The structure is similar to Pb/BSCCO
Josephson junctions prepared for investigating the nature
of pair wavefunction in BSCCO [21].
In the orthorhombic HTSC side, swave and d
wave pairs build up their respective wavefunctions,
characterised by different critical temperatures that
define the energy gap. The dominant wavefunction is d
wave (L = 2). The injection of swave pairs is possible by
allowing a super current to circulate through a swave
Josephson junction with high critical current, i.e. with an
insulating barrier of negligible thickness. The effect of
Cooper pair condensation in two bosonic quantum states
is equivalent to the fact that some relevant parameters,
for instance phase, energy, radiation pattern are exactly
the same for all the pairs. Therefore assuming Cooper
pair density of N=10
20
/cm
3
, with 10 cm
3
of material,
wavefunction coherence amplify the probability of
instanton emission to the level of typical spontaneous
photon emission in a single atom, see section 2 and Eq.
(1).
Cooperpair Bose condensate acts as a much
heavier elementary pair, the gain being N
2
. This is not the
only useful gain, a beaming effect due to radiation
coherence also appears. At large distances from the
source, the overall coherence gain with respect to non
condensed and random emitting sources is N (wave
function coherence) * N (coherent superposition of
emitted instantons  beaming effect) = N
2
. The gain
saturates when the whole supercurrent participates in
instanton emission and directivity is dominated by
geometry, which depends on emission wavelength and
the size of the GASER.
According to Ford [32], the total energy
momentum radiated by the system for the semiclassical
theory is:
gr.
gr.
s.
s.
d.
swave Josephson junction
 +
Current source
Coherent swave
state
Coherent swave state AND
Coherent dwave state (dominant)
HTSC LTSC
gr.
upward extended structure
gr.
gr.
gr.
swave
supercurrent
s
L
s
H
d
H
7
(
=
) ' ' ( ) ' (
2
1
) ' ' ( ) ' (
) ' ' , ( ) ' , ( ' ' ' 8
, , 4 4 3
. .
x T x T x
T
x
T
x x
G
x x
G
x
d
x
d
x
d S
r r c s
, 8)
whereas for the quantum theory it is:
) ' ' ( ) ' (
2
1
) ' ' ( ) ' ( ) ' ' , ( ) ' , ( ' ' ' 8
, , 4 4 3
x T x T x
T
x
T
x x
G
x x
G
x
d
x
d
x
d S
r r q
, 9)
where T
>.
In the semiclassical theory the total energy
momentum radiated by the system depends upon a
product of expectation values; differently for the
quantum theory it depends on expectation values of
products. For calculating the emission of gravitational
radiation in the quantum theory, i.e. for calculating the
emission of instantons, the semiclassical theory that we
have applied is a good approximation for states that can
be considered coherent states, like those produced by
superconductivity. In addition, on very general basis,
Ford suggested that if an excited boson field emits
gravitational waves, they must be considered of quantum
origin, i.e. gravitons or, more generally, instantons.
The wavefunction of dwave Cooper pairs is
not isotropic, it is aligned with the crystal structure of the
HTSC, therefore the directivity pattern can be modified
by changing the orientation of the crystal structure. The
change could even be a dynamical one produced by
electromechanical actuators connected to a computer
logic control system. A curved crystal, or more precisely,
a bended crystal can produce a curved wavefront of
highfrequency gravitational waves, even if no refractive
or reflective material is available and capable of
producing a focused beam starting from plane wave
fronts. The requirement of bending a crystal without
damaging it imposes a planar structure to focusable
HTSC GASERS. The structure should be not dissimilar
to that of flexible mirrors used in adaptive optics
telescopes, but with the difference that the HTSC
GASER should be in principle built flat and then curved
with the actuators as in FIG. 2. This possibility is
extremely important because it is believed, and
theoretically deduced, that a focused beam of
gravitational radiation can convert the radiation into
singularities of various kinds which are, more or less,
static gravitational fields or gravitational anomalies as we
prefer to name them [3336].
FIG. 2 Curved HTSC GASER.
 +
Current source
predicted
spacetime
singularity
curved crystal structure
8
For quantum transitions the frequency is given
by E/h and the power emitted is also related to the
recombination rate reduced by spurious effects. We
therefore apply ideal conditions, where spurious effects
are negligible. The energy gap is the one reported by
measurements on Pb/BSCCO Josephson junctions [21].
The maximum current is the typical critical current of
HTSCs. The expected performances of the HTSC
GASER are summarized in Table 2.
Parameter Value Units
Energy of s/d wave gap in BSCCO 1.3 THz
Power output with 10 kA/cm
2
10 W/ cm
2
Power output for multilayer 10 W/ cm
2
Volumetric power output 10 MW/m
3
Table 2 Expected performances of BSCCO HTSC GASER
We calculate that 10 GigaAmpere of electric
current should be required to produce 10 MW of
HFGW. Multilayered structure is possible if wave
function coherence is preserved in the HTSC side of the
GASER (electrical parallel connection).
To allow a higher working temperature, the new
LTSC Magnesium Diboride (MgB
2
) might be used as a
source of swave pairs. MgB
2
superconducts at 40 K, and
has the remarkable property of having two energy gaps
[37], clearly due to anisotropy. Therefore MgB
2
is not
only a possible swave pair injector, but also represents
an additional experimental proof that cooper pairs with
different energy may share the same material.
5. REQUIRED DEVELOPMENTS
Even if the Halpern and Laurent [17] and Ford
[32] theories show that a quantum source of gravitational
radiation should be possible with respect to a classical
theory, and even if orthorhombic cuprate HTSCs seem
suitable active materials, the development of the first
HTSC GASER appears to be a great challenge. YBCO or
BSCCO large monocrystals should be prepared and
completed with the required swave Josephson junction
for GASER pumping. Hyper pure materials should be
required to avoid unwanted transition channels, following
the lesson learned from the semiconductor industry.
If instantons are possibly emitted by the
presented structure, then the critical current of the
LTSC/HTSC Josephson junction of a given area should
depend on the volume of the HTSC, because of the N
2
in
the emission probability, which should modify the
density of swave Cooper pairs in the HTSC. This
measurement will not directly confirm the feasibility of
the GASER but should confirm the occurrence of spin 2
transitions in the bulk HTSC. Then it should be necessary
to determine the s/d wave gap for known HTSC and
compile a list of emission wavelengths. Detectors,
several of which are described in this Conference, should
be developed for the expected emission wavelengths. In
the THz range, detectors could consist of a laser
interferometer coupled to an optical spectrometer. Using
HeNe 633 nm laser light, sidebands 1.3 nm apart from
the carrier should appear with the presence of a 1.3 THz
geometry perturbation in one arm of the interferometer,
these optical signals can be resolved with low cost
spectrometers.
Finally it should be interesting to look for
gravitational anomalies in front of a curved, or
mechanically stressed (by an electromechanical device
coupled to a computerlogic system) GASER.
Gravitational anomalies could be detected by standard
gravimeters. Other applications involve the focus being
dynamically adjusted by a mechanical connection of the
generator elements to a computer controlled logic
system.
9
6. CONCLUSION
In the framework of gravitationalwave
research, we have discussed the possibility of including
instanton transitions in the model of orthorhombic
cuprate hightemperature superconductors, which may
lead to the development of a practical GASER for the
generation of HFGW. It is well known that quantum
coherence in Bosecondensates would be the source of
coherent radiation. For instance, the stimulated scattering
of indirect excitons in coupled quantum wells has been
attributed to a degenerate Bosegas of electronhole
excitons at ultracryogenic temperatures in GaAs [38].
Stimulated emission of atoms in a Bosecondensate of
electromagnetically trapped atoms has been also
demonstrated [39]. The study of the emission of
instantons from mixed swave / dwave highly saturated
Bosecondensates is, therefore, an intriguing possibility
and a starting point for an interdisciplinary research field,
certainly characterized by extraordinary payoffs.
REFERENCES
[1] Albert Einstein (1918), Sitzungsberichte, Preussische
Akademie der Wisserschaften, p. 154.
[2] Joseph Weber, (1960), Detection and Generation of
Gravitational Waves, Physics Review, Volume 117,
Number 1, pp. 306313.
[3] J. H. Taylor, Jr. (1994), Binary pulsars and
relativistic gravity, Reviews of Modern Physics, Volume
66, Number 3, July, 1994 pp. 711719.
[4] Kip S. Thorne (1987), Gravitational radiation.
Chapter 9 of Three hundred years of gravitation,
Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 330458.
[5] L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz (1975), The
Classical Theory of Fields, Fourth Revised English
Edition, Pergamon Press, pp. 348, 349, 355357.
[6] V. B. Braginsky and Valentin N. Rudenko and
(1978), Gravitational waves and the detection of
gravitational radiation, Physics Report (Review section
of Physics Letters), Volume 46, Number 5, p. 165200.
[7] Stephen W. Harking (1979) in General Relativity:
An Einstein Centenary Survey, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, England, K. C. Cole (2001), The hole
in the universe, Harcourt, Inc., New York, p. 133, 
Norma Sanchez (1982), Connection between the
nonlinear model and the Einstein equations of general
relativity. Physical Review D, Volume 26, Number 10,
November 15, pp.25892597 Norma Sanchez (1983),
New solutions of Einstein equations from analytic
mappings. Physics Letters, Volume 94A, Number 3,4 ,
March 7, pp.125130.
[8] Melvin A. Lewis (1995), GravitationalWave
Versus ElectromagneticWave Antennas, IEEE
Antennas & Propagation Magazine, Volume 37, Number
3, June (HFGW communication).
[9] Robert M. L. Baker, Jr. (2002), HighFrequency
Gravitational Waves, Max Planck Institute for
Astrophysics (MPA) Lecture, May 9, Revised May 15,
2002. (Please see Internet site at:
http://drrobertbaker.com/EuropeanLecture2002.htm) .
[10] Robert M. L. Baker, Jr. (2000), Preliminary Tests
of Fundamental Concepts Associated with Gravitational
Wave Spacecraft Propulsion, American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics: Space 2000 Conference
and Exposition, Paper Number 20005250, September
20, August 21, 2001, Revision. (Please see Internet site
at: http://drrobertbaker.com/RevisedAIAAPaper.htm).
[11] Giorgio Fontana (2000), Gravitational Radiation
and its Application to Space Travel, paper CP 504,
Space Technology and Applications International Forum
2000, edited by M. S. Genk, American Institute of
Physics.
[12] P. Astone, M. Bassan, S. Bates, R. Bizarrini, P.
Bonifazi, R. Cardarelli, G. Cavallari, E. Coccia, A.
Degasperis, D. De Pedis, S. Frasca, E. Majorana, L.
Merucci, I. Modena, G. Muratori, G.V. Pallottino, C.
Patrignani, G. Pizzella, M. Price, P. Rapagnani, F. Ricci,
M. Visco (1991), Evaluation and Preliminary
Measurement of the Interaction of a Dynamical
Gravitational Near Field with a Cryogenic G.W.
Antenna, Zeischrift fuer Physik C, 50, pp. 2129.F.
[13] B. Romero and H. Dehnen (1981), Generation of
Gravitational Radiation in the Laboratory, Z.
Naturforsh. Vol 36a, pp. 948955.
[14] I.M. Pinto and G. Rotoli (1988), Laboratory
generation of gravitational waves?, Proceedings of: 8
th
Italian Conference on General Relativity and
Gravitational Physics, Cavalese (Trento), August 30
September 3, World Scientific.
10
[15] C.W. Misner, K.S. Thorne, and J.A .Wheeler
(1973), Gravitation, Freeman.
[16] S. Weinberg (1972), Gravitation and Cosmology,
Wiley.
[17] L. Halpern and B. Laurent (1964), On the
Gravitational Radiation of Microscopic Systems, IL
Nuovo Cimento, XXXIII No. 3, 1964, pp. 728751
[18] Edward G. Harris (1999), personal communication,
June.
[19] J. Bardeen, L.N. Cooper and J.R. Schrieffer (1957),
Theory of Superconductivity, Physical Review, Vol
108, N. 5, December1, pp. 11751204.
[20] C.C. Tsuei and J.R. Kirtley (2000) Pairing
symmetry in cuprate superconductor, Review of Modern
Physics, Vol. 72, No. 4, October, pp. 9691016.
[21] M. Moessle and R. Kleiner (1999), caxis
Josephson tunneling between Bi
2
Sr
2
CaCu
2
O
8+x
and Pb,
Physical Review B, Vol. 59, No. 6 , February 1, pp. 4486
4496.
[22] K.A Kouznetsov., A. G. Sun, B. Chen, A. S. Katz,
S. R. Bahcall, J. Clarke, R. C. Dynes, D. A. Gajewski, S.
H. Han, M. B. Maple, J. Giapintzakis, J. T. Kim and D.
M. Ginsberg (1997), caxis Josephson Tunneling
between YBa
2
Cu
3
O
7x
and Pb: Direct Evidence for Mixed
Order Parameter Symmetry in a High Tc
Superconductor, Physical Review Letters, 79, October
20, pp. 30503053.
[23] D. J. Van Harlingen (1995), Phasesensitive tests
of the symmetry of the pairing state in the high
temperature superconductorsEvidence for d symmetry,
Review of Modern Physics, Vol. 67, No. 2, April, pp.
525535.
[24] A.G. Sun, D. A. Gajewski, M. B. Maple and R.C.
Dynes (1994), Observation of Josephson Pair Tunneling
between a HighTc Cuprate (YBCO) and a Conventional
Superconductor (Pb),Physical Review Letters, Vol. 72
No. 14, April 4, pp 22672270.
[25] L.P. Gorkov (1959), Microscopic derivation of
the GinzburgLandau equations in the theory of
superconductivity, Soviet Physics JETP, Vol. 36(9), No.
6, December, pp. 13641367.
[26] S.J. Putterman (1974) Superfluid Hydrodynamics,
NorthHolland.
[27] B.D. Josephson (1962), Possible new effect in
superconductive tunneling, Physics Letters, Volume 1,
No. 7, July 1, pp. 251253.
[28] Yukio Tanaka (1994), Josephson Effect between s
Wave and d
x2y2
Wave Superconductors, Physical
Review Letters, Vol. 72, No. 24, 13 June, pp. 38713874
[29] A. I. M. Rae (2000), Role of Anisotropy of Lead in
BSCCOPb Josephson Tunneling, Physical Review
Letters, Vol. 84, N0. 10, March 6, pp. 22342238.
[30] I. Wilke, M. Khazan and C. T. Rieck (2000),
Terahertz surface resistance of high temperature
superconducting thin films, Journal of Applied Physics,
Vol. 87, No. 6, March 15, pp. 29842988.
[31] Max Khazan, Ingrid Wilke and Christopher Stevens
(2001.Surface impedance of Tl2212 thin films at THz
frequencies, IEEE Transactions on Applied
Superconductivity, Vol 11, pt III, pp 35373540.
[32] L. H. Ford (1982) Gravitational Radiation by
Quantum Systems, Annals of Physics, 144, pp. 238248.
[33] Valeria Ferrari (1988), Focusing Process in the
Collision of Gravitational Plane Waves, Physical
Review D, 37, No10, 15 May, pp. 30613064.
[34] V. Ferrari V., P. Pendenza, and G. Veneziano
(1988), Beamlike Gravitational Waves and Their
Geodesics, General Relativity and Gravitation, 20, No.
11, pp. 11851191.
[35] G. Veneziano (1987), Mutual Focusing of
Graviton Beams, Modern Physics Letters A, 2, No 11,
pp. 899903.
[36] P. Szekeres (1972), Colliding Plane Gravitational
Waves, J. Math. Phys, 13, No. 3, March, pp. 286294.
[37] Paul C. Canfield and George W. Crabtree (2003),
Magnesium Diboride: Better Late than Never, Physics
Today, March, pp. 3440.
[38] L.V. Buotv. A. L. Ivanov, A. Imamoglu, P. B.
Littlewood, A. A. Shashkin, V. T. Dolgopolov, K. L.
Kampman, A. C. Gossard (2001), Stimulated Scattering
of Indirect Excitons in Coupled Quantum Wells:
Signature of a Degenerate BoseGas of Excitons,
Physical Review Letters , June 11, Volume 86, Issue 24,
pp. 56085611.
[39] M. O. Mewes, M. R. Andrews, D. M. Kurn, D. S.
Durfee, C. G. Townsend, and W. Ketterle (1997) ,
Output Coupler for BoseEinstein Condensed Atoms,
Physical Review Letters, Vol. 78, No. 4, January 27, pp.
582585