pith. sign in

arxiv: 2412.13167 · v2 · submitted 2024-12-17 · ✦ hep-ex · gr-qc· physics.ins-det· physics.optics

Optomechanical vector sensing of new forces at 6 micron separation

Gautam Venugopalan , Clarke A. Hardy , Kenneth Kohn , Yuqi Zhu , Charles P. Blakemore , Alexander Fieguth , Jacqueline Huang , Chengjie Jia
show 5 more authors
Meimei Liu Lorenzo Magrini Nadav Priel Zhengruilong Wang Giorgio Gratta
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 06:23 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ex gr-qcphysics.ins-detphysics.optics
keywords Yukawa interactionsoptomechanical sensinglevitated microspheresnew fundamental forcesvector force measurementsub-millimeter gravity testsCasimir force subtraction
0
0 comments X

The pith

Optically levitated microspheres set new upper limits of 10^7 on Yukawa forces at 5 micron range via vector sensing.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper uses optically levitated dielectric microspheres to search for hypothetical new gravity-like interactions at the 10 micrometer scale by measuring multiple components of the force vector for the first time. Sensitivity improves by a factor of about 100 compared to earlier work with the same approach. The resulting bounds reach 10^7 on interaction strength at a Yukawa range of roughly 5 micrometers and approach 10^6 for ranges of 10 micrometers or longer. These limits advance the broader goal of detecting gravitational effects between micrometer-scale objects.

Core claim

Sensing multiple spatial components of the force vector with optically levitated dielectric microspheres at 6 micron separation establishes an upper limit of 10^7 on the strength of a hypothetical new Yukawa-type force at λ ≃ 5 μm and close to 10^6 for λ ≳ 10 μm, with sensitivity improved by a factor of ∼100 relative to previous measurements using the same technique.

What carries the argument

Optically levitated dielectric microspheres as test masses performing multi-component vector force sensing at 6 micron separation to constrain Yukawa interactions.

Load-bearing premise

All known electromagnetic, Casimir, and other background forces have been accurately modeled and subtracted at the 6-micron separation with no remaining unaccounted systematic effects in the measurements or microsphere properties.

What would settle it

Detection of a residual force vector component at 6 microns that exceeds the modeled backgrounds and surpasses the reported upper limits after all known subtractions would invalidate the constraints.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.13167 by Alexander Fieguth, Charles P. Blakemore, Chengjie Jia, Clarke A. Hardy, Gautam Venugopalan, Giorgio Gratta, Jacqueline Huang, Kenneth Kohn, Lorenzo Magrini, Meimei Liu, Nadav Priel, Yuqi Zhu, Zhengruilong Wang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Top: diagram of the experimental setup also defining [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Measurements of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Force spectra showing the measured backgrounds from three sources (from three different MSs). Top left: vibration [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Constraints on the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The search for new gravity-like interactions at the sub-millimeter scale is a compelling area of research, with important implications for the understanding of classical gravity and its connections with quantum physics. We report improved constraints on Yukawa-type interactions in the $10\,\mathrm{\mu m}$ regime using optically levitated dielectric microspheres as test masses. The search is performed, for the first time, sensing multiple spatial components of the force vector, and with sensitivity improved by a factor of $\sim 100$ with respect to previous measurements using the same technique. The resulting upper limit on the strength of a hypothetical new force is $10^7$ at a Yukawa range $\lambda\simeq 5\;\mu$m and close to $10^6$ for $\lambda \gtrsim 10\;\mu$m. This result also advances our efforts to measure gravitational effects using micrometer-size objects, with important implications for embryonic ideas to investigate the quantum nature of gravity.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports an experimental search for new Yukawa-type forces at ~6 μm separation using optically levitated dielectric microspheres. It claims the first implementation of vector (multi-component) force sensing with this technique and a factor of ~100 improvement in sensitivity relative to prior work, yielding upper limits on the new-force strength of 10^7 at λ ≃ 5 μm and ~10^6 for λ ≳ 10 μm.

Significance. If the background modeling and subtraction are shown to be accurate to the claimed residual level, the result tightens existing constraints in the 5–10 μm regime and demonstrates a new experimental capability (vector sensing) that may help discriminate signals from backgrounds. The work also contributes to the longer-term goal of probing gravitational effects with micrometer-scale objects.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract and Results section] The headline limits (10^7 at λ ≃ 5 μm, ~10^6 for λ ≳ 10 μm) are obtained only after subtracting electromagnetic, Casimir, and patch-potential backgrounds that exceed the target sensitivity by many orders of magnitude at 6 μm separation. The manuscript provides no quantitative validation (e.g., residual systematic budget, cross-checks with known forces, or microsphere charge/dielectric characterization) that these subtractions are accurate to better than the reported residual; this subtraction is load-bearing for the central claim.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thoughtful review and positive assessment of the work's significance. We address the major comment on background subtraction validation below, and will incorporate additional quantitative details in the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and Results section] The headline limits (10^7 at λ ≃ 5 μm, ~10^6 for λ ≳ 10 μm) are obtained only after subtracting electromagnetic, Casimir, and patch-potential backgrounds that exceed the target sensitivity by many orders of magnitude at 6 μm separation. The manuscript provides no quantitative validation (e.g., residual systematic budget, cross-checks with known forces, or microsphere charge/dielectric characterization) that these subtractions are accurate to better than the reported residual; this subtraction is load-bearing for the central claim.

    Authors: We agree that the reported limits depend on accurate modeling and subtraction of the dominant electromagnetic, Casimir, and patch-potential backgrounds. The manuscript outlines the force models and subtraction procedure in the Results and Methods sections and notes that the new vector-sensing capability provides an internal consistency check across force components that is not available in prior scalar measurements. However, the manuscript does not include a consolidated residual systematic uncertainty budget or explicit cross-checks with known forces at the claimed precision. To address this, the revised manuscript will add a dedicated subsection presenting (i) a quantitative residual systematic error table, (ii) additional cross-check measurements with applied known forces, and (iii) microsphere charge and dielectric characterization data. These additions will be placed in the Results section and will directly support the headline limits. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: experimental upper limits from direct force measurements

full rationale

The paper reports experimental constraints on Yukawa-type forces obtained from vector force measurements on optically levitated microspheres at 6 μm separation. The central result is an upper limit derived from subtracting modeled electromagnetic, Casimir, and other backgrounds from measured data, with no mathematical derivation chain, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or self-citation load-bearing steps that reduce the claimed result to its inputs by construction. The analysis is self-contained against external benchmarks of the measurement technique.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced in the abstract; the work reports experimental constraints on an existing class of Yukawa interactions without postulating new entities or fitting additional constants.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5753 in / 1155 out tokens · 65057 ms · 2026-05-23T06:23:50.003104+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    S. M. Merkowitz, Living Reviews in Relativity 13, 7 (2010)

    work page 2010

  2. [2]

    The LIGO Scientific Collaboration and the Virgo Collab- oration, Physical Review D 100, 104036 (2019)

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration, Physical Review D 103, 122002 (2021)

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    J. Lee, E. Adelberger, T. Cook, S. Fleischer, and B. Heckel, Physical Review Letters 124, 101101 (2020)

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    Adelberger, B

    E. Adelberger, B. Heckel, and A. Nelson, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science 53, 77 (2003)

    work page 2003

  6. [6]

    Arkani-Hamed, S

    N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, and G. Dvali, Scien- tific American 283, 62 (2000)

    work page 2000

  7. [7]

    Antoniadis, N

    I. Antoniadis, N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, and G. Dvali, Physics Letters B 436, 257 (1998)

    work page 1998

  8. [8]

    Sundrum, Physical Review D 69, 044014 (2004)

    R. Sundrum, Physical Review D 69, 044014 (2004)

    work page 2004

  9. [9]

    Montero, C

    M. Montero, C. Vafa, and I. Valenzuela, Journal of High Energy Physics 2023, 22 (2023)

    work page 2023

  10. [10]

    Y.-J. Chen, W. Tham, D. Krause, D. L´ opez, E. Fis- chbach, and R. Decca, Physical Review Letters 116, 221102 (2016)

    work page 2016

  11. [11]

    Tan, A.-B

    W.-H. Tan, A.-B. Du, W.-C. Dong, S.-Q. Yang, C.-G. Shao, S.-G. Guan, Q.-L. Wang, B.-F. Zhan, P.-S. Luo, L.- C. Tu, and J. Luo, Physical Review Letters 124, 051301 (2020)

    work page 2020

  12. [12]

    A. O. Sushkov, W. J. Kim, D. A. R. Dalvit, and S. K. Lamoreaux, Physical Review Letters 107, 171101 (2011)

    work page 2011

  13. [13]

    A. A. Geraci, S. J. Smullin, D. M. Weld, J. Chiaverini, and A. Kapitulnik, Physical Review D78, 022002 (2008)

    work page 2008

  14. [14]

    microparticles-shop.de/index.php?language=en

    Microparticles GmbH, https://www. microparticles-shop.de/index.php?language=en

    work page

  15. [15]

    Kawasaki, A

    A. Kawasaki, A. Fieguth, N. Priel, C. P. Blakemore, D. Martin, and G. Gratta, Review of Scientific Instru- ments 91, 083201 (2020)

    work page 2020

  16. [16]

    Maurer, C

    P. Maurer, C. Gonzalez-Ballestero, and O. Romero-Isart, Physical Review A 108, 033714 (2023)

    work page 2023

  17. [17]

    E. G. Acheson, Aquadag patent us844989a (1907), orig- inal patent describing the water-based colloidal graphite coating known as AquaDAG, used for conductive and lu- bricating purposes

    work page 1907

  18. [18]

    D. C. Moore, A. D. Rider, and G. Gratta, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 251801 (2014)

    work page 2014

  19. [19]

    C. P. Blakemore, A. D. Rider, S. Roy, Q. Wang, A. Kawasaki, and G. Gratta, Phys. Rev. A 99, 023816 (2019)

    work page 2019

  20. [20]

    Q. Wang, A. D. Rider, D. C. Moore, C. P. Blakemore, L. Cao, and G. Gratta, in 2017 IEEE 67th Electronic Components and Technology Conference (ECTC) (2017) pp. 1773–1778

    work page 2017

  21. [21]

    C. P. Blakemore, A. Fieguth, A. Kawasaki, N. Priel, D. Martin, A. D. Rider, Q. Wang, and G. Gratta, Phys- ical Review D 104, L061101 (2021)

    work page 2021

  22. [22]

    Venugopalan and G

    G. Venugopalan and G. Gratta, Platinum Black for stray- light mitigation on high-aspect-ratio micromechanical cantilever (2024)

    work page 2024

  23. [23]

    Allen, W

    B. Allen, W. Hua, and A. Ottewill, Automatic cross-talk removal from multi-channel data (1999)

    work page 1999

  24. [24]

    Vajente, Phys

    G. Vajente, Phys. Rev. D 105, 102005 (2022)

    work page 2022

  25. [25]

    C. P. Blakemore, A. D. Rider, S. Roy, A. Fieguth, A. Kawasaki, N. Priel, and G. Gratta, Phys. Rev. Appl. 12, 024037 (2019)

    work page 2019

  26. [26]

    See Supplementary Material at end of this document for the experimental configurations under which data was collected for this result

    work page

  27. [27]

    Priel, A

    N. Priel, A. Fieguth, C. P. Blakemore, E. Hough, A. Kawasaki, D. Martin, G. Venugopalan, and G. Gratta, Science Advances 8, eabo2361 (2022)

    work page 2022

  28. [28]

    C. P. Blakemore, D. Martin, A. Fieguth, N. Priel, G. Venugopalan, A. Kawasaki, and G. Gratta, Physical Review A 106, 023503 (2022)

    work page 2022

  29. [29]

    Acktar MagicBlack, https://acktar.com/product/ magic-black/ (2024), [Online; accessed March 2024]

    work page 2024

  30. [30]

    S. S. Wilks, The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 9, 60 (1938)

    work page 1938

  31. [31]

    Hough, Novel Techniques to Measure Micron-Scale Gravity, https://purl.stanford.edu/rc763nv9924 (2022), Bachelor’s Thesis, Stanford University

    E. Hough, Novel Techniques to Measure Micron-Scale Gravity, https://purl.stanford.edu/rc763nv9924 (2022), Bachelor’s Thesis, Stanford University

    work page 2022

  32. [32]

    S. Bose, A. Mazumdar, G. W. Morley, H. Ulbricht, M. Toroˇ s, M. Paternostro, A. A. Geraci, P. F. Barker, M. S. Kim, and G. Milburn, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 240401 (2017)

    work page 2017

  33. [33]

    Gonzalez-Ballestero, M

    C. Gonzalez-Ballestero, M. Aspelmeyer, L. Novotny, R. Quidant, and O. Romero-Isart, Science 374, eabg3027 (2021). Supplementary Material Summary of measurement configurations The table below summarizes the measurement configurations used to produce the results in the main text. Each measurement consisted of10 s of data collected at a sampling rate of5 kHz. ...

    work page 2021