Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 7 minor 1 cited by

Quantum control of Nitrogen-Vacancy spin in Diamonds: Towards matter-wave interferometry with massive objects

T0 review · 4 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that spin coherence times already demonstrated in nanodiamonds—tens of microseconds with refocusing pulse sequences—are sufficient for a first-generation Stern-Gerlach interferometer that splits and recombines a levitated

desk verdict A useful experimental progress note undercut by an unshown simulation that carries the abstract's central feasibility claim. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.15504 v1 pith:4YXBIHQP submitted 2025-08-21 quant-ph gr-qcphysics.atom-ph

N. Levi , O. Feldman , Y. Rosenzweig , D. Groswasser , A. Elgarat , M. Gal-Katizri , R. Folman This is my paper
classification quant-phgr-qcphysics.atom-ph
keywords nitrogen-vacancycenternanodiamondStern-Gerlachinterferometrymatter-wavespincoherencetimelevitatedoptomechanicsquantumgravitytestsspatialsuperposition
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

This paper argues that the spin coherence times already demonstrated in nanodiamonds, tens of microseconds with refocusing (Hahn-echo) sequences, are sufficient for a first-generation Stern-Gerlach interferometer (SGI) that splits and recombines a levitated nanodiamond of about 10^7 atoms, creating a spatial superposition on the order of nanometers. The case rests on measured coherence times of 79 to 786 microseconds in nanodiamonds and etched pillars, magnetic gradients of 10^5 T/m from atom-chip wires, and interferometer durations of a few tens of microseconds. The authors also report the enabling control tools: optically detected magnetic resonance, Rabi, T1, and Ramsey spectroscopy on bulk nitrogen-vacancy centers; ODMR on a levitated nanodiamond in a Paul trap; and a broadband microwave resonator delivering about 3.8 G uniformly at the NV resonance. If the estimate holds, the remaining path to massive-object matter-wave interferometry is integration of these pieces rather than waiting for fundamentally longer coherence.

What carries the argument

The central object is the nitrogen-vacancy (NV) center: a single electron spin embedded in the nanodiamond whose long coherence time serves as the quantum handle for the interferometer. The mechanism is the Stern-Gerlach interferometer (SGI): a magnetic gradient pulse converts a spin superposition into a spatial superposition, a later gradient pulse recombines the arms, and the spin coherence time bounds how long the loop can stay open. A chip with current-carrying wires supplies the 10^5 T/m gradients, while Paul-trap alignment, via electrical or gyroscopic stabilization, keeps the NV axis fixed enough for microwave control in the levitated case.

What would settle it

Measure the spin-echo coherence time of a single nitrogen-vacancy center inside a levitated nanodiamond of roughly 10^7 atoms while the diamond is Paul-trapped, orientation-stabilized, and in vacuum. If the resulting coherence time is far below the tens of microseconds assumed here—for instance below 1 microsecond—then the claimed nanometer-scale Stern-Gerlach splitting at 10^5 T/m gradients will not be achievable, and the feasibility argument collapses.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a nanodiamond Stern-Gerlach interferometer does not have to wait for advances in spin coherence. Using a single nitrogen-vacancy (NV) center as the quantum handle, a magnetic gradient of 10^5 T/m acting over a few tens of microseconds splits the spin superposition into a spatial superposition with nanometer-scale separation for a nanodiamond of 10^7 atoms; the spin coherence times already measured in nanodiamonds (79 microseconds under Hahn-echo in etched pillars, up to 786 microseconds in milled 12C nanodiamonds) cover this requirement. The authors support the claim by demonstrating quantum control of NV spins in bulk diamond (ODMR, Rabi oscillations, T1 and Ramsey

Load-bearing premise

The feasibility claim assumes that the tens-of-microsecond spin coherence times already seen in diamonds on surfaces or etched pillars will survive in a levitated nanodiamond of about 10^7 atoms, where surface spins and rotation can shorten the coherence; the paper states this has not yet been shown.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At current coherence levels, a first-generation nanodiamond SGI with about 10^7 atoms and nanometer-scale splitting is an engineering target rather than a wait-for-new-physics problem.
  • Spin readout in the final device can be a Stern-Gerlach spatial separation imaged on a CCD, avoiding spectroscopic readout and internal heating of the nanodiamond.
  • If the technique scales to larger masses and longer durations, it opens experimental probes of environmental decoherence, spontaneous collapse models, short-range gravity modifications, and eventually gravity-induced entanglement.
  • The 14N nuclear spin can act as a long-coherence memory: the electron spin handles the Stern-Gerlach splitting while the nuclear spin stores the quantum state during the long durations needed for gravitational-interaction experiments.
  • A broadband microwave resonator matching the NV resonance is a reusable component for levitated-diamond quantum control and could serve ensemble NV magnetometry as well.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond what is written here, the make-or-break measurement is straightforward: measure the spin-echo coherence time of a single NV in a levitated, orientation-stabilized nanodiamond under vacuum. The roadmap survives if it stays above about 10 microseconds and needs rethinking if it falls to about 1 microsecond.
  • Beyond what is written here, the splitting estimate likely scales with coherence time and gradient; a published analytic expression for the splitting as a function of coherence time, mass, and gradient would let other groups reproduce the feasibility number without requesting the simulation.
  • Beyond what is written here, the same resonator and orientation-control stack could serve other levitated-spin experiments, including ensemble magnetometry on many nanodiamonds, since the resonator delivers a uniform field over about 1 square millimeter.
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

4 major / 7 minor

Summary. This technical note reports work toward Stern-Gerlach interferometry (SGI) with nitrogen-vacancy (NV) centers in nanodiamonds (NDs). The authors describe their confocal microscopy setup and present bulk-diamond measurements: ODMR spectra, Rabi oscillations, T1 relaxation, and Ramsey fringes, including hyperfine resolution. They also present ODMR on levitated diamonds in a ring Paul trap and a microwave resonator design with simulated and measured field profiles. The paper's central quantitative claim, stated in the abstract and in Section 2, is that simulations show that currently available spin coherence times of a few tens of microseconds, combined with gradients of 10^5 T/m, enable SGI spatial splitting on the order of nanometers for an ND of 10^7 atoms. The paper also outlines a roadmap toward testing decoherence models, collapse models, and gravitationally induced entanglement.

Significance. If the central feasibility claim were substantiated, it would be a useful anchor for the emerging ND-SGI community, connecting achievable NV coherence times to a concrete interferometric splitting. The experimental sections provide a reproducible description of standard NV characterization and a practical microwave resonator with quantified performance (3.76 G peak field, 270 MHz bandwidth, ±6.6% uniformity over 1 mm^2), which are useful building blocks. However, the paper's most important quantitative assertion is not supported by any model, equations, parameters, or numerical results in the manuscript; the experimental figures mostly lack error bars and fit uncertainties. The strength of the work is therefore primarily as a progress report and engineering description, not as a verified feasibility demonstration.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and §2] The central claim—'Our simulations show that ... an SGI spatial splitting on the order of nanometers for an ND composed of 10^7 atoms'—is stated twice but no simulation is presented. There are no equations, no input parameters (beyond gradient and T2), no pulse sequence, no decoherence model, and no output splitting value. The offer in the abstract to provide details 'upon request' is not a substitute for a derivable result in a journal paper. This is load-bearing because the entire motivation for the experimental roadmap rests on this feasibility estimate. Please add the full simulation model and results, or remove/qualify the claim.
  2. [§2, 'Other decoherence mechanisms'] The sentence 'Other decoherence mechanisms, such as environmental spatial decoherence, e.g., from blackbody radiation, have been calculated by us to enable large spatial splitting, even at room temperature' is a quantitative assertion with no calculation shown and no citation. If this is from Ref. [57] or another prior work, cite it and state the result; otherwise provide the estimate. As written, the reader cannot assess whether the claimed splitting survives environmental decoherence.
  3. [§6 and abstract] The feasibility estimate assumes that T2 times of a few tens of microseconds, demonstrated in bulk diamonds and etched pillars (Refs. [48,51]), will be available in a levitated ND of about 10^7 atoms. Section 6 explicitly concedes 'though, as far as we know, not in levitated NDs'. The manuscript does not quantitatively address how rotation, surface noise, or the trapping environment affect T2 in the levitated case, despite citing gyroscopic stabilization work. Please add a sensitivity analysis or state plainly that the splitting estimate is conditional on an unverified T2 value in levitated NDs.
  4. [Figs. 2–5, 7, 9, 10] Most quantitative figures present fits and extracted frequencies but show no error bars, no repetition counts, and no uncertainties on fitted parameters. For example, Fig. 7 reports a fitted T2* without an uncertainty or goodness-of-fit metric, and Fig. 10 shows a six-Lorentzian fit with no residuals. This limits the quantitative support for the claim of coherent quantum control. Please add error bars/confidence intervals or explicitly state the statistical precision of the measurements.
minor comments (7)
  1. [§2] Typo: 'sufficent' should be 'sufficient'.
  2. [§3] Typo: 'a a rise/fall time' should be 'a rise/fall time'. Also, 'COMS camera' should be 'CMOS camera'.
  3. [Appendix A] Typo: 'reactance’s' should be 'reactances'.
  4. [Reference [19]] Typo: 'micrsospheres' should be 'microspheres'.
  5. [Fig. 3 caption] The phrase 'the reason is yet unclear [58]' is vague; if the slow relaxation is a known artifact, cite the specific explanation, otherwise consider removing the speculation.
  6. [Fig. 7] The fit model is given, but no initial parameters, reduced chi-squared, or uncertainty on T2* is reported. A brief table of fit parameters would improve reproducibility.
  7. [Appendix A] The resonator section reports simulated and measured performance but does not overlay the measured S11 or field profile with simulation. Showing a comparison would strengthen the claim that the model matches the experiment.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the quoted nanometer splitting follows from standard Stern-Gerlach kinematics; the unshown simulation is a completeness gap, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's central quantitative claim is that T2 of a few tens of microseconds and a gradient of 10^5 T/m suffice for nanometer-scale SGI splitting of a 10^7-atom nanodiamond. This is not derived by fitting a parameter and then predicting the same parameter; it follows from the basic SGI relation Δx ≈ (1/2)(μ_B |∇B|/M)T^2. Using M ≈ 10^7 × 12 amu ≈ 2×10^-19 kg and T ≈ 50 µs gives Δx ≈ 5 nm, matching the abstract's order-of-magnitude claim. No equation in the paper is defined in terms of the claimed output, and no fitted input is relabeled as a prediction. The self-citations (e.g., Refs. [16,57]) supply context and limits (phonon decoherence, quantum uncertainty) but are not used to force the splitting number; the cited external results [48,51] are independent measurements of T2. The main weakness is that the 'simulations' are not shown, and the abstract offers details only on request; Section 6 also concedes that the needed coherence times have not yet been demonstrated in levitated NDs ('though, as far as we know, not in levitated NDs'). These are omissions or empirical risk factors, not circular reasoning. Hence no circular step can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new entity is introduced. The central feasibility estimate depends on four assumed device parameters and on standard NV physics. The decisive missing input is the simulation model that would relate these parameters to the splitting.

free parameters (4)
  • NV spin coherence time T2 = assumed tens of microseconds (e.g., 79-786 microseconds in cited works)
    The feasibility claim's input; not measured in this paper for the levitated ND.
  • Nanodiamond atom number / size = 10^7 atoms (tens of nm diameter)
    Claim is quoted for this mass; no scaling law shown.
  • Magnetic gradient = 10^5 T/m
    Assumed available from atom-chip wires, Section 2; no measurement here.
  • SGI duration = few tens of microseconds
    Assumed duration in Section 2; the relation between T2, duration, and splitting is not derived.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption NV ground-state Hamiltonian Eq. (1)-(3) with constants Dgs = 2.87 GHz, P = -4.95 MHz, A|| = 2.16 MHz
    Standard accepted physics; used in Appendix B to explain hyperfine splittings.
  • domain assumption A magnetic gradient acting on the NV spin produces a spin-dependent force that splits the wavepacket
    Standard Stern-Gerlach mechanism, cited to Refs. [8-10,13]; no derivation in this note.
  • domain assumption A single NV in a nanodiamond behaves with the same Hamiltonian as in bulk
    The whole ND SGI proposal relies on this, but levitated-NV control is not yet fully demonstrated, Section 6.
  • domain assumption Coherence times from Refs. [48,51] are representative for the levitated ND of interest
    Paper states this has not yet been shown in levitated NDs, Section 6.
  • ad hoc to paper Environmental spatial decoherence (e.g., blackbody radiation) is negligible for the target splitting
    Stated in Section 2 as "calculated by us" without showing the calculation; central to feasibility.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum control of Nitrogen-Vacancy spin in Diamonds: Towards matter-wave interferometry with massive objects." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4YXBIHQP

@misc{pith2026250815504,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum control of Nitrogen-Vacancy spin in Diamonds: Towards matter-wave interferometry with massive objects},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4YXBIHQP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.15504}
}
read the original abstract

Quantum mechanics (QM) and General relativity (GR), also known as the theory of gravity, are the two pillars of modern physics. A matter-wave interferometer with a massive particle can test numerous fundamental ideas, including the spatial superposition principle - a foundational concept in QM - in previously unexplored regimes. It also opens the possibility of probing the interface between QM and GR, such as testing the quantization of gravity. Consequently, there exists an intensive effort to realize such an interferometer. While several approaches are being explored, we focus on utilizing nanodiamonds with embedded spins as test particles which, in combination with Stern-Gerlach forces, enable the realization of a closed-loop matter-wave interferometer in space-time. There is a growing community of groups pursuing this path [1]. We are posting this technical note (as part of a series of seven such notes), to highlight our plans and solutions concerning various challenges in this ambitious endeavor, hoping this will support this growing community. Here we present our work on quantum control of a nitrogen-vacancy spin system in bulk diamonds and in levitated diamonds as a step towards Stern-Gerlach interferometry with levitated nanodiamonds. Our simulations show that the current state of the art for spin coherence time in nanodiamonds of a few tens of microseconds, is good enough to enable an SGI spatial splitting on the order of nanometers for an ND composed of 10^7 atoms. We would be happy to make available more details upon request.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Mesoscopic mechanical superpositions by gluing individual quantum systems

    quant-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A protocol in which a time-bin superposition of a single electron is converted, via surface capture and a pulsed electric field, into a mesoscopic superposition of nanoparticle momentum states with measurable interference.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 60 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [57]

    Quantum uncertainty limit for Stern–Gerlach interferometry with massive objects,

    Y. Japha and R. Folman, “Quantum uncertainty limit for Stern–Gerlach interferometry with massive objects,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 113602 (2023)

    work page 2023

  2. [1]

    A spin-based pathway to testing the quantum nature of gravity,

    S. Bose, A. Mazumdar, R. Penrose, I. Fuentes, M. Toroˇ s, R. Folman, G. J. Milburn, M. Kim, J. Oppenheim, M. Paternostro, H. Ulbricht, P. F. Barker, T. P. Purdy, M. V. G. Dutt, A. A. Geraci, D. C. Moore, and G. W. Morley, “A spin-based pathway to testing the quantum nature of gravity,” Tech. rep. (2025)

    work page 2025

  3. [2]

    Quantum superposition of molecules beyond 25 kDa,

    Y. Y. Fein, P. Geyer, P. Zwick, F. Kia lka, S. Pedalino, M. Mayor, S. Gerlich, and M. Arndt, “Quantum superposition of molecules beyond 25 kDa,” Nature Physics 15, 1242–1245 (2019)

    work page 2019

  4. [3]

    Coherent inflation for large quantum superpositions of levitated micro- spheres,

    O. Romero-Isart, “Coherent inflation for large quantum superpositions of levitated micro- spheres,” New Journal of Physics 19, 123029 (2017)

    work page 2017

  5. [4]

    On-chip quantum interference of a superconducting microsphere,

    H. Pino, J. Prat-Camps, K. Sinha, B. P. Venkatesh, and O. Romero-Isart, “On-chip quantum interference of a superconducting microsphere,” Quantum Science and Technology 3, 025001 (2018)

    work page 2018

  6. [5]

    Large quantum delocalization of a levitated nanoparticle using optimal control: Applications for force sensing and entangling via weak forces,

    T. Weiss, M. Roda-Llordes, E. Torrontegui, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Romero-Isart, “Large quantum delocalization of a levitated nanoparticle using optimal control: Applications for force sensing and entangling via weak forces,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 023601 (2021)

    work page 2021

  7. [6]

    A roadmap for universal high- mass matter-wave interferometry,

    F. Kia lka, Y. Y. Fein, S. Pedalino, S. Gerlich, and M. Arndt, “A roadmap for universal high- mass matter-wave interferometry,” A VS Quantum Science4, 020502 (2022)

    work page 2022

  8. [7]

    Fast quan- tum interference of a nanoparticle via optical potential control,

    L. Neumeier, M. A. Ciampini, O. Romero-Isart, M. Aspelmeyer, and N. Kiesel, “Fast quan- tum interference of a nanoparticle via optical potential control,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 121, e2306953121 (2024)

    work page 2024

Show all 64 references
  1. [8]

    T 3 Stern–Gerlach matter-wave interferometer,

    O. Amit, Y. Margalit, O. Dobkowski, Z. Zhou, Y. Japha, M. Zimmermann, M. A. Efremov, F. A. Narducci, E. M. Rasel, W. P. Schleich, and R. Folman, “T 3 Stern–Gerlach matter-wave interferometer,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 083601 (2019)

    2019

  2. [9]

    Stern–Gerlach interferometry with the atom chip,

    M. Keil, S. Machluf, Y. Margalit, Z. Zhou, O. Amit, O. Dobkowski, Y. Japha, S. Mouk- ouri, D. Rohrlich, Z. Binstock, Y. Bar-Haim, M. Givon, D. Groswasser, Y. Meir, and R. Fol- man, “Stern–Gerlach interferometry with the atom chip,” pp. 263–301, in “Molecular Beams in Physics a...

    2021

  3. [10]

    Observation of the quantum equivalence principle for matter-waves,

    O. Dobkowski, B. Trok, P. Skakunenko, Y. Japha, D. Groswasser, M. Efremov, C. Marletto, I. Fuentes, R. Penrose, V. Vedral, W. P. Schleich, and R. Folman, “Observation of the quantum equivalence principle for matter-waves,” arXiv:2502.14535 (2025)

    2025

  4. [11]

    Matter-wave interferometry of a levitated thermal nano-oscillator induced and probed by a spin,

    M. Scala, M. S. Kim, G. W. Morley, P. F. Barker, and S. Bose, “Matter-wave interferometry of a levitated thermal nano-oscillator induced and probed by a spin,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 180403 (2013)

    2013

  5. [12]

    Free nano-object Ramsey interferometry for large quantum superpositions,

    C. Wan, M. Scala, G. Morley, A. Rahman, H. Ulbricht, J. Bateman, P. Baker, and S. Bose, “Free nano-object Ramsey interferometry for large quantum superpositions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 143003 (2016)

    2016

  6. [13]

    Realization of a complete Stern-Gerlach interferom- eter: Toward a test of quantum gravity,

    Y. Margalit, O. Dobkowski, Z. Zhou, O. Amit, Y. Japha, S. Moukouri, D. Rohrlich, A. Mazum- dar, S. Bose, C. Henkel, and R. Folman, “Realization of a complete Stern-Gerlach interferom- eter: Toward a test of quantum gravity,” Science Advances 7, eabg2879 (2021)

    2021

  7. [14]

    Levi- todynamics: Levitation and control of microscopic objects in vacuum,

    C. Gonzalez-Ballestero, M. Aspelmeyer, L. Novotny, R. Quidant, and O. Romero-Isart, “Levi- todynamics: Levitation and control of microscopic objects in vacuum,” Science 374, eabg3027 (2021)

    2021

  8. [15]

    Fifteen years of cold matter on the atom chip: promise, realizations, and prospects,

    M. Keil, O. Amit, S. Zhou, D. Groswasser, Y. Japha, and R. Folman, “Fifteen years of cold matter on the atom chip: promise, realizations, and prospects,” Journal of Modern Optics 63, 1840–1885 (2016)

    2016

  9. [16]

    Universal limit on spatial quantum superpositions with massive objects due to phonons,

    C. Henkel and R. Folman, “Universal limit on spatial quantum superpositions with massive objects due to phonons,” Phys. Rev. A 110, 042221 (2024)

    2024

  10. [17]

    The continuous spontaneous localization layering effect from a lattice perspective,

    S. L. Adler, A. Bassi, and M. Carlesso, “The continuous spontaneous localization layering effect from a lattice perspective,” J. Phys. A Math. Theor. 54, 085303 (2021)

    2021

  11. [18]

    Testing the foundation of quantum physics in space via Interferometric and non-interferometric experiments with mesoscopic nanoparticles,

    G. Gasbarri, A. Belenchia, M. Carlesso, S. Donadi, A. Bassi, R. Kaltenbaek, M. Paternostro, and H. Ulbricht, “Testing the foundation of quantum physics in space via Interferometric and non-interferometric experiments with mesoscopic nanoparticles,” Commun. Phys. 4, 155 (2021)

    2021

  12. [19]

    Short-range force detection using optically cooled levitated micrsospheres,

    A. A. Geraci, S. B. Papp, and J. Kitching, “Short-range force detection using optically cooled levitated micrsospheres,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 101101 (2010)

    2010

  13. [20]

    Sensing short-range forces with a nanosphere matter-wave interferometer,

    A. A. Geraci and H. Goldman, “Sensing short-range forces with a nanosphere matter-wave interferometer,” Phys. Rev. D 92, 062002 (2015)

    2015

  14. [21]

    Novel setup for detecting short-range anisotropic corrections to gravity,

    J. S. Bobowski, H. N. Patel, and M. Faizal, “Novel setup for detecting short-range anisotropic corrections to gravity,” Phys. Scr. 99, 045017 (2024)

    2024

  15. [22]

    Measuring gravita- tional attraction with a lattice atom interferometer,

    C. D. Panda, M. J. Tao, M. Ceja, J. Khoury, G. M. Tino, and H. M¨ uller, “Measuring gravita- tional attraction with a lattice atom interferometer,” Nature 631, 515–520 (2024)

    2024

  16. [23]

    Models of wave-function collapse, underlying theories, and experimental tests,

    A. Bassi, K. Lochan, S. Satin, T. P. Singh, and H. Ulbricht, “Models of wave-function collapse, underlying theories, and experimental tests,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 85, 471–527 (2013)

    2013

  17. [24]

    On the gravitization of quantum mechanics 1: Quantum state reduction,

    R. Penrose, “On the gravitization of quantum mechanics 1: Quantum state reduction,” Foun- dations of Physics 44, 557–575 (2014). 16

    2014

  18. [25]

    Quantum state reduction via gravity, and possible tests using Bose–Einstein condensates,

    I. Fuentes and R. Penrose, “Quantum state reduction via gravity, and possible tests using Bose–Einstein condensates,” pp. 187–206, in “Collapse of the Wave Function: Models, Ontol- ogy, Origin, and Implications,” (Cambridge University Press, 2018)

    2018

  19. [26]

    Exploring the unification of quantum theory and general relativity with a Bose–Einstein condensate,

    R. Howl, R. Penrose, and I. Fuentes, “Exploring the unification of quantum theory and general relativity with a Bose–Einstein condensate,” New J. Phys. 21, 043047 (2019)

    2019

  20. [27]

    Gravitationally-induced wave function collapse time for molecules,

    A. A. Tomaz, R. S. Mattos, and M. Barbatti, “Gravitationally-induced wave function collapse time for molecules,” Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 26, 20785–20798 (2024)

    2024

  21. [28]

    Revealing self-gravity in a Stern–Gerlach humpty–dumpty experi- ment,

    M. Hatifi and T. Durt, “Revealing self-gravity in a Stern–Gerlach humpty–dumpty experi- ment,” arXiv:2006.07420 (2020)

    2006 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Dephasing and inhibition of spin interference from semi-classical self-gravitation,

    A. Großardt, “Dephasing and inhibition of spin interference from semi-classical self-gravitation,” Class. Quantum Grav. 38, 245009 (2021)

    2021

  23. [30]

    Probing the Schr¨ odinger–Newton equation in a Stern–Gerlach-like experiment,

    G. H. Aguiar and G. E. Matsas, “Probing the Schr¨ odinger–Newton equation in a Stern–Gerlach-like experiment,” Phys. Rev. A 109, 032223 (2024)

    2024

  24. [31]

    Spin entanglement witness for quantum gravity,

    S. Bose, A. Mazumdar, G. W. Morley, H. Ulbricht, M. Toroˇ s, M. Paternostro, A. A. Geraci, P. F. Barker, M. S. Kim, and G. Milburn, “Spin entanglement witness for quantum gravity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 240401 (2017)

    2017

  25. [32]

    Gravitationally-induced entanglement between two massive par- ticles is sufficient evidence of quantum effects in gravity,

    C. Marletto and V. Vedral, “Gravitationally-induced entanglement between two massive par- ticles is sufficient evidence of quantum effects in gravity,” Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 240402 (2017)

    2017

  26. [33]

    Quantum gravity witness via entanglement of masses: Casimir screening,

    T. W. van de Kamp, R. J. Marshman, S. Bose, and A. Mazumdar, “Quantum gravity witness via entanglement of masses: Casimir screening,” Phys. Rev. A 102, 062807 (2020)

    2020

  27. [34]

    Relaxation of ex- perimental parameters in a quantum-gravity-induced entanglement of masses protocol using electromagnetic screening,

    M. Schut, A. Grinin, A. Dana, S. Bose, A. Geraci, and A. Mazumdar, “Relaxation of ex- perimental parameters in a quantum-gravity-induced entanglement of masses protocol using electromagnetic screening,” Phys. Rev. Research 5, 043170 (2023)

    2023

  28. [35]

    Micrometer-size spatial superpositions for the QGEM protocol via screening and trapping,

    M. Schut, A. Geraci, S. Bose, and A. Mazumdar, “Micrometer-size spatial superpositions for the QGEM protocol via screening and trapping,” Phys. Rev. Research 6, 013199 (2024)

    2024

  29. [36]

    Diamond magnetometry of superconducting thin films,

    A. Waxman, H. Schlussel, D. Groswasser, V. M. Acosta, L.-S. Bouchard, D. Budker, and R. Folman, “Diamond magnetometry of superconducting thin films,” Phys. Rev. B 89, 054509 (2014)

    2014

  30. [37]

    Wide-field imaging of superconductor vortices with electron spins in diamond,

    Y. Schlussel, T. Lenz, D. Rohner, Y. Bar-Haim, L. Bougas, D. Groswasser, M. Kieschnick, E. Rozenberg, L. Thiel, A. Waxman, J. Meijer, P. Maletinsky, D. Budker, and R. Folman, “Wide-field imaging of superconductor vortices with electron spins in diamond,” Phys. Rev. Applied 10,...

    2018

  31. [38]

    Probing the origins of inhomogeneous broaden- ing in nitrogen-vacancy centers with Doppler-free-type spectroscopy,

    Y. Rosenzweig, Y. Schlussel, and R. Folman, “Probing the origins of inhomogeneous broaden- ing in nitrogen-vacancy centers with Doppler-free-type spectroscopy,” Phys. Rev. B98, 014112 (2018)

    2018

  32. [39]

    Neutralization of levitated charged nan- odiamond: Towards matter-wave interferometry with massive objects,

    S. Liran, O. Dobkowski, R. Benjaminov, P. Skakunenko, M. Averbukh, Y. Bar-Haim, D. Groswasser, J. H. Baraban, and R. Folman, “Neutralization of levitated charged nan- odiamond: Towards matter-wave interferometry with massive objects,” Will be uploaded to the arXiv by the end o...

    2025

  33. [40]

    De- sign of high-efficiency uhv loading of nanodiamonds into a paul trap: Towards matter-wave interferometry with massive objects,

    R. Benjaminov, S. Liran, O. Dobkowski, Y. Bar-Haim, M. Averbukh, and R. Folman, “De- sign of high-efficiency uhv loading of nanodiamonds into a paul trap: Towards matter-wave interferometry with massive objects,” arXiv:2508.14722 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  34. [41]

    Fabrication of nano-diamonds with a single NV center: Towards matter-wave interferometry with massive objects,

    M. Givon, Y. Bar-Haim, D. Groswasser, A. Solodar, N. Aharon, M. Belman, A. Yosefi, E. Golan, J. Jopp, and R. Folman, “Fabrication of nano-diamonds with a single NV center: Towards matter-wave interferometry with massive objects,” arXiv:2508.13662 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  35. [42]

    Strong confinement of a nanopar- ticle in a needle paul trap: Towards matter-wave interferometry with nanodiamonds,

    P. Skakunenko, D. Folman, Y. Bar-Haim, and R. Folman, “Strong confinement of a nanopar- ticle in a needle paul trap: Towards matter-wave interferometry with nanodiamonds,” arXiv:2508.14272 (2025)

    2025

  36. [43]

    Trapping and cooling of nanodiamonds in a paul trap under ultra-high vacuum: Towards matter-wave interferometry with massive objects,

    O. Feldman, B. B. Shultz, M. Muretova, O. Dobkowski, Y. Japha, D. Groswasser, and R. Fol- man, “Trapping and cooling of nanodiamonds in a paul trap under ultra-high vacuum: Towards matter-wave interferometry with massive objects,” arXiv:2508.14687 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  37. [44]

    Parametric feedback cooling of librations of a nanodiamond in a paul trap: Towards matter-wave interferometry with massive objects,

    M. Muretova, Y. Japha, M. Toros, and R. Folman, “Parametric feedback cooling of librations of a nanodiamond in a paul trap: Towards matter-wave interferometry with massive objects,” arXiv:2508.13723 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  38. [45]

    Solid-state electronic spin coherence time approaching one second,

    N. Bar-Gill, L. M. Pham, A. Jarmola, D. Budker, and R. L. Walsworth, “Solid-state electronic spin coherence time approaching one second,” Nat. Commun. 4, 1743 (2013)

    2013

  39. [46]

    One-second coherence for a single electron spin coupled to a multi-qubit nuclear-spin environment,

    M. H. Abobeih, J. Cramer, M. A. Bakker, N. Kalb, M. Markham, D. J. Twitchen, and T. H. Taminiau, “One-second coherence for a single electron spin coupled to a multi-qubit nuclear-spin environment,” Nat. Commun. 9, 2552 (2018)

    2018

  40. [47]

    Long spin coherence times of nitrogen vacancy centers in milled nanodiamonds,

    B. D. Wood, G. A. Stimpson, J. E. March, Y. N. D. Lekhai, C. J. Stephen, B. L. Green, A. C. Frangeskou, L. Gin´ es, S. Mandal, O. A. Williams, and G. W. Morley, “Long spin coherence times of nitrogen vacancy centers in milled nanodiamonds,” Phys. Rev. B 105, 205401 (2022)

    2022

  41. [48]

    Long spin coherence and relaxation times in nanodiamonds milled from polycrystalline 12C diamond,

    J. E. March, B. D. Wood, C. J. Stephen, L. Dur´ an Fervenza, B. G. Breeze, S. Mandal, A. M. Edmonds, D. J. Twitchen, M. L. Markham, O. A. Williams, and G. W. Morley, “Long spin coherence and relaxation times in nanodiamonds milled from polycrystalline 12C diamond,” Phys. Rev. ...

    2023

  42. [49]

    Depth- dependent decoherence caused by surface and external spins for NV centers in diamond,

    W. Zhang, J. Zhang, J. Wang, F. Feng, S. Lin, L. Lou, W. Zhu, and G. Wang, “Depth- dependent decoherence caused by surface and external spins for NV centers in diamond,” Phys. Rev. B 96, 235443 (2017)

    2017

  43. [50]

    Origins of diamond surface noise probed by correlating single-spin measurements with surface spectroscopy,

    S. Sangtawesin, B. L. Dwyer, S. Srinivasan, J. J. Allred, L. V. H. Rodgers, K. De Greve, A. Stacey, N. Dontschuk, K. M. O’Donnell, D. Hu, D. A. Evans, C. Jaye, D. A. Fischer, M. L. Markham, D. J. Twitchen, H. Park, M. D. Lukin, and N. P. De Leon, “Origins of diamond surface no...

    2019

  44. [51]

    Scalable fabrication of high purity diamond nanocrystals with long-spin-coherence nitrogen vacancy centers,

    M. E. Trusheim, L. Li, A. Laraoui, E. H. Chen, O. Gaathon, H. Bakhru, T. Schroeder, C. A. Meriles, and D. Englund, “Scalable fabrication of high purity diamond nanocrystals with long-spin-coherence nitrogen vacancy centers,” Nano Lett. 14, 32–36 (2014)

    2014

  45. [52]

    Rotational locking of charged microparticles in quadrupole ion traps,

    M. Perdriat, C. C. Rusconi, T. Delord, P. Huillery, C. Pellet-Mary, A. Durand, B. A. Stickler, and G. H´ etet, “Rotational locking of charged microparticles in quadrupole ion traps,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 253602 (2024). 18

    2024

  46. [53]

    Nuclear magnetic resonance with a levitating microparticle,

    J. Voisin, A. Durand, T. Copie, M. Perdriat, and G. H´ etet, “Nuclear magnetic resonance with a levitating microparticle,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 213602 (2024)

    2024

  47. [54]

    Quantum control and Berry phase of electron spins in rotating levitated diamonds in high vacuum,

    Y. Jin, K. Shen, P. Ju, X. Gao, C. Zu, A. J. Grine, and T. Li, “Quantum control and Berry phase of electron spins in rotating levitated diamonds in high vacuum,” Nat. Commun. 15, 1–9 (2024)

    2024

  48. [55]

    Gyroscopically stabilized quantum spin rotors,

    V. Wachter, S. Viola Kusminskiy, G. H´ etet, and B. A. Stickler, “Gyroscopically stabilized quantum spin rotors,” arXiv:2504.10339 (2025)

    2025

  49. [56]

    Rotational stability in nanorotor and spin contrast in one-loop interferometry in the Stern–Gerlach setup,

    R. Rizaldy, T. Zhou, S. Bose, and A. Mazumdar, “Rotational stability in nanorotor and spin contrast in one-loop interferometry in the Stern–Gerlach setup,” arXiv:2412.15335 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Spin readout techniques of the nitrogen-vacancy center in diamond,

    D. A. Hopper, H. Shulevitz, and L. Bassett, “Spin readout techniques of the nitrogen-vacancy center in diamond,” Micromachines 9, 437 (2018)

    2018

  51. [59]

    Robust noise suppression and quantum sensing by continuous phased dynamical decoupling,

    D. Louzon, G. T. Genov, N. Staudenmaier, F. Frank, J. Lang, M. L. Markham, A. Retzker, and F. Jelezko, “Robust noise suppression and quantum sensing by continuous phased dynamical decoupling,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 120802 (2025)

    2025

  52. [60]

    Motional dynamical decoupling for inter- ferometry with macroscopic particles,

    J. S. Pedernales, G. W. Morley, and M. B. Plenio, “Motional dynamical decoupling for inter- ferometry with macroscopic particles,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 023602 (2020)

    2020

  53. [61]

    Spin dynamical decoupling for generating macro- scopic superpositions of a free-falling nanodiamond,

    B. D. Wood, S. Bose, and G. W. Morley, “Spin dynamical decoupling for generating macro- scopic superpositions of a free-falling nanodiamond,” Phys. Rev. A 105, 012824 (2022)

    2022

  54. [62]

    CMOS integrated circuits for the quantum information sciences,

    J. Anders, M. Babaie, J. C. Bardin, I. Bashir, G. Billiot, E. Blokhina, S. Bonen, E. Charbon, J. Chiaverini, I. L. Chuang, C. Degenhardt, D. Englund, L. Geck, L. Le Guevel, D. Ham, R. Han, M. I. Ibrahim, D. Kr¨ uger, K. M. Lei, A. Morel, D. Nielinger, G. Pillonnet, J. M. Sage,...

    2023

  55. [63]

    Efficient, uniform, and large area microwave magnetic coupling to NV centers in diamond using double split-ring resonators,

    K. Bayat, J. Choy, M. Farrokh-Baroughi, S. Meesala, and M. Loncar, “Efficient, uniform, and large area microwave magnetic coupling to NV centers in diamond using double split-ring resonators,” Nano Lett. 14, 1208–1213 (2014)

    2014

  56. [64]

    Modified split ring resonators for efficient and homogeneous microwave control of large volume spin ensembles,

    Y. Ben-Shalom, A. Hen, and N. Bar-Gill, “Modified split ring resonators for efficient and homogeneous microwave control of large volume spin ensembles,” arXiv:2309.11130 (2023). 19

    2023 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.