List of Figures

View Image Figure 1:
The sensitivity of various gravitational-wave detection techniques across 13 orders of magnitude in frequency. At the low frequency end the sensitivity curves for pulsar timing arrays (based on current observations and future observations with the Square Kilometre Array [108]) are extrapolated from Figure 4 in [325]. In the mid-range LISA, DECIGO and BBO are described in more detail in Section 7, with the DECIGO and BBO sensitivity curves taken from models given in [323]. At the high frequency the sensitivities are represented by three generations of laser interferometers: LIGO, Advanced LIGO and the Einstein Telescope (see Sections 6, 6.3.1 and 6.3.2). Also included is a representative sensitivity for the AURIGA [88], Allegro [226] and Nautilus [239] bar detectors.
View Image Figure 2:
Some possible sources for ground-based and space-borne detectors.
View Image Figure 3:
Schematic of gravitational-wave detector using laser interferometry.
View Image Figure 4:
Measured sensitivity of the initial LIGO interferometers during the S5 science run (see Section 6.1.2). Reproduced with permission from [213].
View Image Figure 5:
Internal stages of the large chamber seismic isolation system for Advanced LIGO (image is inverted for clarity).
View Image Figure 6:
CAD drawing of quad suspension system for Advanced LIGO, showing the mirror test mass at the bottom and where the uppermost section is attached to the third stage platform of the large chamber seismic isolation system shown in Figure 5.
View Image Figure 7:
Time-lapsed schematic illustrating the fluctuating gravitational force on a suspended mass by the propagation of a surface wave through the ground.
View Image Figure 8:
Monolithic silica suspension of (a) GEO600 6 kg mirror test mass suspended from 4 fibres of thickness 250 µm and (b) prototype monolithic suspension for Advanced LIGO at LASTI (mirror mass of 40 kg, silica fibre thickness 400 µm).
View Image Figure 9:
Michelson interferometers with (a) delay lines and (b) Fabry–Pérot cavities in the arms of the interferometer.
View Image Figure 10:
The implementation of power recycling on a Michelson interferometer with Fabry–Pérot cavities.
View Image Figure 11:
The implementation of signal recycling on a Michelson interferometer with Fabry–Pérot cavities.
View Image Figure 12:
The 10 m prototype gravitational wave detector at Glasgow.
View Image Figure 13:
A bird’s eye view of the LIGO detector, sited in Hanford, Washington.
View Image Figure 14:
A time-line of the science runs of the first generation interferometric gravitational-wave detectors, from their first lock to mid-2011.
View Image Figure 15:
The best strain sensitivities from the LIGO science runs S1 through S6 [213]. The S6 curve is preliminary and based on h(t) data that has not been completely reviewed and may be subject to change. Also shown is the LIGO 4 km design sensitivity.
View Image Figure 16:
The typical strain sensitivities from the GEO600 science runs S1 through S5 [150]. Also shown is the theoretical noise budget for the detector when tuned to 550 Hz – the operating position for the S5 run.
View Image Figure 17:
The best strain sensitivities from the Virgo weekend and full time science runs WSR1, WSR10, VSR1 and VSR2 [305, 57].
View Image Figure 18:
Design sensitivity curves for the Advanced LIGO, Advanced Virgo and LCGT second-generation detectors. The Advanced LIGO curve comes from [166], the Advanced Virgo curve comes from [67], and the LCGT curve comes from [82]. These curves are based on specific configurations of the detectors and are therefore subject to change.
View Image Figure 19:
Potential sensitivities of the Einstein Telescope for 3 different design concepts: ET-B [174], ET-C [175] and ET-D [178]. The curves are available from [137]
View Image Figure 20:
A design sensitivity amplitude spectral density curve for LISA created using the standard parameters in the online generator at [208]. The curve assumes equal length arms, sensitivity averaged over the whole sky and all polarisations, and an SNR of 1. Also included is a curve showing the expected background noise from galactic white-dwarf–binary systems, which will dominate over the instrumental noise in the range from ≈ 0.1 – 1 mHz.
View Image Figure 21:
The proposed LISA detector.