Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 55 references

Nonreciprocal optical metasurface based on spinning cylinders

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A metasurface of spinning silicon cylinders makes light pass one way and block the other, without magnets or nonlinear materials.

desk verdict The spinning-cylinder metasurface simulation is credible for the axisymmetric case, but the wavefront-shaping section's static effective medium for non-axisymmetric spinning pillars has a real time-modulation gap, so those isolation ratios are unestablished. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.15928 v1 pith:CX7FI2Z2 submitted 2024-11-24 physics.optics

Zheng Yang , Wanyue Xiao , Hengzhi Li , Hao Pan , Shubo Wang This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.optics
keywords nonreciprocalmetasurfacespinningcylindersSagnaceffectTellegenresponsetime-reversalsymmetrybreakingtransmissionwavefrontmanipulationmovingmedium
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper proposes a nonreciprocal optical metasurface whose nonreciprocity comes from mechanically spinning its meta-atoms, not from magnets or nonlinear materials. It claims that an array of silicon cylinders rotating just above a silicon substrate breaks time-reversal symmetry through the relativistic Sagnac effect, turning each cylinder into a so-called Tellegen-type bianisotropic element. In full-wave simulations, the structure yields strongly asymmetric transmission and reflection for opposite incidence angles, with an isolation ratio around 65 percent at 249.56 THz. Adding silicon pillars lets the same structure deflect a forward beam while blocking its time-reversed counterpart, with isolation as high as 57.1 percent. If true, this gives a free-space platform for one-way light routing that could be switched by starting or stopping the rotation.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the spinning silicon cylinder treated as a moving medium with the Minkowski constitutive relations, which the paper rewrites as a stationary bianisotropic medium with Tellegen-type tensors. The crucial identity is the resulting eigenmode frequency splitting $\Delta\omega = 2m\Omega(\varepsilon\mu-1)/(\varepsilon\mu)$ between the clockwise and counterclockwise chiral multipole modes, a photonic analogue of the Zeeman effect that the paper traces to the Sagnac effect. This splitting is what creates the effective azimuthal gauge field $A_\theta$ in the Helmholtz equation and, together with spin-momentum locking of the substrate guided mode, produces direction-dependent coupling between the cylinders. The phase-gradient extensions rely on propagation phase from silicon pillars and the generalized Snell law to steer the transmitted beam.

What would settle it

Build a test cell where a dielectric cylinder or disk of radius $R$ spins at $\Omega R/c = 0.01$ next to a dielectric half-space and measure the transmission contrast for opposite incidence angles at the predicted resonance; if the measured isolation ratio falls far below the simulated 65 percent, the Minkowski constitutive assumption is the first suspect. A less demanding check is to compare the full-wave simulation against a rigorous moving-boundary or Doppler-shifted solver on a single cylinder and verify the predicted first-order splitting $\Delta\omega = 2m\Omega(\varepsilon\mu-1)/(\varepsilon\mu)$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that a periodic lattice of spinning dielectric cylinders coupled through a substrate behaves as a nonreciprocal metasurface. The rotation enters Maxwell's equations through the Minkowski constitutive relations and can be re-expressed as an effective azimuthal gauge field; this gauge field lifts the degeneracy of clockwise and counterclockwise chiral multipole modes of the cylinders, producing a Tellegen-type bianisotropic response that breaks reciprocity. Near the resonance of one chiral dipole mode, the cylinders couple asymmetrically to the forward and backward guided modes of the substrate, so an incident plane wave is largely transmitted from one side and largely reflected from the other. The paper demonstrates this with full-wave simulations, showing a maximum transmission contrast of 65.4 percent at $f = 249.56$ THz for opposite incident angles $\pm 8.18^\circ$, and extends the effect to nonreciprocal beam deflection by adding pillars that impose a phase gradient. The mechanism is presented as distinct from magneto-optic, nonlinear, and temporal-modulation schemes because it relies on the relativistic response of a moving medium.

Load-bearing premise

The whole prediction rests on treating a rigidly spinning submicron silicon cylinder as a moving medium governed by the Minkowski constitutive relations, with the same permittivity and no extra mechanical, thermal, or dispersive effects; if that effective description is wrong, the simulated one-way effects may not appear in a real device.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A compact optical isolator could be built from an array of spinning cylinders over a substrate, with no external magnetic field and no high-intensity nonlinear threshold.
  • The same metasurface acts as an angle-selective filter: light incident at $+8.18^\circ$ is transmitted while light incident at the mirror angle is reflected, so beam direction becomes a control knob for one-way routing.
  • Adding subwavelength pillars turns the device into a one-way beam deflector, so forward light can be sent to a chosen diffraction channel while the time-reversed channel is suppressed.
  • The isolation ratio of roughly 65 percent is achieved in the subwavelength regime, so the device volume can be near the wavelength scale rather than requiring bulky magnets or long modulators.
  • Starting and stopping the rotation provides a dynamic, reconfigurable on-off switch for nonreciprocity at fixed frequency and geometry.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • One extension the paper leaves implicit is that the same gauge-field mechanism should work at other frequencies and with other dielectric materials, as long as the mode number and rotation speed keep the splitting first-order; a sweep of $\varepsilon$ and $\mu$ would be a direct test.
  • A practical device would likely need a different way to spin submicron silicon cylinders at $\Omega R/c = 0.01$; the paper does not discuss mechanical drive, friction, or thermal load, so the simulated configuration may be an idealisation rather than a construction blueprint.
  • The Minkowski-relation step is the main unvalidated modelling assumption, so a comparison against a rigorous moving-boundary simulation or a carefully scaled rotating-dielectric experiment would either confirm the scheme or reveal where it breaks.
  • Because the effect appears at resonance of a chiral mode, losses in the silicon could reduce the isolation ratio; designing around that trade-off is a natural next step.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a nonreciprocal optical metasurface composed of a periodic array of spinning silicon cylinders placed above a silicon substrate. The cylinders are modeled using the Minkowski constitutive relations for moving media, which are recast as an equivalent stationary bianisotropic (Tellegen-type) medium, giving an effective azimuthal gauge field that splits the degeneracy of clockwise and counterclockwise chiral multipole modes. Using COMSOL full-wave simulations, the authors report strongly asymmetric transmission and reflection for opposite incident angles, an isolation ratio of about 65% at f = 249.56 THz for opposite incidences, and nonreciprocal beam deflection with isolation ratios of 44.8%, 57.1%, and 37.6% obtained by adding dielectric pillars to the meta-atoms to control the transmission phase. The paper claims that this constitutes a new mechanism for nonreciprocal light manipulation in free space, distinct from magneto-optic, nonlinear, and temporal-modulation approaches.

Significance. If the moving-medium constitutive model and the static-equivalent simulation approach are valid, the paper offers a conceptually new route to nonreciprocity based on the Sagnac effect in spinning dielectric meta-atoms, with no need for magnets or nonlinear materials. The manuscript includes useful internal controls: the Ω=0 simulations show symmetric transmission and reflection spectra, and the multipole expansion provides a physical picture of the chiral-mode excitation asymmetry. The proposed mechanism is falsifiable and could be extended to topological or non-Hermitian photonic platforms. However, the entire evidence is numerical, and the Sec. III B designs involve non-axisymmetric rotating bodies for which the static-equivalent model is not automatically valid; without addressing this, the wavefront-manipulation results are not yet credible. The paper also omits simulation parameters and independent validation of the constitutive assumption, which currently limits its significance to a conditional proof-of-principle.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. III B, Figs. 6-9] The meta-atoms in Sec. III B are not rotationally symmetric: a rectangular pillar attached to the cylinder breaks the cylindrical symmetry, so the lab-frame permittivity distribution is time-periodic with period 2π/Ω. The effective stationary bianisotropic model of Eq. (2) is not applicable to such a body; a rotating non-axisymmetric scatterer produces frequency sidebands at ω ± nΩ. The frequency-domain COMSOL simulation of a static equivalent object does not include these sidebands, and the paper provides no estimate of their amplitude at ΩR/c=0.01 (Ω≈2.4 THz). The isolation ratios reported in Figs. 7(c), 8(c), and 9(c) (44.8%, 57.1%, 37.6%) therefore do not yet establish nonreciprocal wavefront manipulation. A Floquet or time-domain treatment of the actual rotating geometry, or a rigorous bound on sideband coupling, is required.
  2. [Sec. II, Eqs. (1)-(2)] The entire simulation rests on the Minkowski constitutive relations applied pointwise to a rigidly rotating dielectric cylinder. The paper neither validates this model for a submicron solid silicon object at ΩR/c=0.01 nor discusses the effect of material dispersion, mechanical stress, and the assumption of rigid-body rotation. Since this constitutive step is the origin of the Tellegen response that drives all the reported phenomena, the authors should state clearly that this is a modeling assumption and delineate its range of validity, ideally with an independent check such as a comparison with an alternative formulation of moving-medium electrodynamics or with published experimental data on spinning microresonators.
  3. [Sec. III A, all simulations] The paper reports full-wave simulations but provides no simulation parameters (boundary conditions, mesh size, solver type, port definitions, or convergence checks). The text also does not state how periodic boundary conditions are imposed, how the incidence angles are mapped to Floquet ports, or how the reflection/transmission coefficients are extracted. Because the central results are entirely computational, the absence of these details prevents reproducibility and verification. Please add a Simulation Methods paragraph or provide the COMSOL models and data.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. I] There is a typo in the first paragraph of the introduction: 'The airticle is organized as follows' should be 'The article is organized as follows'.
  2. [Sec. II] In the sentence defining the spinning speed, the notation is inconsistent: 'spin at angular velocity Ω = Ωˆ z' uses the same symbol for the vector and its magnitude, and the clause 'where c is the speed of light' appears abruptly; please clarify the definitions of Ω, R, and the normalized speed ΩR/c.
  3. [Sec. II, Eq. (5)] Equation (5) as printed is ambiguous: the denominator 'Aθ 2 − ε′rµ′z' lacks parentheses, and the dependence of Aθ on Ω and r is not repeated; a cleaner expression with clear notation for the mode quantities would help the reader.
  4. [Fig. 6] The labels in Fig. 6(b) and 6(c) appear to contain typographical artifacts such as '1n 2n 3n 4n'; these should be corrected to '1-4' or 'No. 1-4' consistently with the text.
  5. [Sec. III B, Figs. 7-9] The Fourier analysis of transmission channels does not specify the number of harmonics retained, the spatial window used, or how the channel amplitudes are normalized; please add this information for reproducibility.
  6. [References] Reference [8] is cited in the context of metasurface applications but is about a self-biased non-reciprocal magnetic metasurface; the citation placement in the introduction may confuse readers and should be reconsidered.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central derivation is self-contained, and the claimed nonreciprocity is a nontrivial simulation output of the Minkowski constitutive model, not fitted or renamed.

full rationale

The paper's main chain is analytical and self-contained: Eq. (1) (Minkowski relations, cited to Minkowski) is rewritten as Eq. (2); Eqs. (3)-(4) derive the Helmholtz equation with the gauge-field term; Eq. (5) is obtained by substituting e^{±imθ} modes and is a first-order consequence of Eq. (1), not a fit to the COMSOL results. The full-wave simulations solve Maxwell's equations with the bianisotropic parameters of Eq. (2); the observed transmission contrast (65.4%) and isolation ratios (44.8%, 57.1%, 37.6%) are frequency- and angle-dependent resonance and coupling effects, not equal by construction to the input constitutive tensors. The wavefront section uses phase maps from separate COMSOL calculations and the generalized Snell's law to design phase gradients; the subsequent supercell simulations confirm the expected deflection angle, but the isolation ratios are computed from the simulated diffraction channels and are not imposed. Self-citations [15,16,36] provide prior context for spinning-particle nonreciprocity and the gauge-field language, but the key equations are displayed and derived in this paper, so the self-citations are not load-bearing. The skeptic's objection that adding a rectangular pillar breaks rotational symmetry and makes a static bianisotropic effective-medium model inapplicable is a modeling-validity concern, not a circularity: no quoted equation reduces the reported isolation to the constitutive input by construction. Hence the circularity burden is low.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central numerical claim needs no fitted model parameters, but the demonstration depends on the chosen spin speed and operating point. The theoretical interpretation rests on the Minkowski constitutive relations for a rotating dielectric, an assumption not independently validated in this extreme regime. The paper introduces no new physical entities; the effective gauge field is a mathematical reformulation.

free parameters (2)
  • normalized spinning speed ΩR/c = 0.01
    Chosen input that controls the strength of time-reversal breaking and hence the nonreciprocity. It is not fitted to data, but no first-principles argument fixes its value; it is selected to be small enough for the first-order frequency-splitting formula (Eq. (5)) yet large enough to produce a visible effect.
  • operating point (frequency, incident angle) = f = 249.56 THz, θi = 8.18°
    Selected post hoc from the parameter scans in Fig. 3 as the point of maximum transmission contrast and isolation ratio. The theory does not predict these values in advance; they are operating choices for the demonstration.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Minkowski constitutive relations (Eq. (1)) apply pointwise to a rigidly rotating silicon cylinder with velocity v(r)=Ωr.
    Standard electrodynamics of moving media, but treating a rotating solid as locally inertial with position-dependent velocity is an approximation that is not experimentally validated here.
  • domain assumption Silicon is lossless and dispersionless with ε=11.9 and μ=1.
    Used to set R=1-T and simplify the constitutive tensors; real silicon has finite absorption and dispersion near 1.2 µm.
  • domain assumption The substrate guided mode carries transverse spin with spin-momentum locking, making cylinder-substrate coupling direction-dependent.
    Invoked in Sec. II to explain asymmetric coupling; based on cited spin-momentum locking literature, but no quantitative coupling model is derived for this specific waveguide-cylinder geometry.
  • domain assumption The normalized spin speed ΩR/c=0.01 satisfies the small-speed expansion used in Eq. (5).
    The paper states the frequency-splitting relation is valid under ΩR/c << 1 and neglects higher-order terms; the chosen value is consistent with this but still corresponds to a surface speed of roughly 3×10^6 m/s.
  • ad hoc to paper The cylinders can rigidly rotate at the assumed speed without mechanical failure.
    No mechanical, thermal, or material-strength analysis is provided; the required angular velocity (≈1.5×10^13 rad/s for R=200 nm) is far beyond demonstrated rotating microstructures.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Nonreciprocal optical metasurface based on spinning cylinders." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CX7FI2Z2

@misc{pith2026241115928,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Nonreciprocal optical metasurface based on spinning cylinders},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CX7FI2Z2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.15928}
}
read the original abstract

Optical systems breaking Lorentz reciprocity have attracted broad attention due to their intriguing physics and applications. Nonreciprocal metasurfaces can enable one-way light transmission and reflection with essential applications in optical communication. Conventional nonreciprocal metasurfaces rely on using magneto-optic or nonlinear materials to induce nonreciprocal optical properties. Here, we propose and demonstrate a new mechanism for realizing nonreciprocal metasurfaces based on the relativistic effect of a moving medium. The metasurface is composed of periodic spinning dielectric cylinders located above a dielectric substrate. The spinning motion breaks the time-reversal symmetry and induces bi-anisotropic Tellegen-type response of the meta-atoms. We show that the metasurface can realize both asymmetric and nonreciprocal manipulations of the incident plane wave. The underlying mechanism is attributed to the Sagnac effect associated with the chiral multipole modes of the coupled spinning cylinders. By introducing dielectric pillars to modulate the phase profile, the metasurface can enable nonreciprocal wavefront manipulations. Our work offers a new mechanism for realizing nonreciprocal light manipulation in free space. The proposed metasurface can serve as a platform to explore the interesting physics of nonreciprocal optics, non-Hermitian optics, and topological photonics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.15928 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic of the nonreciprocal metasurface composed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Transmission as a function of the frequency and in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. (a) Transmission of the metasurface under the for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (d) with θi = −8.18◦ , a−1 is only slightly larger than a+1 at the resonance frequency. This difference in the excitation of the chiral dipole modes gives rise to the asymmetric and nonreciprocal properties of the metasur￾face. We note that the above multipole expansio…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (a) Schematic of the metasurface for wavefront ma [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. (a) Transmission phase and amplitude for the pil [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. (a) Transmission phase and amplitude for the pil [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    S. B. Glybovski, S. A. Tretyakov, P. A. Belov, Y. S. Kivshar, and C. R. Simovski, Metasurfaces: From mi- crowaves to visible, Phys. Rep. 634, 1 (2016)

    work page 2016

  2. [2]

    H.-T. Chen, A. J. Taylor, and N. Yu, A review of meta- surfaces: physics and applications, Rep. Prog. Phys. 79, 076401 (2016)

    work page 2016

  3. [3]

    Hsiao, C

    H.-H. Hsiao, C. H. Chu, and D. P. Tsai, Fundamen- tals and applications of metasurfaces, Small Methods 1, 1600064 (2017)

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    Sun, K.-Y

    S. Sun, K.-Y. Yang, C.-M. Wang, T.-K. Juan, W. T. Chen, C. Y. Liao, Q. He, S. Xiao, W.-T. Kung, G.- Y. Guo, et al., High-efficiency broadband anomalous re- flection by gradient meta-surfaces, Nano Lett. 12, 6223 (2012)

    work page 2012

  5. [5]

    X. Ni, N. K. Emani, A. V. Kildishev, A. Boltasseva, and V. M. Shalaev, Broadband light bending with plasmonic nanoantennas, Science 335, 427 (2012)

    work page 2012

  6. [6]

    (c) Fourier analysis for the amplitudes of the transmission channels under forward in- cidence (black dots) and backward incidence (red dots)

    (b) Magnetic field Hz for the forward incidence (left panel) and backward incidence (right panel). (c) Fourier analysis for the amplitudes of the transmission channels under forward in- cidence (black dots) and backward incidence (red dots). The dots surrounded by black and red circles are the channels |S21|2 and |S12|2. . is negatively deflected under th...

    work page

  7. [7]

    D. Lin, P. Fan, E. Hasman, and M. L. Brongersma, Di- electric gradient metasurface optical elements, Science 345, 298 (2014)

    work page 2014

  8. [8]

    Arbabi, Y

    A. Arbabi, Y. Horie, A. J. Ball, M. Bagheri, and A. Faraon, Subwavelength-thick lenses with high numer- ical apertures and large efficiency based on high-contrast transmitarrays, Nat. Commun. 6, 7069 (2015)

    work page 2015

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    W. Yang, J. Qin, J. Long, W. Yan, Y. Yang, C. Li, E. Li, J. Hu, L. Deng, Q. Du, et al., A self-biased non-reciprocal magnetic metasurface for bidirectional phase modulation, Nat. Electron. 6, 225 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    G. Yoon, J. Kim, J. Mun, D. Lee, K. T. Nam, and J. Rho, Wavelength-decoupled geometric metasurfaces by arbi- trary dispersion control, Commun. Phys. 2, 129 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    Huang, X

    L. Huang, X. Chen, H. M¨ uhlenbernd, H. Zhang, S. Chen, B. Bai, Q. Tan, G. Jin, K.-W. Cheah, C.-W. Qiu, et al., Three-dimensional optical holography using a plasmonic metasurface, Nat. Commun. 4, 2808 (2013)

    2013

  4. [12]

    X. Ni, A. V. Kildishev, and V. M. Shalaev, Metasurface holograms for visible light, Nat. Commun.4, 2807 (2013)

    2013

  5. [13]

    Caloz, A

    C. Caloz, A. Al` u, S. Tretyakov, D. Sounas, K. Achouri, and Z.-L. Deck-L´ eger, Electromagnetic Nonreciprocity, Phys. Rev. Appl. 10, 047001 (2018)

    2018

  6. [14]

    Chang, X

    L. Chang, X. Jiang, S. Hua, C. Yang, J. Wen, L. Jiang, G. Li, G. Wang, and M. Xiao, Parity–time symmetry and variable optical isolation in active–passive-coupled microresonators, Nat. Photonics 8, 524 (2014)

    2014

  7. [15]

    Maayani, R

    S. Maayani, R. Dahan, Y. Kligerman, E. Moses, A. U. Hassan, H. Jing, F. Nori, D. N. Christodoulides, and T. Carmon, Flying couplers above spinning resonators generate irreversible refraction, Nature 558, 569 (2018)

    2018

  8. [16]

    H. Shi, Y. Cheng, Z. Yang, Y. Chen, and S. Wang, Op- tical isolation induced by subwavelength spinning parti- cle via spin-orbit interaction, Phys. Rev. B 103, 094105 (2021)

    2021

  9. [17]

    Z. Yang, Y. Cheng, N. Wang, Y. Chen, and S. Wang, Nonreciprocal light propagation induced by a subwave- length spinning cylinder, Opt. Express 30, 27993 (2022)

    2022

  10. [18]

    Scheucher, A

    M. Scheucher, A. Hilico, E. Will, J. Volz, and A. Rauschenbeutel, Quantum optical circulator con- trolled by a single chirally coupled atom, Science 354, 1577 (2016)

    2016

  11. [19]

    Kamal, J

    A. Kamal, J. Clarke, and M. Devoret, Noiseless non- reciprocity in a parametric active device, Nat. Phys. 7, 311 (2011)

    2011

  12. [20]

    M. M. Salary, S. Jafar-Zanjani, and H. Mosallaei, Nonre- ciprocal optical links based on time-modulated nanoan- tenna arrays: Full-duplex communication, Phys. Rev. B 99, 045416 (2019). 9

    2019

  13. [21]

    Taravati and G

    S. Taravati and G. V. Eleftheriades, Full-duplex non- reciprocal beam steering by time-modulated phase- gradient metasurfaces, Phys. Rev. Appl. 14, 014027 (2020)

    2020

  14. [22]

    Taravati and G

    S. Taravati and G. V. Eleftheriades, Full-duplex reflective beamsteering metasurface featuring magnetless nonrecip- rocal amplification, Nat. Commun. 12, 4414 (2021)

    2021

  15. [23]

    F. D. M. Haldane and S. Raghu, Possible Realization of Directional Optical Waveguides in Photonic Crystals with Broken Time-Reversal Symmetry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 013904 (2008)

    2008

  16. [24]

    D¨ otsch, N

    H. D¨ otsch, N. Bahlmann, O. Zhuromskyy, M. Hammer, L. Wilkens, R. Gerhardt, P. Hertel, and A. F. Popkov, Applications of magneto-optical waveguides in integrated optics, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 22, 240 (2005)

    2005

  17. [25]

    H. Pan, M. K. Chen, D. P. Tsai, and S. Wang, Nonrecip- rocal Pancharatnam-Berry metasurface for unidirectional wavefront manipulations, Opt. Express 32, 25632 (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    Y. Shi, Z. Yu, and S. Fan, Limitations of nonlinear optical isolators due to dynamic reciprocity, Nat. Photonics 9, 388 (2015)

    2015

  19. [27]

    A. B. Khanikaev and A. Alu, Nonlinear dynamic reci- procity, Nat. Photonics 9, 359 (2015)

    2015

  20. [28]

    Peng, S ¸

    B. Peng, S ¸. K.¨Ozdemir, F. Lei, F. Monifi, M. Gianfreda, G. L. Long, S. Fan, F. Nori, C. M. Bender, and L. Yang, Parity–time-symmetric whispering-gallery microcavities, Nat. Phys. 10, 394 (2014)

    2014

  21. [29]

    Guo and C

    T. Guo and C. Argyropoulos, Nonreciprocal transmission of electromagnetic waves with nonlinear active plasmonic metasurfaces, Phys. Rev. B 106, 235418 (2022)

    2022

  22. [30]

    Yu and S

    Z. Yu and S. Fan, Complete optical isolation created by indirect interband photonic transitions, Nat. Photonics 3, 91 (2009)

    2009

  23. [31]

    X. Guo, Y. Ding, Y. Duan, and X. Ni, Nonreciprocal metasurface with space–time phase modulation, Light Sci. Appl. 8, 123 (2019)

    2019

  24. [32]

    N. A. Estep, D. L. Sounas, J. Soric, and A. Alu, Magnetic-free non-reciprocity and isolation based on parametrically modulated coupled-resonator loops, Nat. Phys. 10, 923 (2014)

    2014

  25. [33]

    Taravati, N

    S. Taravati, N. Chamanara, and C. Caloz, Nonreciprocal electromagnetic scattering from a periodically space-time modulated slab and application to a quasisonic isolator, Phys. Rev. B 96, 165144 (2017)

    2017

  26. [34]

    L. Bi, J. Hu, P. Jiang, D. H. Kim, G. F. Dionne, L. C. Kimerling, and C. Ross, On-chip optical isolation in monolithically integrated non-reciprocal optical res- onators, Nat. Photonics 5, 758 (2011)

    2011

  27. [35]

    P. P. Jr. and H. A. Haus, Electrodynamics of Moving Media (The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1967)

    1967

  28. [36]

    Mazor and A

    Y. Mazor and A. Al` u, Nonreciprocal hyperbolic propaga- tion over moving metasurfaces, Phys. Rev. B 99, 045407 (2019)

    2019

  29. [37]

    H. Shi, Z. Xiong, W. Chen, J. Xu, S. Wang, and Y. Chen, Gauge-field description of sagnac frequency shift and mode hybridization in a rotating cavity, Opt. Express 27, 28114 (2019)

    2019

  30. [38]

    H. Shi, Z. Yang, C. Zhang, Y. Cheng, Y. Chen, and S. Wang, Robust exceptional point of arbitrary order in coupled spinning cylinders, Opt. Express 29, 29720 (2021)

    2021

  31. [39]

    Huang, A

    R. Huang, A. Miranowicz, J.-Q. Liao, F. Nori, and H. Jing, Nonreciprocal photon blockade, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 153601 (2018)

    2018

  32. [40]

    Minkowski, Die grundgleichungen f¨ ur die elektromag- netischen vorg¨ ange in bewegten k¨ orpern, Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu G¨ ottingen, Math

    H. Minkowski, Die grundgleichungen f¨ ur die elektromag- netischen vorg¨ ange in bewegten k¨ orpern, Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu G¨ ottingen, Math. Klasse 1908, 53 (1908)

    1908

  33. [41]

    Lindell, A

    I. Lindell, A. Sihvola, S. Tretyakov, and A. J. Viitanen, Electromagnetic Waves in Chiral and Bi-Isotropic Media (Artech House, Boston, 1994)

    1994

  34. [42]

    H. C. Lefevre, The Fiber-Optic Gyroscope(Artech House, Boston, 2022)

    2022

  35. [43]

    K. Y. Bliokh, D. Smirnova, and F. Nori, Quantum spin hall effect of light, Science 348, 1448 (2015)

    2015

  36. [44]

    K. Y. Bliokh, F. J. Rodr ´ ıguez-Fortu˜ no, F. Nori, and A. V. Zayats, Spin–orbit interactions of light, Nat. Photonics9, 796 (2015)

    2015

  37. [45]

    C. F. Bohren and D. R. Huffman,Absorption and Scatter- ing of Light by Small Particles(Wiley, New York, 2008)

    2008

  38. [46]

    Grahn, A

    P. Grahn, A. Shevchenko, and M. Kaivola, Electromag- netic multipole theory for optical nanomaterials, New J. Phys. 14, 093033 (2012)

    2012

  39. [47]

    Decker, I

    M. Decker, I. Staude, M. Falkner, J. Dominguez, D. N. Neshev, I. Brener, T. Pertsch, and Y. S. Kivshar, High- efficiency dielectric huygens’ surfaces, Adv. Opt. Mater. 3, 813 (2015)

    2015

  40. [48]

    Y. F. Yu, A. Y. Zhu, R. Paniagua-Dom ´ ınguez, Y. H. Fu, B. Luk’yanchuk, and A. I. Kuznetsov, High-transmission dielectric metasurface with 2 π phase control at visible wavelengths, Laser Photon. Rev. 9, 412 (2015)

    2015

  41. [49]

    Bomzon, G

    Z. Bomzon, G. Biener, V. Kleiner, and E. Hasman, Space- variant Pancharatnam–Berry phase optical elements with computer-generated subwavelength gratings, Opt. Lett. 27, 1141 (2002)

    2002

  42. [50]

    Marrucci, C

    L. Marrucci, C. Manzo, and D. Paparo, Optical Spin- to-Orbital Angular Momentum Conversion in Inhomoge- neous Anisotropic Media, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 163905 (2006)

    2006

  43. [51]

    X. Xie, M. Pu, J. Jin, M. Xu, Y. Guo, X. Li, P. Gao, X. Ma, and X. Luo, Generalized Pancharatnam-Berry phase in rotationally symmetric meta-atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 183902 (2021)

    2021

  44. [52]

    Xiao and S

    W. Xiao and S. Wang, On-chip optical wavefront shaping by transverse-spin-induced pancharatanam–berry phase, Opt. Lett. 49, 1915 (2024)

    2024

  45. [53]

    A. U. R. Khalid, F. Feng, N. Ullah, X. Yuan, and M. G. Somekh, Exploitation of geometric and propa- gation phases for spin-dependent rational-multiple com- plete phase modulation using dielectric metasurfaces, Photonics Res. 10, 877 (2022)

    2022

  46. [54]

    L. Wu, J. Tao, and G. Zheng, Controlling phase of arbi- trary polarizations using both the geometric phase and the propagation phase, Phys. Rev. B 97, 245426 (2018)

    2018

  47. [55]

    N. Yu, P. Genevet, M. A. Kats, F. Aieta, J.-P. Teti- enne, F. Capasso, and Z. Gaburro, Light propagation with phase discontinuities: generalized laws of reflection and refraction, Science 334, 333 (2011)

    2011

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.