pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.26600 · v1 · pith:GULHG3BUnew · submitted 2026-06-25 · ⚛️ nucl-th

The ²²⁹Th Isomer: Nuclear Structure, Clocks, and Tests of Fundamental Physics

Xiao Lu , Rui Zhao , Shan-Gui Zhou This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 02:14 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ nucl-th
keywords 229Th isomernuclear clockoctupole correlationsNilsson configurationsfundamental constantsCoriolis mixingnuclear structuredark matter
0
0 comments X

The pith

The 8 eV isomer in 229Th arises from near-degenerate 5/2+[633] and 3/2+[631] neutron Nilsson states mixed by Coriolis and octupole effects.

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

This review connects three perspectives on the 229Th isomer, whose excitation energy sits at roughly 8 eV. Experimentally, it follows progress from indirect gamma-ray estimates to resonant laser driving, absolute frequency measurements against atomic clocks, and closed-loop solid-state clock operation. Theoretically, the low energy is traced to the near-degeneracy of two specific neutron configurations whose mixing is shaped by Coriolis forces and octupole shape correlations. The same near-cancellation of large nuclear energy scales into an eV-scale gap produces heightened sensitivity to changes in fundamental constants and to possible new interactions. A reader cares because the work ties nuclear structure calculations directly to concrete metrology platforms and to tests that would otherwise require much higher energies.

Core claim

The central claim is that the near-degeneracy of the 5/2+[633] and 3/2+[631] neutron Nilsson configurations, together with Coriolis mixing and octupole correlations, underlies the anomalously low transition energy and its electromagnetic properties. Comparisons among phenomenological and microscopic models identify octupole correlations as the common structural ingredient, while magnetic moments and transition strengths remain sensitive tests of the calculated wave functions.

What carries the argument

The near-degeneracy of the 5/2+[633] and 3/2+[631] neutron Nilsson configurations together with Coriolis mixing and octupole correlations.

If this is right

  • The transition frequency lies in the vacuum-ultraviolet and is directly accessible to laser spectroscopy.
  • Trapped-ion, highly charged ion, and solid-state platforms can support feedback-loop nuclear-clock operation with nuclear-state manipulation and readout.
  • The MeV-scale nuclear contributions that nearly cancel to yield an eV-scale gap increase sensitivity to variations of fundamental constants.
  • Signatures of ultralight dark matter, CP-violating interactions, and Lorentz-invariance violation become detectable through the same cancellation.
  • Nuclear quantum technologies become feasible through the identified mechanisms for state control.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the Nilsson-orbital picture holds, other nuclei exhibiting similar near-degeneracies could host comparably low-energy isomers worth targeted searches.
  • The cancellation mechanism might allow the isomer to register effects from new physics at energy scales inaccessible to ordinary atomic clocks.
  • A working solid-state nuclear clock could provide a compact, portable reference independent of electronic transitions.
  • Refined calculations of the same configurations could predict measurable properties in neighboring isotopes for immediate experimental checks.

Load-bearing premise

That comparisons among phenomenological and microscopic models can reliably single out octupole correlations as the decisive ingredient even though magnetic moments and transition strengths stay sensitive to wave-function details.

What would settle it

A measured magnetic moment or transition strength that lies outside the range of all models that include octupole correlations would falsify the proposed structural origin of the low energy.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.26600 by Rui Zhao, Shan-Gui Zhou, Xiao Lu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: population through radioactive decay or nuclear [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Schematic of representative pathways for populating the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Historical evolution of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Nilsson single neutron energy levels for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Low-energy level scheme of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Potential energy surface of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Comparison of theoretical predictions (blue circles with error bars) and experimental values (green vertical lines with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The $^{229}$Th nucleus possesses an isomeric state at an excitation energy of $\sim 8$ eV, the lowest known nuclear transition energy, placing its frequency in the vacuum-ultraviolet range and making it directly accessible to laser spectroscopy. In this review, we discuss the $^{229}$Th isomer from three connected perspectives: experimental spectroscopy and clock development, nuclear structure theory, and applications to precision tests of fundamental physics. We first trace the experimental progress from indirect $\gamma$-ray energy inference to resonant laser excitation, absolute frequency comparison with an atomic clock, and feedback-loop operation of a solid-state nuclear clock, and discuss trapped-ion, highly charged ion, and solid-state platforms together with mechanisms for nuclear-state manipulation and readout. We then review, from the nuclear-structure perspective, how the near-degeneracy of the $5/2^+[633]$ and $3/2^+[631]$ neutron Nilsson configurations, together with Coriolis mixing and octupole correlations, underlies the anomalously low transition energy and its electromagnetic properties. Comparisons among different phenomenological and microscopic models show that octupole correlations are a common structural ingredient, while magnetic moments and transition strengths remain sensitive tests of the calculated wave functions. Finally, we discuss how the near-cancellation of MeV-scale nuclear contributions into an eV-scale transition can enhance sensitivity to variations of fundamental constants, signatures of ultralight dark matter, CP-violating interactions, Lorentz-invariance violation, and possible nuclear quantum technologies.

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

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. This review article on the 229Th isomer summarizes experimental progress from indirect gamma-ray measurements to resonant laser excitation, absolute frequency metrology, and solid-state nuclear clock operation across trapped-ion, highly charged ion, and solid-state platforms. It presents the nuclear-structure consensus that the ~8 eV transition arises from the near-degeneracy of the 5/2+[633] and 3/2+[631] Nilsson neutron orbitals together with Coriolis mixing and octupole correlations, noting that model comparisons identify octupole effects as common while magnetic moments and transition strengths remain sensitive to wave-function details. The review closes with applications to tests of fundamental-constant variations, ultralight dark matter, CP violation, Lorentz invariance, and nuclear quantum technologies.

Significance. As a synthesis of existing literature rather than a source of new derivations or data, the manuscript provides a coherent, balanced overview of an active interdisciplinary field. The explicit acknowledgment in the abstract that observables beyond the transition energy remain model-sensitive strengthens its utility as a reference. No new parameter-free predictions or machine-checked results are introduced, but the review correctly frames the structural picture as the current consensus while highlighting open experimental and theoretical challenges.

minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that 'comparisons among different phenomenological and microscopic models show that octupole correlations are a common structural ingredient' would benefit from a parenthetical list of the specific models referenced (e.g., in the nuclear-structure section) to allow readers to trace the claim without consulting the full reference list.
  2. [nuclear structure section] The review correctly notes remaining sensitivity of magnetic moments and transition strengths, but a short table or bullet list in the nuclear-structure section comparing predicted versus measured values across the cited models would improve clarity for non-specialist readers.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive assessment of the manuscript, accurate summary of its scope, and recommendation to accept. The review is intended as a synthesis of the field rather than a source of new data or derivations, and we are pleased that this framing is recognized.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: review article summarizing external literature

full rationale

This is a review paper that traces experimental progress and summarizes nuclear-structure results from the existing literature without performing or presenting any new primary calculations, fits, or derivations. The central claim about near-degeneracy of Nilsson orbitals plus Coriolis mixing and octupole correlations is explicitly presented as the consensus picture drawn from multiple phenomenological and microscopic models in prior work. No equations, parameters, or predictions are introduced that reduce by construction to the paper's own inputs, and no self-citation chain is used to justify a uniqueness theorem or ansatz. The manuscript is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks and receives the default non-circularity finding.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is a review paper; it does not introduce new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities but discusses existing ones from the literature on 229Th.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5808 in / 1080 out tokens · 18525 ms · 2026-06-26T02:14:43.353163+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

157 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    G. D. Dracoulis, P. M. Walker, and F. G. Kondev, Rep. Prog. Phys.79, 076301 (2016)

    2016

  2. [2]

    Walker and Z

    P. Walker and Z. Podoly´ ak, Phys. Scr.95, 044004 (2020)

    2020

  3. [3]

    G. W. Misch, T. M. Sprouse, M. R. Mumpower, A. J. Couture, C. L. Fryer, B. S. Meyer, and Y. Sun, Symme- try13, 1831 (2021)

    2021

  4. [4]

    F. G. Kondev, M. Wang, W. J. Huang, S. Naimi, and G. Audi, Chin. Phys. C45, 030001 (2021)

    2021

  5. [5]

    S. Garg, B. Maheshwari, B. Singh, Y. Sun, A. Goel, and A. K. Jain, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables150, 101546 (2023)

    2023

  6. [6]

    Aprahamian and Y

    A. Aprahamian and Y. Sun, Nature Phys.1, 81 (2005)

    2005

  7. [7]

    Seiferle, L

    B. Seiferle, L. von der Wense, P. V. Bilous, I. Amers- dorffer, C. Lemell, F. Libisch, S. Stellmer, T. Schumm, C. E. D¨ ullmann, A. P´ alffy, and P. G. Thirolf, Nature 573, 243 (2019)

    2019

  8. [8]

    U. C. Perera, H. W. T. Morgan, E. R. Hudson, and A. Derevianko, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 123001 (2025)

    2025

  9. [9]

    E. V. Tkalya, JETP Lett.55, 211 (1992)

    1992

  10. [10]

    Peik and C

    E. Peik and C. Tamm, Europhys. Lett.61, 181 (2003)

    2003

  11. [11]

    Sikorsky, J

    T. Sikorsky, J. Geist, D. Hengstler, S. Kempf, L. Gastaldo, C. Enss, C. Mokry, J. Runke, C. E. D¨ ullmann, P. Wobrauschek, K. Beeks, V. Rosecker, J. H. Sterba, G. Kazakov, T. Schumm, and A. Fleis- chmann, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 142503 (2020)

    2020

  12. [12]

    C. J. Campbell, A. G. Radnaev, A. Kuzmich, V. A. Dzuba, V. V. Flambaum, and A. Derevianko, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 120802 (2012)

    2012

  13. [13]

    E. Peik, T. Schumm, M. S. Safronova, A. P´ alffy, J. Weit- enberg, and P. G. Thirolf, Quantum Sci. Technol.6, 034002 (2021)

    2021

  14. [14]

    L. A. Kroger and C. W. Reich, Nucl. Phys. A259, 29 (1976)

    1976

  15. [15]

    B. R. Beck, J. A. Becker, P. Beiersdorfer, G. V. Brown, K. J. Moody, J. B. Wilhelmy, F. S. Porter, C. A. Kil- bourne, and R. L. Kelley, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 142501 (2007)

    2007

  16. [16]

    Tiedau, M

    J. Tiedau, M. V. Okhapkin, K. Zhang, J. Thielk- ing, G. Zitzer, E. Peik, F. Schaden, T. Pronebner, I. Morawetz, L. T. De Col, F. Schneider, A. Leitner, M. Pressler, G. A. Kazakov, K. Beeks, T. Sikorsky, and T. Schumm, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 182501 (2024)

    2024

  17. [17]

    Elwell, C

    R. Elwell, C. Schneider, J. Jeet, J. E. S. Terhune, H. W. T. Morgan, A. N. Alexandrova, H. B. Tran Tan, A. Derevianko, and E. R. Hudson, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 013201 (2024)

    2024

  18. [18]

    Zhang, L

    C. Zhang, L. von der Wense, J. F. Doyle, J. S. Higgins, T. Ooi, H. U. Friebel, J. Ye, R. Elwell, J. E. S. Ter- hune, H. W. T. Morgan, A. N. Alexandrova, H. B. Tran Tan, A. Derevianko, and E. R. Hudson, Nature636, 603 (2024)

    2024

  19. [19]

    Zhang, T

    C. Zhang, T. Ooi, J. S. Higgins, J. F. Doyle, L. von der Wense, K. Beeks, A. Leitner, G. A. Kazakov, P. Li, P. G. Thirolf, T. Schumm, and J. Ye, Nature633, 63 (2024)

    2024

  20. [20]

    W. G. Rellergert, D. DeMille, R. R. Greco, M. P. Hehlen, J. R. Torgerson, and E. R. Hudson, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 200802 (2010)

    2010

  21. [21]

    von der Wense, B

    L. von der Wense, B. Seiferle, S. Stellmer, J. Weiten- berg, G. Kazakov, A. P´ alffy, and P. G. Thirolf, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 132503 (2017)

    2017

  22. [22]

    G. A. Kazakov, A. N. Litvinov, V. I. Romanenko, L. P. Yatsenko, A. V. Romanenko, M. Schreitl, G. Winkler, and T. Schumm, New J. Phys.14, 083019 (2012)

    2012

  23. [23]

    W. Wang, F. Zou, S. Fritzsche, and Y. Li, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 223001 (2024)

    2024

  24. [24]

    Hiraki, K

    T. Hiraki, K. Okai, M. Bartokos, K. Beeks, H. Fuji- moto, Y. Fukunaga, H. Haba, Y. Kasamatsu, S. Ki- tao, A. Leitner, T. Masuda, M. Guan, N. Nagasawa, R. Ogake, M. Pimon, M. Pressler, N. Sasao, F. Schaden, T. Schumm, M. Seto, Y. Shigekawa, K. Shimizu, T. Sikorsky, K. Tamasaku, S. Takatori, T. Watanabe, A. Yamaguchi, Y. Yoda, A. Yoshimi, and K. Yoshimura, ...

    2024

  25. [25]

    Schaden, T

    F. Schaden, T. Riebner, I. Morawetz, L. T. De Col, G. A. Kazakov, K. Beeks, T. Sikorsky, T. Schumm, K. Zhang, V. Lal, G. Zitzer, J. Tiedau, M. V. Okhapkin, and E. Peik, Phys. Rev. Res.7, L022036 (2025)

    2025

  26. [26]

    L. T. De Col, T. Riebner, I. Morawetz, F. Schnei- der, N. Sempelmann, J. Schlachet-L´ epinay, F. Schaden, M. Bartokos, G. A. Kazakov, K. Beeks, B. Gerstenecker, M. Pimon, S. Lahs, A. Hellerschmied, T. Lercher, J. Premper, A. Niessner, M. Matus, H. Denker, 20 M. Cizek, O. Cip, V. Lal, G. Zitzer, V. Petrov, J. Tiedau, M. V. Okhapkin, E. Peik, and T. Schumm,...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  27. [27]

    Huang, G

    B. Huang, G. Yan, Q. Xiao, W. Bu, Z. Zhang, C. Zhao, C. Yan, Z.-A. Chen, P. Zhang, G. Penyazkov, Z. Zhan, L. Yan, Y. Wang, L. Li, S. Li, X. Qian, X. Liu, Q. He, T. Sun, H. Tian, B. Lu, N. Ma, J. Li, Y. Wu, Q. Gong, Y. Li, H. Shi, X. Li, L. Ma, S. Zhu, Y. Mo, J. Lin, L. You, Y. Lin, X. Zhang, Y. Hang, L. Su, and S. Ding, A nuclear clock based on 229th (202...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  28. [28]

    B. R. Mottelson and S. G. Nilsson, Phys. Rev.99, 1615 (1955)

    1955

  29. [29]

    Barci, G

    V. Barci, G. Ardisson, G. Barci-Funel, B. Weiss, O. El Samad, and R. K. Sheline, Phys. Rev. C68, 034329 (2003)

    2003

  30. [30]

    A. M. Dykhne and E. V. Tkalya, J. Exp. Theor. Phys. Lett.67, 251 (1998)

    1998

  31. [31]

    P. A. Butler and W. Nazarewicz, Rev. Mod. Phys.68, 349 (1996)

    1996

  32. [32]

    Minkov and A

    N. Minkov and A. P´ alffy, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 212501 (2017)

    2017

  33. [33]

    Minkov and A

    N. Minkov and A. P´ alffy, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 162502 (2019)

    2019

  34. [34]

    Chen, L.-J

    Z.-R. Chen, L.-J. Wang, and Y. Wu, Phys. Lett. B869, 139858 (2025)

    2025

  35. [35]

    Minkov, A

    N. Minkov, A. P´ alffy, P. Quentin, and L. Bonneau, Phys. Rev. C110, 034327 (2024)

    2024

  36. [36]

    Restrepo-Giraldo, J

    A. Restrepo-Giraldo, J. Dobaczewski, J. Bonnard, and X. Sun, Radiative decay and electromagnetic mo- ments in 229th determined within nuclear DFT (2026), arXiv:2602.02429 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  37. [37]

    E. F. Zhou and J. M. Yao, Microscopic study of low- lying states in odd-mass nuclei for atomic electric dipole moment searches (2025), arXiv:2511.05984 [nucl-th]

    arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Wang and P.-W

    Y.-Y. Wang and P.-W. Zhao, Chin. Phys. B35, 020603 (2026)

    2026

  39. [39]

    V. V. Flambaum, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 092502 (2006)

    2006

  40. [40]

    Fuchs, F

    E. Fuchs, F. Kirk, E. Madge, C. Paranjape, E. Peik, G. Perez, W. Ratzinger, and J. Tiedau, Phys. Rev. X 15, 021055 (2025)

    2025

  41. [41]

    Caputo, D

    A. Caputo, D. Gazit, H. W. Hammer, J. Kopp, G. Paz, G. Perez, and K. Springmann, Phys. Rev. C112, L031302 (2025)

    2025

  42. [42]

    V. V. Flambaum, Phys. Rev. C99, 035501 (2019)

    2019

  43. [43]

    V. V. Flambaum, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 072501 (2016)

    2016

  44. [44]

    V. A. Dzuba and V. V. Flambaum, Phys. Rev. A111, 053109 (2025)

    2025

  45. [45]

    W. Wang, K. Zhang, K.-M. Xu, and S.-G. Zhou, Hyperfine-resolved laser excitation and detection of nuclear isomer in trapped 229th3+ ions (2026), arXiv:2604.27614 [physics.atom-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  46. [46]

    S.-C. Yu, X. Hua, X. Tong, C.-B. Li, and L. She, Chin. Phys. Lett.42, 120302 (2025)

    2025

  47. [47]

    J. Wang, H. Miao, S. Ding, and D. E. Liu, Direct nuclear-level qubits using trapped th-229 ions: A plat- form for entanglement and universal quantum informa- tion processing (2025), arXiv:2508.10626 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  48. [48]

    W.-T. Gan, Z. Li, C. Wang, X. Hua, and X. Tong, Chin. Phys. B35, 023703 (2026)

    2026

  49. [49]

    C.-C. Zhao, L. Li, S.-M. Li, Q.-R. Gong, P.-X. Zhang, Y. Hang, L.-S. Ma, and S.-N. Zhu, Chin. Phys. B35, 020602 (2026)

    2026

  50. [50]

    Yu, C.-B

    S.-C. Yu, C.-B. Li, and L. She, Chin. Phys. B35, 023701 (2026)

    2026

  51. [51]

    D. G. Burke, P. E. Garrett, T. Qu, and R. A. Naumann, Phys. Rev. C42, R499 (1990)

    1990

  52. [52]

    Von Der Wense, B

    L. Von Der Wense, B. Seiferle, M. Laatiaoui, J. B. Neu- mayr, H.-J. Maier, H.-F. Wirth, C. Mokry, J. Runke, K. Eberhardt, C. E. D¨ ullmann, N. G. Trautmann, and P. G. Thirolf, Nature533, 47 (2016)

    2016

  53. [53]

    Yamaguchi, Y

    A. Yamaguchi, Y. Shigekawa, H. Haba, H. Kikunaga, K. Shirasaki, M. Wada, and H. Katori, Nature629, 62 (2024)

    2024

  54. [54]

    Ruchowska, W

    E. Ruchowska, W. A. P l´ ociennik, J. ˙Zylicz, H. Mach, J. Kvasil, A. Algora, N. Amzal, T. B¨ ack, M. J. G. Borge, R. Boutami, P. A. Butler, J. Cederk¨ all, B. Cederwall, B. Fogelberg, L. M. Fraile, H. O. U. Fynbo, E. Hagebø, P. Hoff, H. Gausemel, A. Jungclaus, R. Kaczarowski, A. Kerek, W. Kurcewicz, K. Lagergren, E. Nacher, B. Rubio, A. Syntfeld, O. Teng...

    2006

  55. [55]

    Kraemer, J

    S. Kraemer, J. Moens, M. Athanasakis-Kaklamanakis, S. Bara, K. Beeks, P. Chhetri, K. Chrysalidis, A. Claessens, T. E. Cocolios, J. G. M. Correia, H. Witte, R. Ferrer, S. Geldhof, R. Heinke, N. Hosseini, M. Huyse, U. Koster, Y. Kudryavtsev, M. Laatiaoui, R. Lica, G. Magchiels, V. Manea, C. Merckling, L. M. C. Pereira, S. Raeder, T. Schumm, S. Sels, P. G. T...

    2023

  56. [56]

    Masuda, A

    T. Masuda, A. Yoshimi, A. Fujieda, H. Fujimoto, H. Haba, H. Hara, T. Hiraki, H. Kaino, Y. Kasamatsu, S. Kitao, K. Konashi, Y. Miyamoto, K. Okai, S. Okubo, N. Sasao, M. Seto, T. Schumm, Y. Shigekawa, K. Suzuki, S. Stellmer, K. Tamasaku, S. Uetake, M. Watanabe, T. Watanabe, Y. Yasuda, A. Yam- aguchi, Y. Yoda, T. Yokokita, M. Yoshimura, and K. Yoshimura, Nat...

    2019

  57. [57]

    Wang, Z.-R

    Y. Wang, Z.-R. Xiao, H.-Z. Zhang, L.-Q. Hua, and X.-J. Liu, Chin. Phys. B35, 020601 (2026)

    2026

  58. [58]

    H.-Y. Lan, D. Wu, M.-Z. Wang, Z.-Y. Chen, J.-F. Lv, Y.-H. Xia, Z.-N. Wang, W. Luo, X.-L. Xu, and X.-Q. Yan, Adv. Sci.13, e23384 (2026)

    2026

  59. [59]

    Ahmad, J

    I. Ahmad, J. E. Gindler, R. R. Betts, R. R. Chasman, and A. M. Friedman, Phys. Rev. Lett.49, 1758 (1982)

    1982

  60. [60]

    R. G. Helmer and C. W. Reich, Phys. Rev. C49, 1845 (1994)

    1994

  61. [61]

    G. M. Irwin and K. H. Kim, Phys. Rev. Lett.79, 990 (1997)

    1997

  62. [62]

    R. W. Shaw, J. P. Young, S. P. Cooper, and O. F. Webb, Phys. Rev. Lett.82, 1109 (1999)

    1999

  63. [63]

    X. Zhao, Y. N. Martinez de Escobar, R. Rundberg, E. M. Bond, A. Moody, and D. J. Vieira, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 160801 (2012)

    2012

  64. [64]

    Peik and K

    E. Peik and K. Zimmermann, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 018901 (2013)

    2013

  65. [65]

    Thielking, M

    J. Thielking, M. V. Okhapkin, P. G lowacki, D. M. Meier, L. Von Der Wense, B. Seiferle, C. E. D¨ ullmann, P. G. Thirolf, and E. Peik, Nature556, 321 (2018)

    2018

  66. [66]

    Yamaguchi, H

    A. Yamaguchi, H. Muramatsu, T. Hayashi, N. Yuasa, K. Nakamura, M. Takimoto, H. Haba, K. Konashi, M. Watanabe, H. Kikunaga, K. Maehata, N. Y. Ya- masaki, and K. Mitsuda, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 222501 21 (2019)

    2019

  67. [67]

    Shigekawa, A

    Y. Shigekawa, A. Yamaguchi, K. Tokoi, N. Sato, H. Kikunaga, K. Shirasaki, Y. Kasamatsu, M. Wada, and H. Haba, Nat. Phys. 10.1038/s41567-026-03251-1 (2026)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-026-03251-1 2026

  68. [68]

    C. W. Reich and R. G. Helmer, Phys. Rev. Lett.64, 271 (1990)

    1990

  69. [69]

    H. Ton, S. Roodbergen, J. Brasz, and J. Blok, Nucl. Phys. A155, 245 (1970)

    1970

  70. [70]

    Gerstenkorn, P

    S. Gerstenkorn, P. Luc, J. Verges, D. W. Englekemeir, J. E. Gindler, and F. S. Tomkins, J. Phys. France35, 483 (1974)

    1974

  71. [71]

    C. E. Bemis, F. K. McGowan, J. Ford, J. L. C., W. T. Milner, R. L. Robinson, P. H. Stelson, G. A. Leander, and C. W. Reich, Phys. Scr.38, 657 (1988)

    1988

  72. [72]

    C. J. Campbell, A. G. Radnaev, and A. Kuzmich, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 223001 (2011)

    2011

  73. [73]

    Seiferle, L

    B. Seiferle, L. Von Der Wense, and P. G. Thirolf, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 042501 (2017)

    2017

  74. [74]

    Shigekawa, A

    Y. Shigekawa, A. Yamaguchi, K. Suzuki, H. Haba, T. Hiraki, H. Kikunaga, T. Masuda, S. Nishimura, N. Sasao, A. Yoshimi, and K. Yoshimura, Phys. Rev. C104, 024306 (2021)

    2021

  75. [75]

    J. C. Berengut, V. A. Dzuba, V. V. Flambaum, and S. G. Porsev, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 210801 (2009)

    2009

  76. [76]

    von der Wense and B

    L. von der Wense and B. Seiferle, Eur. Phys. J. A56, 277 (2020)

    2020

  77. [77]

    P. V. Bilous, H. Bekker, J. C. Berengut, B. Seiferle, L. von der Wense, P. G. Thirolf, T. Pfeifer, J. R. C. L´ opez-Urrutia, and A. P´ alffy, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 192502 (2020)

    2020

  78. [78]

    Zitzer, J

    G. Zitzer, J. Tiedau, C. E. D¨ ullmann, M. V. Okhapkin, and E. Peik, Phys. Rev. A111, L050802 (2025)

    2025

  79. [79]

    V. F. Strizhov and E. V. Tkalya, Sov. Phys. JETP72, 387 (1991)

    1991

  80. [80]

    X. Ma, W. Q. Wen, Z. K. Huang, H. B. Wang, Y. J. Yuan, M. Wang, Z. Y. Sun, L. J. Mao, J. C. Yang, H. S. Xu, G. Q. Xiao, and W. L. Zhan, Phys. Scr.T166, 014012 (2015)

    2015

Showing first 80 references.