pith. sign in

arxiv: 2603.29290 · v2 · submitted 2026-03-31 · 🪐 quant-ph

A Universal Topological Platform for Nonreciprocal Spin-Photon Interface in Solid-State Quantum Networks

Fang-Yu Hong This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-14 00:31 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords nonreciprocal quantum interfaceTomonaga-Luttinger liquidcarbon nanotubespin-photon entanglementchiral routingquantum networksstrong-coupling regime
0
0 comments X

The pith

A carbon nanotube microtoroid supplies topological protection for nonreciprocal spin-photon coupling usable with any solid-state emitter.

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

The paper proposes a plasmonic architecture that places a Tomonaga-Luttinger liquid inside a single-walled carbon nanotube microtoroid to deliver strong light-matter interaction together with deterministic, nonreciprocal photon routing. Valley-momentum mismatch kinematically blocks backscattering of the liquid's collective modes, producing robust chiral spin-momentum locking that routes circularly polarized photons from an emitter into separate channels. A graded mode converter and tripod-STIRAP sequence then convert the confined plasmon into fiber-guided light while generating magnetically tunable entanglement. The design operates in the strong-coupling regime with cooperativity above 100 and chiral contrast above 20 dB, remaining compatible with any solid-state emitter because it is wavelength-agnostic.

Core claim

The central claim is that the collective bosonic excitations of a Tomonaga-Luttinger liquid inside a single-walled carbon nanotube microtoroid furnish kinematic protection against backscattering through valley-momentum mismatch, thereby enabling deterministic nonreciprocal routing of photons from any solid-state emitter while achieving cooperativities greater than 100, chiral contrasts exceeding 20 dB, and near-unity extraction after a graded plasmonic-photonic conversion.

What carries the argument

Tomonaga-Luttinger liquid inside a single-walled carbon nanotube microtoroid, whose collective excitations gain chiral spin-momentum locking from valley-momentum mismatch and whose residual backscattering is suppressed by electrostatic gating and annealing.

If this is right

  • Photons emitted in opposite circular polarizations are routed into physically separate propagation channels without external magnetic fields or circulators.
  • A tripod-STIRAP sequence produces high-fidelity, magnetically tunable spin-photon entanglement.
  • The graded plasmonic-photonic converter converts the confined mode into fiber-guided light at near-unity efficiency.
  • The same architecture works for any solid-state emitter because the protection mechanism is independent of transition wavelength.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same valley-momentum protection could be examined in other one-dimensional conductors that support collective modes.
  • If the 100 Hz backscattering target is reached, the platform could be integrated with existing fiber networks without additional isolation stages.
  • The approach opens a route to test whether similar kinematic locking appears in other plasmonic or polaritonic 1D systems.

Load-bearing premise

The valley-momentum mismatch supplies kinematic protection that keeps TLL excitations from backscattering, and electrostatic gating plus annealing can reduce any leftover atomic-scale scattering down to roughly 100 Hz.

What would settle it

Direct measurement of backscattering rates well above 100 Hz inside an electrostatically gated and annealed SWCNT microtoroid while the emitter is in strong coupling would show that the chiral protection does not hold at the claimed level.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.29290 by Fang-Yu Hong.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: summarizes the key scaling laws that de￾termine whether the hybrid NV–CNT–fiber system can reach the high-cooperativity and high-extraction regime required by the tripod protocol. The emitter–cavity cou￾pling strength is estimated from Eq. (46), g ≈ |d| ~ r ~ωc 2ǫ0ǫrVmode exp − x Ld  , (57) which implies an exponential suppression with the emitter–CNT separation x and an inverse-square-root en￾hancement … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

A fundamental obstacle to scalable solid-state quantum networks is the lack of a universal interface providing strong light-matter coupling, deterministic nonreciprocal photon routing, and efficient extraction. Here we propose a plasmonic platform overcoming these challenges using a Tomonaga-Luttinger liquid (TLL) in a single-walled carbon nanotube (SWCNT) microtoroid. The TLL's collective bosonic excitations are kinematically protected against backscattering by a large valley-momentum mismatch, guaranteeing robust chiral spin-momentum locking unattainable in dielectric cavities. This 1D protection enables deterministic routing of circularly polarized photons from a quantum emitter (e.g., a nitrogen-vacancy center) into distinct propagation channels. By aligning the emitter's symmetry axis, parasitic {\pi} transitions are geometrically forbidden. Furthermore, residual atomic-scale backscattering is suppressed to ~100 Hz via electrostatic gating and annealing. To overcome the severe mode mismatch between the CNT plasmon and optical fiber, we introduce a graded plasmonic-photonic mode converter, providing a path to near-unity extraction efficiency. Using a tripod-STIRAP scheme, we demonstrate high-fidelity, magnetically tunable spin-photon entanglement. Our analysis confirms operation deep in the strong-coupling regime, with cooperativities C > 100 and chiral contrast exceeding 20 dB. This wavelength-agnostic architecture is compatible with any solid-state emitter, establishing a scalable blueprint for robust, nonreciprocal quantum nodes in a global quantum internet.

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

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a plasmonic platform based on a Tomonaga-Luttinger liquid (TLL) hosted in a single-walled carbon nanotube (SWCNT) microtoroid to realize a universal, wavelength-agnostic nonreciprocal spin-photon interface for solid-state quantum emitters such as NV centers. It asserts that valley-momentum mismatch kinematically protects TLL collective modes against backscattering, enabling chiral spin-momentum locking, deterministic routing of circularly polarized photons, suppression of residual backscattering to ~100 Hz via gating and annealing, and operation deep in the strong-coupling regime (C > 100, chiral contrast > 20 dB) together with a graded plasmonic-photonic mode converter for near-unity extraction and a tripod-STIRAP protocol for tunable entanglement.

Significance. If the kinematic protection survives emitter coupling and the stated performance metrics are realized, the architecture would supply a scalable, nonreciprocal quantum node blueprint that addresses extraction efficiency and routing robustness in solid-state networks, offering a concrete path toward global quantum internet components compatible with arbitrary emitters.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and §3] Abstract and §3 (TLL protection): the central claim that valley-momentum mismatch continues to protect against backscattering after the quantum emitter is coupled is not demonstrated; a local electrostatic potential from the emitter can induce intervalley scattering whose rate is not bounded by the quoted 100 Hz residual, directly threatening the asserted >20 dB chiral contrast while still permitting C > 100.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the numerical performance claims (C > 100, 20 dB contrast, 100 Hz suppression) are stated without visible derivations, rate equations, or simulations, leaving the strong-coupling and nonreciprocity assertions unsupported in the manuscript as presented.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Mode converter description] The graded plasmonic-photonic mode converter is introduced without a quantitative mode-overlap calculation or figure showing the grading profile; a supplementary schematic would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive report. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript to strengthen the supporting analysis and derivations while preserving the core claims.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and §3] Abstract and §3 (TLL protection): the central claim that valley-momentum mismatch continues to protect against backscattering after the quantum emitter is coupled is not demonstrated; a local electrostatic potential from the emitter can induce intervalley scattering whose rate is not bounded by the quoted 100 Hz residual, directly threatening the asserted >20 dB chiral contrast while still permitting C > 100.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit bound on intervalley scattering induced by the emitter's local potential is required to fully substantiate the protection. In the revised manuscript we will expand §3 with a calculation of the scattering rate arising from the emitter-induced electrostatic perturbation. The analysis will show that the kinematic valley-momentum mismatch, combined with dielectric screening in the microtoroid, keeps this rate below the quoted 100 Hz residual, thereby preserving the >20 dB chiral contrast. Supporting rate equations and order-of-magnitude estimates will be added. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the numerical performance claims (C > 100, 20 dB contrast, 100 Hz suppression) are stated without visible derivations, rate equations, or simulations, leaving the strong-coupling and nonreciprocity assertions unsupported in the manuscript as presented.

    Authors: The derivations, rate equations, and simulation results underlying C > 100, the 20 dB contrast, and the 100 Hz suppression are contained in the main text (particularly the sections on coupling dynamics, loss channels, and the mode converter). To make these supports immediately visible, we will add a concise summary of the key equations and simulation parameters to the abstract and include an explicit reference to the relevant sections. A short appendix with the full rate-equation model will also be provided in the revision. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: forward-looking proposal with independent physical mechanisms

full rationale

The manuscript is a theoretical proposal for a TLL-based plasmonic interface. All central claims (kinematic protection via valley-momentum mismatch, suppression of backscattering to ~100 Hz by gating/annealing, C > 100, >20 dB contrast) are presented as consequences of stated physical properties and device geometry rather than as outputs of a fit or self-referential definition. No equations are shown that reduce a prediction to its own input parameters, no load-bearing self-citations appear in the derivation chain, and the STIRAP entanglement scheme is invoked as an external protocol. The architecture is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks and does not exhibit any of the enumerated circularity patterns.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The proposal rests on standard condensed-matter properties of TLL and SWCNT but introduces a custom platform configuration without independent verification of the new elements.

free parameters (1)
  • target cooperativity C
    Claimed threshold for strong-coupling regime without derivation shown.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption TLL collective excitations are kinematically protected by valley-momentum mismatch
    Invoked in abstract to guarantee chiral spin-momentum locking.
invented entities (1)
  • graded plasmonic-photonic mode converter no independent evidence
    purpose: Overcome severe mode mismatch for near-unity extraction efficiency
    New component introduced to solve fiber coupling issue.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5561 in / 1451 out tokens · 89179 ms · 2026-05-14T00:31:16.967557+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

86 extracted references · 86 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    For these parameters, one expects a total emis- sion fidelity close to the extraction bound ηext = 30

    0 GHz. For these parameters, one expects a total emis- sion fidelity close to the extraction bound ηext = 30. 0

    work page

  2. [2]

    A numerical solution of Eq

    67%. A numerical solution of Eq. ( 34) can then yield near-unity transfer into the two chiral channels with an approximately equal 50/ 50 splitting, as illustrated in Fig. 2. -5 5 0 10 15 20 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Total Emitted Photon: 99.59 % (50/50 Perfect Split) 10 -2 10 -1 10 0 10 1 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 (a) (b) FIG. 2. Illustrative dynamics and param...

    work page

  3. [3]

    In practice, however, the parameters AFiber eff and Lint cannot be reduced arbitrarily

    shows explicitly that the outcoupling rate increases linearly with the ring radius R and quadrat- ically with the overlap factor ξ, while it decreases in- versely with both the fiber effective mode area and the interaction length. In practice, however, the parameters AFiber eff and Lint cannot be reduced arbitrarily. If the coupler is still to be interpreted...

    work page

  4. [4]

    For a conventional or moderately tapered di- electric fiber, one typically expects AFiber eff ∼ 10− 13–10− 12 m2, L int ∼ 0

    should be regarded as an upper-bound scaling law rather than as a precise engineering formula. For a conventional or moderately tapered di- electric fiber, one typically expects AFiber eff ∼ 10− 13–10− 12 m2, L int ∼ 0. 5–5 µ m, which implies a strongly suppressed external coupling rate because of the large mismatch between the CNT near field and the much mo...

    work page

  5. [5]

    yields a substantially larger outcoupling rate. Such values should nevertheless be interpreted as optimistic effective parameters characterizing the local evanescent interaction region, rather than as universal geometric parameters of a standard tapered fiber. Since no passive external channel can extract energy much faster than the optical timescale up to ...

    work page

  6. [6]

    For a ring radius R = 2 µ m and CNT diameter dt ∼ 2 nm, one may estimate Vmode ∼ 1

    is meaningful only within the parameter regime where the right-hand side remains smaller than, or at most comparable to, ω c. For a ring radius R = 2 µ m and CNT diameter dt ∼ 2 nm, one may estimate Vmode ∼ 1. 5 × 10− 22 m3. As- suming an NV dipole moment of order 10 Debye and an emitter-CNT separation x ∼ 10 nm with Ld ∼ 5 nm, one obtains a strongly enha...

    work page

  7. [7]

    and the geometric parametrization in Eq. ( 56), κ max ex (R) ≡ κ R ∼ ξ2 ω c 2πR A CNT eff Lint AFiber eff , (58) the maximum achievable outcoupling rate increases lin- early with the ring radius R and decreases inversely with the fiber effective mode area AFiber eff and the interaction length Lint. This behavior is illustrated in Figs. 3(c,d), emphasizing that...

    work page

  8. [8]

    Fabricate a ring-shaped scaffold on a cryogenic- compatible low-loss substrate, such as suspended SiN, diamond, or an hBN-buffered platform

    work page

  9. [9]

    Grow or transfer one or several SWCNTs onto the 8 ring perimeter to form a closed or quasi-closed plas- monic path

    work page

  10. [10]

    Undercut the surrounding material to obtain a par- tially suspended geometry and reduce dielectric loading

    work page

  11. [11]

    Position a tapered fiber in the evanescent near field of the ring to control κ ex

    work page

  12. [12]

    For deterministic emitter placement, a practical ap- proach is to use a pre-characterized nanodiamond host- ing a single NV center

    Apply a perpendicular magnetic field to tune the cavity resonance through the Aharonov-Bohm ef- fect. For deterministic emitter placement, a practical ap- proach is to use a pre-characterized nanodiamond host- ing a single NV center. Candidate nanodiamonds may be selected by confocal microscopy, antibunching mea- surements, and optically detected magnetic ...

    work page

  13. [13]

    Tomonaga, Prog

    S. Tomonaga, Prog. Theor. Phys. 5, 544 (1950)

    work page 1950

  14. [14]

    J. M. Luttinger, J. Math. Phys. 4, 1154 (1963)

    work page 1963

  15. [15]

    F. D. M. Haldane, J. Phys. C 14, 2585 (1981)

    work page 1981

  16. [16]

    Giamarchi, Quantum Physics in One Dimension (Ox- ford University Press, Oxford, 2003)

    T. Giamarchi, Quantum Physics in One Dimension (Ox- ford University Press, Oxford, 2003)

    work page 2003

  17. [17]

    Egger and A

    R. Egger and A. O. Gogolin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 5082 (1997)

    work page 1997

  18. [18]

    C. Kane, L. Balents, and M. P. A. Fisher, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 5086 (1997)

    work page 1997

  19. [19]

    Z. Shi, C. Hong, K. Behnia, et al. , Nature Photonics 9, 515 (2015)

    work page 2015

  20. [20]

    Ajiki and T

    H. Ajiki and T. Ando, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 62, 1255 (1993)

    work page 1993

  21. [21]

    Bachtold, C

    A. Bachtold, C. Strunk, J.-P. Salvetat, et al., Nature 397, 673 (1999)

    work page 1999

  22. [22]

    E. D. Minot, Y. Yaish, V. Sazonova, and P. L. McEuen, Nature 428, 536 (2004)

    work page 2004

  23. [23]

    Kuemmeth, S

    F. Kuemmeth, S. Ilani, D. C. Ralph, and P. L. McEuen, Nature 452, 448 (2008)

    work page 2008

  24. [24]

    Petersen, J

    J. Petersen, J. Volz, and A. Rauschenbeutel, Science 346, 67 (2014)

    work page 2014

  25. [25]

    Mitsch, C

    R. Mitsch, C. Sayrin, B. Albrecht, P. Schneeweiss, and A. Rauschenbeutel, Nature Communications 5, 5713 (2014)

    work page 2014

  26. [26]

    S¨ ollner, S

    I. S¨ ollner, S. Mahmoodian, S. L. Hansen, et al. , Nature Nanotechnology 10, 775 (2015)

    work page 2015

  27. [27]

    R. J. Coles, D. M. Price, J. E. Dixon, et al., Nature Com- munications 7, 11183 (2016). 9

    work page 2016

  28. [28]

    Lodahl, S

    P. Lodahl, S. Mahmoodian, S. L. Sørensen, et al., Nature 541, 473 (2017)

    work page 2017

  29. [29]

    K. Y. Bliokh, F. J. Rodr ´ ıguez-Fortu˜ no, F. Nori, and A. V. Zayats, Nature Photonics 9, 796 (2015)

    work page 2015

  30. [30]

    Bergmann, H

    K. Bergmann, H. Theuer, and B. W. Shore, Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 1003 (1998)

    work page 1998

  31. [31]

    R. G. Unanyan, M. Fleischhauer, B. W. Shore, and K. Bergmann, Optics Communications 155, 144 (1998)

    work page 1998

  32. [32]

    Kis and F

    Z. Kis and F. Renzoni, Phys. Rev. A 65, 032318 (2002)

    work page 2002

  33. [33]

    N. V. Vitanov, A. A. Rangelov, B. W. Shore, and K. Bergmann, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 015006 (2017)

    work page 2017

  34. [34]

    Lindblad, Commun

    G. Lindblad, Commun. Math. Phys. 48, 119 (1976)

    work page 1976

  35. [35]

    Gorini, A

    V. Gorini, A. Kossakowski, and E. C. G. Sudarshan, J. Math. Phys. 17, 821 (1976)

    work page 1976

  36. [36]

    H. J. Carmichael, An Open Systems Approach to Quan- tum Optics (Springer, Berlin, 1993)

    work page 1993

  37. [37]

    Breuer and F

    H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum Systems (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002)

    work page 2002

  38. [38]

    C. W. Gardiner and P. Zoller, Quantum Noise (Springer, Berlin, 2004)

    work page 2004

  39. [39]

    Briegel, W

    H.-J. Briegel, W. D¨ ur, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5932 (1998)

    work page 1998

  40. [40]

    L.-M. Duan, M. D. Lukin, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Na- ture 414, 413 (2001)

    work page 2001

  41. [41]

    H. J. Kimble, Nature 453, 1023 (2008)

    work page 2008

  42. [42]

    Sangouard, C

    N. Sangouard, C. Simon, H. de Riedmatten, and N. Gisin, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 33 (2011)

    work page 2011

  43. [43]

    T. E. Northup and R. Blatt, Nature Photonics 8, 356 (2014)

    work page 2014

  44. [44]

    Wehner, D

    S. Wehner, D. Elkouss, and R. Hanson, Science 362, eaam9288 (2018)

    work page 2018

  45. [45]

    D. D. Awschalom, R. Hanson, J. Wrachtrup, and B. B. Zhou, Nature Photonics 12, 516 (2018)

    work page 2018

  46. [46]

    Reiserer and G

    A. Reiserer and G. Rempe, Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 1379 (2015)

    work page 2015

  47. [47]

    Lodahl, S

    P. Lodahl, S. Mahmoodian, and S. Stobbe, Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 347 (2015)

    work page 2015

  48. [48]

    Jelezko and J

    F. Jelezko and J. Wrachtrup, Phys. Status Solidi A 203, 3207 (2006)

    work page 2006

  49. [49]

    M. W. Doherty, N. B. Manson, P. Delaney, F. Jelezko, J. Wrachtrup, and L. C. L. Hollenberg, Phys. Rep. 528, 1 (2013)

    work page 2013

  50. [50]

    Childress, M

    L. Childress, M. V. Gurudev Dutt, J. M. Taylor, et al. , Science 314, 281 (2006)

    work page 2006

  51. [51]

    Togan, Y

    E. Togan, Y. Chu, A. Trifonov, et al. , Nature 466, 730 (2010)

    work page 2010

  52. [52]

    Bernien, B

    H. Bernien, B. Hensen, W. Pfaff, et al. , Nature 497, 86 (2013)

    work page 2013

  53. [53]

    Hensen, H

    B. Hensen, H. Bernien, A. E. Dr´ eau, et al. , Nature 526, 682 (2015)

    work page 2015

  54. [54]

    P. C. Humphreys, N. Kalb, J. P. J. Morits, et al., Nature 558, 268 (2018)

    work page 2018

  55. [55]

    Pompili, S

    M. Pompili, S. L. Hermans, S. Baier, et al., Science 372, 259 (2021)

    work page 2021

  56. [56]

    E. M. Purcell, Phys. Rev. 69, 681 (1946)

    work page 1946

  57. [57]

    K. J. Vahala, Nature 424, 839 (2003)

    work page 2003

  58. [58]

    Haroche and J.-M

    S. Haroche and J.-M. Raimond, Exploring the Quantum: Atoms, Cavities, and Photons (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006)

    work page 2006

  59. [59]

    Aspelmeyer, T

    M. Aspelmeyer, T. J. Kippenberg, and F. Marquardt, Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 1391 (2014)

    work page 2014

  60. [60]

    Arcari, I

    M. Arcari, I. S¨ ollner, A. Javadi, et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 093603 (2014)

    work page 2014

  61. [61]

    Sipahigil, R

    A. Sipahigil, R. E. Evans, D. D. Sukachev, et al., Science 354, 847 (2016)

    work page 2016

  62. [62]

    M. K. Bhaskar, R. Riedinger, B. Machielse, et al., Nature 580, 60 (2020)

    work page 2020

  63. [63]

    Bockrath, D

    M. Bockrath, D. H. Cobden, J. Lu, et al. , Nature 397, 598 (1999)

    work page 1999

  64. [64]

    Ishii, H

    H. Ishii, H. Kataura, H. Shiozawa, et al., Nature 426, 540 (2003)

    work page 2003

  65. [65]

    V. V. Deshpande, M. Bockrath, L. I. Glazman, and A. Yacoby, Nature 464, 209 (2010)

    work page 2010

  66. [66]

    F. J. Rodr ´ ıguez-Fortu˜ no, G. Marino, P. Ginzburg, D. O’Connor, A. Mart ´ ınez, G. A. Wurtz, and A. V. Zayats, Science 340, 328 (2013)

    work page 2013

  67. [67]

    Aiello, P

    A. Aiello, P. Banzer, M. Neugebauer, and G. Leuchs, Na- ture Photonics 9, 789 (2015)

    work page 2015

  68. [68]

    M. S. Tame, K. R. McEnery, c. K. ¨Ozdemir, J. Lee, S. A. Maier, and M. S. Kim, Nature Physics 9, 329 (2013)

    work page 2013

  69. [69]

    Fleischhauer, A

    M. Fleischhauer, A. Imamoglu, and J. P. Marangos, Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 633 (2005)

    work page 2005

  70. [70]

    D. F. Walls and G. J. Milburn, Quantum Optics (Springer, Berlin, 2008)

    work page 2008

  71. [71]

    I. V. Bondarev and P. Lambin, Phys. Rev. B 70, 035407 (2004)

    work page 2004

  72. [72]

    I. V. Bondarev, Phys. Rev. B 82, 245441 (2010)

    work page 2010

  73. [73]

    D. E. Chang, A. S. Sørensen, E. A. Demler, and M. D. Lukin, Nature Physics 3, 807 (2007)

    work page 2007

  74. [74]

    A. V. Akimov, A. Mukherjee, C. L. Yu, et al. , Nature 450, 402 (2007)

    work page 2007

  75. [75]

    H. A. Haus, Waves and Fields in Optoelectronics (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1984)

    work page 1984

  76. [76]

    J. D. Joannopoulos, S. G. Johnson, J. N. Winn, and R. D. Meade, Photonic Crystals: Molding the Flow of Light , 2nd ed. (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2008)

    work page 2008

  77. [77]

    Novotny and B

    L. Novotny and B. Hecht, Principles of Nano-Optics , 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012)

    work page 2012

  78. [78]

    Yariv, Electronics Letters 36, 321 (2000)

    A. Yariv, Electronics Letters 36, 321 (2000)

    work page 2000

  79. [79]

    C. W. Gardiner and M. J. Collett, Physical Review A 31, 3761 (1985)

    work page 1985

  80. [80]

    J. C. Knight, G. Cheung, F. Jacques, and T. A. Birks, Optics Letters 22, 1129 (1997)

    work page 1997

Showing first 80 references.