kitano.pdf

35
Demonstration of Negative Group Delays in a Simple Electronic Circuit Masao Kitano [email protected], Room #1213 Kyoto University Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB – p.1/34

Upload: tomas-kyso-kyselica

Post on 02-Oct-2015

213 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • Demonstration of Negative GroupDelays in a Simple Electronic Circuit

    Masao [email protected], Room #1213

    Kyoto University

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.1/34

  • Group Delays in Circuits

    Group delays in lumped systems (L = 0 or L c/)Mitchell and Chiao: Am. J. Phys. 66, 14 (1998)

    Bandpass Amplifier (LC + opamp)Arbitrary Waveform Generator

    Nakanishi, Sugiyama, and MK: quant-ph/0201001(to appear in Am. J. Phys.)

    Highpass Amplifier (RC + opamp)Baseband pulse (No carriers)Band limited signal from rectangular pulser +lowpass filter

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.2/34

  • Negative delay circuit

    The output LED is lit earlier than the input LED. Negative delay

    Time constants could be order of seconds. We can see it!

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.3/34

  • Experiment

    button

    LED

    pulse

    pulse generatorLED

    input output

    negative delay circuit

    1. rectangular pulse generator + low-pass filter

    2. negative delay circuit

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.4/34

  • Group delays ideal case

    Group delay for base-band signals (delay time: td)

    VOUT(t) = (hVIN)(t) = VIN(t td)

    h(t) = (t td)Fourier Transformed: VOUT() = H()VIN()

    H() = (Fh)() =

    dt h(t)eit = exp(itd)

    time

    Vin(t) Vout(t)H()td

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.5/34

  • Positive and Negative delays

    td Causality Physical realization> 0 causal distributed system= 0 (locally, mutually) causal lumped system< 0 non causal impossible

    Positive delays are easy, if you have an appropriatespace.

    Record and play is also possible.

    No way to make ideal (unconditional) negative delays.

    No lumped systems (L = 0) can produce ideal positiveor negative delays.

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.6/34

  • Approximate delay with lumped systems

    Ideal response function H()

    A() = |H()| = 1,() = argH() = td

    Approximate realization #1 with lumped systems

    H() =1+ iT1 iT (1 pole, 1 zero)

    A() = 1 (flat response)() = 2tan1T 2T

    Stability condition T 0 (only positive delays)

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.7/34

  • Approximate delay (2)

    Approximate realization #2 with lumped systems

    H() = 1+ iT (1 zero)

    A() =

    1+(T )2 1+ (T )2

    2( distortion)

    () = tan1T TNo sign restriction on T (positive and negative delay)

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.8/34

  • Asymmetry positive / negative

    Transfer function positive delay T < 0 negative delay T > 0

    H() = 1+ iT

    0

    zero

    Re

    Im

    0

    zero

    Re

    Im

    H() =1+ iT1 iT

    0

    pole

    zero

    Re

    Im

    0

    pole

    zero

    Re

    Im

    The arrows shows the direction of the phase increase of H().

    Stability condition requires that poles can be only in the upper-

    half plane, but zero can be anywhere.Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.9/34

  • Negative Group Delay Circuit

    Vin Vout

    V- R

    1/iC

    V =(iC)1

    R+(iC)1Vout =

    11+ iCR

    Vout

    Vin V for large gain of operational amplifierVout = (1+ iCR)Vin

    A pole is converted into a zero by the feedback circuit.Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.10/34

  • Finite bandwidth

    Transfer Function

    H() = 1+ iT (T = CR > 0)A() = 1+O(2T 2),() = T +O(3T 3)

    Spectral condition for input signals

    | | < 1T

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.11/34

  • Bandwidth

    Works only for band-limited signals otherwise outputs are distorted.

    -80-60-40-20

    020406080

    -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 20

    0.5

    1

    1.5

    2

    2.5

    -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2

    Am

    plitu

    deA(

    )

    Frequency T Frequency TPh

    ase(

    )/

    degr

    ee

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.12/34

  • Band-Limit Circuit (Low-pass filter)

    VoutR1 R1

    C1C1

    (1)R2

    R2

    Vin

    Bessel filter (2nd order; m = 2)

    HLP() =

    1+ iTLP(3)+(iTLP)2

    TLP = R1C1, = (1+R3/R2) = 1.268

    Cutoff frequency: C = 0.7861/TLP

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.13/34

  • Low-pass filters

    A rectangular pulser and a series of lowpass filters (m stages)are used to generate band-limited pulses.

    RectangularPulser

    LPF 1 LPF 2 LPF m

    ....

    Pushing the button (at t = 0) starts the event.The band-limited output has a smooth leading edge.

    A delay comparable to the pulse width is unavoidable.

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.14/34

  • Low-pass filters(2)

    0

    0.1

    0.2

    0.3

    0.4

    0.5

    0.6

    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

    ampl

    itude

    /A.U

    .

    time c t

    m=24 6 8 10

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.15/34

  • Circuit Diagram

    TRGOUT

    VCRESTHDIS

    timer IC7555

    10k R0

    C0

    20k

    R3

    R1 C1

    9V 9V

    R1R2

    SW

    C R

    C

    R

    20k

    10k C R

    C

    R

    C1 C1C1

    R3

    R2

    R1

    R1

    100

    TL082 TL082

    TL082 TL082

    Pulse generator

    100

    LEDLED

    Vin Vout

    input output Negative delay circuit

    Low-pass filters

    Trec

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.16/34

  • Circuit parameters

    Pulse generator Negative delay circuitR0 6.8MC0 0.22FTrec 1.5sR1 2.2MC1 0.22FR2 10kR3 2.2kc 1.6Hz

    R 1MC 0.22FR 10kC 22nFT (= RC) 0.22s

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.17/34

  • Circuit Board

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.18/34

  • Experimental result

    m = 4,n = 2

    -0.5

    0

    0.5

    1

    1.5

    2

    2.5

    -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

    input

    ampl

    itude

    /V

    time / sWorkshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.19/34

  • Experimental result

    m = 4,n = 2

    -0.5

    0

    0.5

    1

    1.5

    2

    2.5

    -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

    inputoutput

    ampl

    itude

    /V

    time / sWorkshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.19/34

  • Interference in time domain

    In time domain (cf. H() = 1+ iT )

    vout(t) =(

    1+Tddt

    )vin(t) = vin(t)+T

    dvindt

    (t)

    Two terms interfere constructively at the leading edge anddestructively at the trailing edge.

    -1

    -0.8

    -0.6

    -0.4

    -0.2

    0

    0.2

    0.4

    0.6

    0.8

    1

    1.2

    -4 -2 0 2 4

    exp(-x**2)-2*x*exp(-x**2)

    (1-0.2*x)*exp(-x**2)

    constructive destructive

    time

    vindvin/dt

    vout

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.20/34

  • All-passive circuit

    i(t)

    v(t) C R

    i(t) =1R

    v(t)+Cddt

    v(t) =1R

    (1+RC

    ddt

    )v(t)

    This circuit gives negative group delays, if we consider v(t) as

    the input and i(t) as the output.

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.21/34

  • Unbalanced interferometer

    Reflectivity of beam splitters: R = 1/2 , Delay: = 2L/c

    Edark(t)= (1R)Ein(t)REin(t) 2(

    1+

    4ddt

    )Ein(t)

    L

    dark port

    bright port

    input

    -0.2

    0

    0.2

    0.4

    0.6

    0.8

    1

    1.2

    -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

    ampl

    itude

    t/T

    inputbrightdark

    dark (blow up)

    = 0.08, = 0.15T , T : gaussian pulse width Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.22/34

  • Cascading for larger advancement

    Transfer function for n stages: Hn() = (1+ iT )n

    An() 1+ n(T )2

    2= 1+

    (

    nT )2

    2, n() nT

    -80

    -60

    -40

    -20

    0

    20

    40

    60

    80

    -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.60.8

    0.9

    1

    1.1

    1.2

    1.3

    1.4

    1.5

    -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6

    n = 1

    n = 1

    n = 2

    n = 2

    n = 3n = 3

    Am

    plitu

    deA(

    )

    Frequency T Frequency T

    Phas

    ear

    g[(

    )]

    Bandwidth is reduced as n increased.Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.23/34

  • Cascading (2)

    Usable bandwidth decreases as 1/

    n, if T is given.

    For a given input pulse (Tw), T = CR must be reduced asTw/

    n.

    Total advancement scales 1/

    n;

    td n (Tw/

    n) =

    nTw

    Order m of lowpass filters must be increasedaccordingly;

    m > n

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.24/34

  • Cascading, n = 10

    0

    0.2

    0.4

    0.6

    0.8

    1

    1.2

    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

    input

    norm

    aliz

    edam

    plitu

    de

    time / s

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.25/34

  • Cascading, n = 10

    0

    0.2

    0.4

    0.6

    0.8

    1

    1.2

    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

    inputoutput

    norm

    aliz

    edam

    plitu

    de

    time / s

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.25/34

  • Problems in cascading

    It is possible to increase the advancement as large as thepulse width or more, but

    The advancement increases slowly; 1/

    n.

    The order m of lowpass filters must be increased.

    The system becomes very sensitive to noises. (A hugegain outside of the band)

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.26/34

  • Pushing the limit

    0 5 1015 20 25

    300

    2

    4

    6

    80.5

    0

    0.5

    1

    Total=nT

    time t/sec

    n

    0 510 15

    20 253

    0

    10

    20

    30

    40

    500.5

    0

    0.5

    Ttotal=sqrt(n)T

    time t/sec

    n

    Simple-minded cascading 1/

    n cascading

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.27/34

  • Pushing the limit two pulse case

    0 5 10 15 20 25 30 352

    1.5

    1

    0.5

    0

    0.5

    1

    1.5

    2

    2.5

    time t/sec

    input

    output(n=49)

    output(linear,n=7)

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.28/34

  • Out-of-band gain

    Outside gain Significant obstacle toward large n.

    Realistic transfer function (finite gain at = ):

    H() =1+ iT

    1+ iT/, > 1

    () = (11)T

    A() =

    1+(T )2

    1+(T/)2

    {1 ( = 0) ( = )

    For = 0.5, n = 50; An() = n = 250 = 1015!

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.29/34

  • Role of lowpass filters

    Predictability Your move will be predicted if somerestrictions are imposed.

    JERKLIMIT

    0.034ACCEL.LIMIT

    10 0.11SPEEDLIMIT

    35

    ...

    dmxdtm

    Resemblance of functions A negative delay circuitreveals the difference.

    dist( f ,g) = max0 jm

    d j fdt j djg

    dt j

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.30/34

  • Role of filters (2)

    On the condition m > n

    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

    0

    0.5

    n=8n=9n=10n=11n=12n=13

    time t/sec 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12

    4

    2

    0

    2

    4

    6

    x 103

    n=8n=9n=10n=11n=12n=13

    time t/sec

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.31/34

  • Causality

    Pulser LPF (m) ND (n)

    A B C

    O

    O

    A BC

    t

    Causal relation in a casual sense

    O A B ?CCausal relation in a strict sense

    A B C ( A)Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.32/34

  • Conclusion

    A stand-alone (battery-operated) demonstration boxBattery operatedNo extra equipment such as an oscilloscope or afunction generator needed

    Large negative delays 0.5s are achievedexperimentally.

    25% of pulse width

    Larger delay with cascading is possible (in priciple).Advancement can be larger than the pulse width.

    Filter stage plays an essential role.The start of event (cause) is located before thefilters.

    Workshop on Quantum Optics, UCSB p.33/34

    Group Delays in CircuitsNegative delay circuitExperimentGroup delays -- ideal casePositive and Negative delaysApproximate delay with lumped systemsApproximate delay (2)Asymmetry --- positive / negativeNegative Group Delay CircuitFinite bandwidthBandwidthBand-Limit Circuit (Low-pass filter)Low-pass filtersLow-pass filters(2)Circuit DiagramCircuit parametersCircuit BoardExperimental resultInterference in time domainAll-passive circuitUnbalanced interferometerCascading --- for larger advancementCascading (2)Cascading, $n=10$Problems in cascadingPushing the limitPushing the limit --- two pulse caseOut-of-band gainRole of lowpass filtersRole of filters (2)CausalityConclusion