Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 8 minor 32 references

Position measurement of a levitated particle with vectorial light

T0 review · 2 major / 8 minor · reviewed 2026-07-30 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read A single geometric factor fixed by the focused trapping field sets both backaction and imprecision for levitated particles, and radial polarization cuts axial recoil heating.

desk verdict Solid vectorial methods paper that makes high-NA and structured-beam traps quantitatively usable for near-Heisenberg design; the ~2.7× radial-beam claim is a clean ideal-case result, not a lab number. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.23833 v1 pith:ZJ5GUPUJ submitted 2026-07-26 physics.optics quant-ph

Daniel Tandeitnik , Lucas Bianchi , Sebastian Gutierrez-Bernal , Joanna A. Zielińska , Paulo A. Maia Neto , Thiago Guerreiro This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.opticsquant-ph
keywords levitatedoptomechanicsvectoriallightangularspectrumrepresentationmeasurementbackactioninformationradiationpatternradialpolarizationdetectionefficiencyHeisenberglimit
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

Levitated optomechanics needs to know how much of a particle’s position information is actually captured, and how much random momentum kick that measurement costs. This paper replaces the usual plane-wave picture with a fully vectorial scattering theory that works for high-NA tweezers and arbitrary beam shapes. It shows that one number—the generalized geometric factor built from a coherent scattering vector—fixes both the backaction noise and the imprecision noise while still saturating the Heisenberg bound. The same framework defines an information radiation pattern and a realistic mode-matched detection efficiency for forward and backward collection. Applied to a radially polarized trap, it confirms that axial recoil heating drops by roughly a factor of 2.7 relative to a standard linearly polarized Gaussian tweezer, giving experimenters a concrete design handle and an open-source toolbox.

What carries the argument

The coherent scattering vector V_q(k_f) = W_q − k_f,q E_local (and its transverse part), whose solid-angle integral defines the generalized geometric factor C_q that carries all spatial and polarization structure into both noise spectra and the information radiation pattern.

What would settle it

Measure axial recoil heating (or the full C_z) for a ~156 nm silica particle in a high-NA radially polarized trap at f_0 ≈ 1 and compare the reduction factor against a linearly polarized Gaussian tweezer under matched power and NA; a null result near the plane-wave prediction would falsify the claimed geometric suppression.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For an optically levitated Rayleigh dipole in an arbitrary non-paraxial trapping field, a single generalized geometric factor C_q—obtained by integrating the squared transverse coherent scattering vector over final solid angle—fully determines both the backaction force spectral density and the measurement imprecision, exactly saturating S_I,q S_bk,q = ħ²/4. The same construction yields the angular information radiation pattern and, via Richards–Wolf projection onto a local-oscillator mode, experimentally realistic forward- and backward-detection efficiencies. For a radially polarized trap the axial decoherence rate is substantially lower than for a conventional linearly polarized Gaussian tw

Load-bearing premise

The particle is treated as a tiny isotropic point dipole much smaller than the light wavelength, so higher multipoles and any tensor polarizability are ignored.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Experimenters can compute realistic forward/backward detection efficiencies including mode mismatch, not just geometric collection NA.
  • Structuring the trap polarization (e.g., radial) can route positional information and suppress axial backaction without changing particle size.
  • The Heisenberg product remains saturated for any vector beam once C_q is evaluated, so efficiency losses are purely hardware and collection effects.
  • An open-source package lets groups optimize filling factor, NA, and beam type before building near-Heisenberg-limited setups.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same ASR + IRP machinery could rank other structured beams (azimuthal, higher-order vortex) for axis-selective sensing without new theory.
  • If multipolar corrections become important at larger particle size, the gap between this dipole C_q and full Mie treatments would quantify when radial-polarization gains survive.
  • Backward-detection gains from high-NA depolarization recovery suggest redesigning LO spatial modes rather than only increasing collection NA.
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

2 major / 8 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a semiclassical, fully vectorial scattering theory for position measurement of an optically levitated Rayleigh particle, formulated in the angular spectrum representation (ASR) so that arbitrary non-paraxial, structured trapping fields and high-NA focusing are treated exactly. The central object is the coherent scattering vector V_q(k_f) (Eq. 7), whose transverse intensity integrated over final solid angle defines a generalized geometric factor C_q (Eq. 11) that fixes both the backaction PSD S_bk,q = C_q ħ²k²Γ_S (Eq. 13) and the imprecision S_I,q = (4C_q k²Γ_S)^{-1} (Eq. 15), with the Heisenberg product saturated by construction. The authors introduce the information radiation pattern (Eq. 23), compute realistic forward/backward detection efficiencies via a Richards–Wolf projection onto the local oscillator with split-detector masks (Eqs. 24–26), benchmark against the plane-wave approximation (PWA), and apply the framework to a radially polarized trap, finding an axial decoherence rate reduced by a factor ~2.7 relative to a Gaussian tweezer at f_0=1, NA=0.75. The formalism is released as the open-source LevitationToolbox.

Significance. If correct, this is a useful and timely generalization of the Tebbenjohanns–Frimmer–Novotny point-dipole/PWA theory (Ref. [13]) to arbitrary vector beams and high-NA traps, complementary to the Mie-regime QED treatment of Maurer et al. (Ref. [20]). The paper ships several concrete strengths: (i) the PWA geometric factors C = [0.2, 0.4, A²+0.4] are recovered analytically as a limiting case of Eq. (11); (ii) the ASR detection efficiencies demonstrably converge to the PWA bounds in the overfilled limit f_0→10 (Fig. 6c,d), a non-trivial consistency check; (iii) the Heisenberg saturation S_I S_bk = ħ²/4 follows exactly and mode-independently; (iv) physically transparent IRPs visualize focal-depolarization effects absent from scalar theory; and (v) all numerics are reproducible via the released open-source toolbox. The radial-beam worked example provides the first point-dipole-regime quantification of the axial-backaction suppression predicted in the Mie simulations of Ref. [22], and is directly relevant to experiments seeking near-Heisenberg-limited readout.

major comments (2)
  1. [§III.B, Fig. 3(f)] The headline quantitative result — the ~2.7-fold reduction of Γ_bk,z for the radially polarized trap — rests on a mechanism (§III.B) that is maximally sensitive to the idealizations stated at the opening of §II.A: the suppression requires E_local to be purely longitudinal at the equilibrium point and the particle to be an exactly z-aligned scalar dipole, so that the emission maximum coincides with the node of axial momentum transfer. Three perturbations directly attack this alignment rather than merely rescaling it: (i) tensor polarizability from the percent-level ellipticity of real SiO2 nanospheres, which tilts the induced dipole off z and, because C_z is quadratic in the transverse momentum components, could degrade the suppression faster than linearly in the anisotropy; (ii) thermal sampling of off-axis positions, where the radial beam's transverse field components are nonzero — part
  2. [§II.B vs. Eqs. (19)–(21)] There is an internal tension between the physical narrative and the equations used. The text states that the nanoparticle extracts momentum 'via elastic scattering' mediated by 'an effective imaginary radiation-reaction polarizability', which 'dictat[es] both the mean radiation pressure and the random momentum fluctuations responsible for measurement backaction'. Yet the polarizability actually used in all observables is the bare real Clausius–Mossotti form of Eq. (19), and Eq. (21) takes σ_ext to be the pure Rayleigh scattering cross-section, discarding the extinction/absorptive (radiation-reaction) part. Please state explicitly whether the radiative correction, α^{-1} = α_CM^{-1} − i k³/(6πε₀), is included in the numerics underlying Figs. 3–6; at ka ≈ 0.32 the correction to α and σ_ext is at the few-percent level and propagates directly into Γ_S (Eq. 20) and hence into the quoted decoh
minor comments (8)
  1. [§III.A, Eq. (14)] Eq. (14): the identification of the far-field phase variance with the same angular integral as the momentum variance is asserted ('assumes a mathematical form that is exactly analogous') rather than shown. Since the exact Heisenberg saturation — and its non-circularity — hinges on Eqs. (12) and (14) being the same integral of |V⊥_q|², a one-line derivation from the displacement-induced phase of the scattered field, e.g. via E_sc ∝ e^{ik_f·r} ∫ dΩ_i E_inc(k_i) e^{-ik_i·r}, would close the logical loop.
  2. [§IV.A–B] The benchmarking would be strengthened by a quantitative cross-check of the IRPs and C_q against the dipole limit of the Lorenz–Mie theory of Ref. [20] (e.g., for the Gaussian illumination used there), rather than against the analytical PWA alone. As it stands, Fig. 6's agreement in the f_0→10 limit is the only external validation of the full vectorial machinery.
  3. [§V, Conclusions] The statement that 'scalar approximations systematically overestimate achievable measurement efficiencies' is contradicted by the paper's own §IV.B and Fig. 6(d), where the ASR backward-detection efficiency η_x exceeds the PWA bound because the objective coherently recovers z-dipole radiation into the transverse LO mode. Please reword (e.g., 'systematically mispredict', with the sign depending on geometry).
  4. [§III.B, Eq. (20)] Eq. (20): the definition Γ_S = σ_ext|E(r_eq)|²/(ℏkc) uses |E|² as if it were an intensity. Please state the convention — whether |E|² includes the ε₀c/2 (and any medium-index) factor — since a factor-of-two ambiguity here propagates into all quoted Γ_bk values in Fig. 3.
  5. [§IV.B, Eq. (26)] Eq. (26): for backward detection the LO is taken identical to the trapping field, so the LO power in the denominator equals the (large) trapping power. Please clarify how this normalization relates to the detection-efficiency conventions of Ref. [13] so that the curves in Fig. 6 can be compared quantitatively with prior work.
  6. [Fig. 6] The multiplicative rescalings (×100 for η_z in forward panels, ×10⁻² in panel (c)) are only partially explained; panel (c)'s efficiency scale in particular is hard to read. Please state all scale factors explicitly in the caption and consider consistent axis ranges.
  7. [Figs. 4 and 5] The polar cross-sections (d–f) in both figures lack a defined color/radial scale, and the PWA inset appears only in Fig. 4(a); adding the corresponding PWA insets (or stating normalized units) would make the depolarization narrowing claimed in the text directly verifiable from the figure.
  8. [§II.A, §II.D, Eq. (10)] Typos/typesetting: 'radiusa of the scatterer' (§II.A, missing space); 'Toobtainapurelygeometricanddimensionlessmeasure' (§II.D, missing spaces); trailing comma after Eq. (10).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: C_q, IRP, and detection efficiencies are derived from the ASR coherent-scattering construction; Heisenberg saturation is the expected dual of one integral, not a fitted or self-cited prediction.

full rationale

The load-bearing objects are defined from first principles within the paper. The coherent scattering vector V_q (Eq. 7) is built from the angular-spectrum incident field and the dipole momentum transfer; the generalized geometric factor C_q (Eq. 11) is the normalized solid-angle integral of |V⊥_q|²; backaction and imprecision (Eqs. 13, 15) are then both written in terms of that same C_q, so S_I S_bk = ħ²/4 follows immediately. That product is a consistency check of the information–backaction duality (standard since the PWA treatments they recover), not a claim that an independent quantity was predicted. The information radiation pattern (Eq. 23) and the Richards–Wolf mode-matched detection efficiency (Eqs. 24–26) are likewise projections of the same V, not fits to data. The radial-beam axial-suppression example is a numerical evaluation of C_z under ASR focusing that confirms an external prior prediction (Almeida & Barker, Ref. [22], non-overlapping authors); it is not imported as an axiom. Self-citations ([14] heterodyne detection, [32] the companion toolbox) are peripheral and not used to justify uniqueness or to force the central formulae. No parameters are fitted and then re-presented as predictions. The derivation chain is self-contained against the stated Rayleigh/scalar-polarizability assumptions.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard semiclassical electrodynamics and the Rayleigh dipole model, plus aplanatic high-NA focusing. No parameters are fitted to measurement data; NA, f_0, power, and particle size are experimental inputs. Invented objects are definitional constructs (V_q, C_q, IRP), not new physical entities. Load-bearing domain assumptions are the point-dipole limit, coherent-state Poissonian scattering, and neglect of laser-induced damping and absorption.

assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption Particle radius a ≪ λ (Rayleigh regime); response is a point electric dipole with scalar polarizability α from Clausius–Mossotti.
    Stated in §II.A; suppresses multipoles and tensor polarizability. Underpins V_q and all numerics (156 nm at 1550 nm).
  • domain assumption Trapping field is a coherent state; photon scattering is Poissonian (Var N = ⟨N⟩), yielding Var(P_tot)=⟨N⟩⟨p²⟩.
    §II.A–B; used to drop mean-momentum terms and obtain white backaction S_bk = σ²_bk.
  • domain assumption Focusing by an aplanatic lens obeying the sine condition; ASR map E_par → E_inc with √cos θ energy factor and identical index on both sides.
    §II.C, Eq. (9); standard Richards–Wolf/Novotny–Hecht focusing model.
  • domain assumption Laser-induced damping γ_bk = 2P/(m c²) is negligible versus gas damping or feedback.
    §II.A; simplifies Langevin dynamics. Reasonable at medium vacuum / with feedback but not universal.
  • standard math Far-field transversality: project V_q onto plane ⊥ k_f before integrating |V_⊥_q|².
    §II.B, Eq. (8); enforces EM radiation constraint and recovers dipole pattern 1−|p̂·k̂_f|².
  • standard math Dipole radiation solid-angle normalization ∫ = 8π/3 used to define dimensionless C_q.
    §II.D, Eq. (11); classical ED identity (Jackson).
  • domain assumption Non-absorptive dielectric: Γ_S from Rayleigh extinction σ_ext ≈ (8π/3) α²/(ε₀² λ⁴) at equilibrium.
    §III.B, Eqs. (20)–(21); sets absolute scale of Γ_bk and rates in Fig. 3.
  • ad hoc to paper For backward detection efficiency examples, LO is identical to the trapping field in space and polarization.
    §IV.B; convenient benchmark. Formalism allows arbitrary LO, but quoted η_det curves use this choice.
invented entities (3)
  • Coherent scattering vector V_q (and transverse V_⊥_q)
    purpose: Encode interference of incident momentum distribution with dipole emission for arbitrary ASR fields; building block of C_q and IRP.
    Defined in §II.B Eqs. (7)–(8). Definitional construct, not a new physical particle or force.
  • Generalized geometric factor C_q
    purpose: Single dimensionless factor fixing S_bk,q, S_I,q, and Γ_bk,q for any trap mode while preserving Heisenberg limit.
    §II.D Eq. (11). Generalizes PWA C-vector; definitional.
  • Information radiation pattern (IRP) dη_info,q
    purpose: Angular density of position information; identifies which solid angles carry measurable phase about axis q.
    §IV.A Eq. (23). Extends usage in Tebbenjohanns/Maurer to full vector ASR; definitional diagnostic.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Position measurement of a levitated particle with vectorial light." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZJ5GUPUJ

@misc{pith2026260723833,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Position measurement of a levitated particle with vectorial light},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZJ5GUPUJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.23833}
}
read the original abstract

We develop a fully vectorial, semiclassical scattering formalism for optically levitated dipolar scatterers, expressed within the angular spectrum representation and applicable to arbitrary trapping-field configurations as well as to high--numerical-aperture focusing. Within this framework, we introduce the information radiation pattern to characterize the angular distribution of position-dependent information and use a Richards--Wolf projection of the scattered field onto the local-oscillator mode to quantify the resulting mode-matching efficiency, yielding experimentally realistic forward- and backward-detection efficiencies. As a worked example, we apply the formalism to a radially polarized trapping beam and confirm that the axial recoil heating rate is reduced relative to a conventional linearly polarized Gaussian tweezer. The theoretical framework is implemented in LevitationToolbox, an open-source Python package intended to support the design and optimization of near-Heisenberg-limited levitated optomechanical experiments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.23833 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic representation of coherent photon scatter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Geometrical representation of the coordinate transfor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Comparison of optomechanical trapping parameters for a linearly polarized fundamental Gaussian beam (top row, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Spatial distribution of the position information radiated by a dipolar scatterer trapped in a strongly focused fundamental [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Spatial distribution of the position information radiated by a dipolar scatterer trapped in a strongly focused radial beam. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Comparison of detection efficiencies [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [13]

    Tebbenjohanns, M

    F. Tebbenjohanns, M. Frimmer, and L. Novotny, Optimal position detection of a dipolar scatterer in a focused field, Physical Review A100, 043821 (2019)

    2019

  2. [20]

    Maurer, C

    P. Maurer, C. Gonzalez-Ballestero, and O. Romero-Isart, Quantum theory of light interaction with a lorenz-mie particle: Optical detection and three-dimensional ground- state cooling, Physical Review A108, 033714 (2023)

    2023

  3. [22]

    Almeida and P

    F. Almeida and P. Barker, Levitated optomechanics with cylindrically polarized vortex beams, arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.05384 (2025)

    arXiv 2025

  4. [1]

    Gonzalez-Ballestero, M

    C. Gonzalez-Ballestero, M. Aspelmeyer, L. Novotny, R. Quidant, and O. Romero-Isart, Levitodynamics: Lev- itation and control of microscopic objects in vacuum, Science374, eabg3027 (2021)

    2021

  5. [2]

    Millen, T

    J. Millen, T. S. Monteiro, R. Pettit, and A. N. Vami- vakas, Optomechanics with levitated particles, Reports on Progress in Physics83, 026401 (2020)

    2020

  6. [3]

    Delić, M

    U. Delić, M. Reisenbauer, K. Dare, D. Grass, V. Vuletić, N. Kiesel, and M. Aspelmeyer, Cooling of a levitated nanoparticle to the motional quantum ground state, Sci- ence367, 892 (2020)

    2020

  7. [4]

    Piotrowski, D

    J. Piotrowski, D. Windey, J. Vijayan, C. Gonzalez- Ballestero, A. de los Ríos Sommer, N. Meyer, R. Quidant, O. Romero-Isart, R. Reimann, and L. Novotny, Simulta- neous ground-state cooling of two mechanical modes of a levitated nanoparticle, Nature Physics19, 1009 (2023)

    2023

  8. [5]

    Dania, O

    L. Dania, O. S. Kremer, J. Piotrowski, D. Candoli, J. Vijayan, O. Romero-Isart, C. Gonzalez-Ballestero, L. Novotny, and M. Frimmer, High-purity quantum op- tomechanics at room temperature, Nature Physics21, 1603 (2025)

    2025

Show all 32 references
  1. [6]

    Magrini, P

    L. Magrini, P. Rosenzweig, C. Bach, A. Deutschmann- Olek, S. G. Hofer, S. Hong, N. Kiesel, A. Kugi, and M. Aspelmeyer, Real-time optimal quantum control of mechanical motion at room temperature, Nature595, 373 (2021)

    2021

  2. [7]

    Tebbenjohanns, M

    F. Tebbenjohanns, M. L. Mattana, M. Rossi, M. Frim- mer, and L. Novotny, Quantum control of a nanoparticle optically levitated in cryogenic free space, Nature595, 378 (2021)

    2021

  3. [8]

    Neumeier, M

    L. Neumeier, M. A. Ciampini, O. Romero-Isart, M. As- pelmeyer, and N. Kiesel, Fast quantum interference of a nanoparticle via optical potential control, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences121, e2306953121 (2024)

    2024

  4. [9]

    Ranjit, M

    G. Ranjit, M. Cunningham, K. Casey, and A. A. Geraci, Zeptonewton force sensing with nanospheres in an optical lattice, Physical Review A93, 053801 (2016)

    2016

  5. [10]

    Tseng, T

    Y.-H. Tseng, T. Penny, B. Siegel, J. Wang, and D. C. Moore, Search for dark matter scattering from optically levitated nanoparticles, PRX Quantum6, 040367 (2025)

    2025

  6. [11]

    D. C. Moore and A. A. Geraci, Searching for new physics using optically levitated sensors, Quantum Science & Technology6, 014008 (2021)

    2021

  7. [12]

    G. Afek, D. Carney, and D. C. Moore, Coherent scattering of low mass dark matter from optically trapped sensors, Physical review letters128, 101301 (2022)

    2022

  8. [14]

    Tandeitnik, G

    D. Tandeitnik, G. Dias, and T. Guerreiro, Heterodyne position detection of an optomechanical system, arXiv preprint arXiv:2607.09912 (2026)

    2026 arXiv

  9. [15]

    V. Jain, J. Gieseler, C. Moritz, C. Dellago, R. Quidant, and L. Novotny, Direct measurement of photon recoil from a levitated nanoparticle, Physical review letters116, 243601 (2016)

    2016

  10. [16]

    Seberson and F

    T. Seberson and F. Robicheaux, Distribution of laser shot-noise energy delivered to a levitated nanoparticle, Physical Review A102, 033505 (2020)

    2020

  11. [17]

    Richards and E

    B. Richards and E. Wolf, Electromagnetic diffraction in optical systems, ii. structure of the image field in an aplanatic system, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 253, 358 (1959)

    1959

  12. [18]

    Wolf, Electromagnetic diffraction in optical systems-i

    E. Wolf, Electromagnetic diffraction in optical systems-i. an integral representation of the image field, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences253, 349 (1959). 12

    1959

  13. [19]

    Novotny and B

    L. Novotny and B. Hecht,Principles of nano-optics(Cam- bridge university press, 2012)

    2012

  14. [21]

    Kamba, N

    M. Kamba, N. Hara, and K. Aikawa, Quantum squeezing of a levitated nanomechanical oscillator, Science389, 1225 (2025)

    2025

  15. [23]

    Karrai, I

    K. Karrai, I. Favero, and C. Metzger, Doppler optome- chanics of a photonic crystal, Physical review letters100, 240801 (2008)

    2008

  16. [24]

    C. C. Gerry and P. L. Knight,Introductory quantum optics (Cambridge university press, 2023)

    2023

  17. [25]

    A. A. Clerk, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, F. Marquardt, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Introduction to quantum noise, mea- surement, and amplification, Reviews of Modern Physics 82, 1155 (2010)

    2010

  18. [26]

    Papoulis and J

    A. Papoulis and J. G. Hoffman, Probability, random variables, and stochastic processes (1967)

    1967

  19. [27]

    P.H.Jones, O.M.Maragò,andG.Volpe,Optical tweezers: Principles and applications(Cambridge University Press, 2015)

    2015

  20. [28]

    D. J. Griffiths,Introduction to electrodynamics(Cam- bridge University Press, 2023)

    2023

  21. [29]

    J. D. Jackson,Classical electrodynamics(John Wiley & Sons, 2012)

    2012

  22. [30]

    Callegari, M

    A. Callegari, M. Mijalkov, A. B. Gököz, and G. Volpe, Computational toolbox for optical tweezers in geometrical optics, Journal of the Optical Society of America B32, B11 (2015)

    2015

  23. [31]

    This scaling can therefore be used to rescale the results to any other specified power

    The quantities shown scale proportionally to the square root of the incident power. This scaling can therefore be used to rescale the results to any other specified power

  24. [32]

    D. R. Tandeitnik, LevitationToolbox: A python tool- box for evaluating non-paraxial optical levitation and measurement backaction, https://github.com/ QuantumAdventures/LevitationToolbox(2026)

    2026

Pith tools

Reviewed July 30, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.