Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 66 references

A rotating Brownian particle in a viscoelastic fluid carries its Magnus response in its unforced fluctuations, and the paper derives a geometric construction that reads the full response matrix from cross-correlations alone.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

Rotation in a memory fluid produces enhanced diffusion and time-antisymmetric displacement correlations that a minimal linear model links, through Onsager-Casimir symmetry, to the Magnus response.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-04 challenge →

load-bearing objection A clean theoretical construction (Eq. 25) for extracting the odd response from unforced fluctuations, with a qualitative experimental confirmation that quantitatively falls short of the central relation—worth serious review but nowhere near finished. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2608.00344 v1 pith:MJX42CYN submitted 2026-07-31 cond-mat.stat-mech cond-mat.soft

Memory with Onsager-Casimir symmetry: Rotating particle in a viscoelastic fluid

Debankur Das , Niloyendu Roy , Niklas Windbacher , Clemens Bechinger , Matthias Kr\"uger This is my paper
classification cond-mat.stat-mech cond-mat.soft
keywords Onsager-Casimir symmetrymemory kernelMagnus effectviscoelastic fluidrotating Brownian particlefluctuation-dissipation theoremtwo-time correlationsnon-reciprocal response
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The reading

The paper claims that a rotating colloidal particle in a viscoelastic fluid produces a non-reciprocal memory kernel that obeys Onsager-Casimir symmetry, and that this symmetry allows the transverse Magnus response to be read from purely unforced fluctuations. The authors build a minimal linear model coupling the tracer to a fictitious bath particle through a spring and an advective rotation term; eliminating the bath yields a memory kernel that rotates in time and obeys the corresponding fluctuation-dissipation theorem. From this they derive Eq. (25), a geometric construction connecting two-time displacement correlations to the full response matrix, including the antisymmetric off-diagonal sector that ordinary Einstein relations miss. Experiments show rotation-enhanced diffusion and time-antisymmetric cross-correlations that match the model qualitatively, and the correlation-extracted Magnus angle tracks direct force measurements in trend. If the construction is correct, a passive trajectory measurement replaces an active force-response measurement for determining odd, non-reciprocal transport coefficients.

Core claim

The central discovery is that the unforced two-time displacement correlation matrix C(t,t') of a rotating tracer contains the transverse (Magnus) response on its own, provided the dynamics obey Onsager-Casimir symmetry and the associated fluctuation-dissipation relation. The paper proves that the full response matrix χ(t) is isolated by adding the one-sided time derivatives of C at the kink t=t': the limit from above plus the limit from below equals 2χ(t'). For the off-diagonal sector this goes beyond the Einstein relation, which only determines the symmetric part of χ. Applying this construction to the minimal model reproduces the steady-state Magnus angle, and applying it to experimental c

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the dyadic memory kernel L(t)=2γδ(t)I + k exp(-kt/(γν)) R(Ωt), where R is the rotation matrix in the plane perpendicular to Ω. It is non-reciprocal, forms a logarithmic spiral in the complex plane, and satisfies the Onsager-Casimir symmetry L^T(Ω)=L(-Ω). The corresponding fluctuation-dissipation relation fixes the noise correlation in terms of L, leading to Eq. (25): summing the right and left time derivatives of the bulk correlation C(t,t') at t=t' yields 2χ(t'), thereby exposing the antisymmetric response without applying a force.

Load-bearing premise

The derivation assumes that at zero force the tracer-bath system has a stationary distribution independent of rotation and equal to the Boltzmann distribution of the coupling spring, so the fluctuation-dissipation theorem holds even though the particle is constantly stirring the viscoelastic fluid.

What would settle it

Rotate the particle in the opposite direction and check whether the off-diagonal cross-correlation C12(t,t') flips sign exactly; any deviation signals broken Onsager-Casimir symmetry. Alternatively, trap the particle in a weak harmonic potential, measure ⟨x(t)x(t')⟩, and compare with the response χ(t) measured by a step force: Eq. (18) requires a specific agreement, so a clear mismatch would refute the correlation-based extraction.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The Magnus deflection angle can be measured from force-free correlation data, which is valuable in systems where controlled forces are hard to apply, such as biological or soft-matter environments.
  • The relation extends the Einstein relation to the antisymmetric response sector for systems with pseudovector time-reversal breaking, so systems in magnetic fields or under rigid-body rotation share the same construction.
  • The model predicts a rotation-induced enhancement of long-time diffusivity that saturates at high Ω; this is testable independently of the cross-correlation measurements.
  • The predicted plateau of C12(t,t') at large time separations is a direct falsifiable signature of the rotating memory kernel.
  • Time-antisymmetric cross-correlations in an unconfined system serve as fingerprints of non-reciprocal memory even when the system is force-free and unconfined.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the construction is robust, it turns trajectory tracking into a passive rheological probe for odd or non-reciprocal mobility components in chiral active fluids, odd-viscosity media, and other broken-time-reversal systems.
  • A sharp experimental check is to reverse Ω and test whether C12(t,t') flips sign exactly; if it does not, the stationary bath is being driven out of thermal equilibrium by the rotation and the fluctuation-dissipation basis of Eq. (25) fails.
  • The single-exponential bath is a simplification; real micellar fluids show two relaxation times, so quantitative agreement may require a multi-exponential kernel that still rotates as a logarithmic spiral.
  • Confinement would allow a direct test of Eq. (18): measure ⟨x(t)x(t')⟩ in a weak trap and compare with an independent step-force measurement of χ, separating statistical uncertainty from genuine violation of the relation.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports experiments on a rotating colloidal particle in a viscoelastic micellar fluid, finding rotation-enhanced long-time diffusion and time-antisymmetric off-diagonal displacement cross-correlations. It introduces a linear two-particle model in which the tracer is coupled to a fictitious bath degree of freedom and rotation enters as an advective term; after eliminating the bath, the tracer obeys a generalized Langevin equation with a non-reciprocal, logarithmically-spiraling memory kernel satisfying Onsager-Casimir symmetry. The paper derives the corresponding fluctuation-dissipation relation, an exact expression for the bulk two-time displacement correlation C(t,t'), and a geometric construction, Eq. (25), intended to extract the full response matrix—including the antisymmetric Magnus sector—from unforced fluctuations. Experiments and model are claimed to agree qualitatively, but quantitative deviations are acknowledged.

Significance. If Eq. (25) is correct and applicable, it is an elegant and potentially useful extension of fluctuation-response ideas: it shows that in systems obeying Onsager-Casimir symmetry, the transverse (odd/Magnus) response can be read off from equilibrium-like displacement fluctuations in an unconfined geometry, without applying a force. The linear model is transparent and analytically solvable, and the supporting information gives detailed derivations. The paper also provides falsifiable predictions—enhanced diffusivity and antisymmetric cross-correlations—that are observed in two different viscoelastic fluids. However, the central quantitative claim is not yet established: the experimental deviations from Eq. (25) are explicit in the manuscript, and the equilibrium-stationarity assumption on which the fluctuation-dissipation theorem rests is not tested in the experiments.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. IV, Eq. (6) and Sec. VI, Eq. (14); SI Eqs. (S3)-(S7)] There is an internal inconsistency in the fluctuation-dissipation relation. Eq. (6) defines L(t)=2γδ(t)I + k exp(-kt/γν) R(Ωt). Eq. (14) states ⟨ξ(t)⊗ξ(t')⟩=2k_B T L(t-t') for t>t'. But the explicit computation in SI Eq. (S3) gives ⟨ξ_1(t)ξ_1(t')⟩=2k_B T [γδ(t-t')+k exp(...)cos(...)], whose delta term is 2γk_BTδ, not 4γk_BTδ as required by 2k_BT L. Thus Eq. (14) (and the Fourier form Eq. (16)) is off by a factor of two in the instantaneous term. This is a load-bearing algebraic error: Eqs. (17), (18), and the derivation leading to Eq. (25) all rely on this relation. The authors should correct either Eq. (6) (L(τ)=γδ(τ)I+...) or the factor in Eq. (14), and re-check the subsequent spectral and time-domain formulas.
  2. [Footnote [53] and Sec. VIII, Fig. 4(c)] The central construction (25) is derived under the assumption, stated in footnote [53], that for F=0 the stationary distribution of (x,y) is independent of Ω and equals the Boltzmann distribution for ½k(x-y)^2. This is exact for the toy model because the advection term is divergence-free, but it is not established—and is physically questionable—for a colloid mechanically rotating in a viscoelastic fluid, which stirs the bath and can drive it out of equilibrium. The paper's own experimental comparison undermines the claim: in Fig. 4(c)(inset) the correlation-derived Magnus angles systematically overestimate the force-measured values, and the text concedes that this 'also hints that our experiments do not obey (25).' The equilibrium-stationarity precondition is therefore not validated. The authors should either test the FDT directly (e.g., by comparing fluctuation data at +Ω and −Ω) or sub
  3. [Sec. VII, Fig. 4 and Appendix A(f)] The experimental test of Eq. (25) is not independent of the model. The correlation data in Fig. 4(c) are first fitted to Eq. (19) using an effective Ω=0.06 s^-1 against a nominal Ω=0.02 s^-1, plus fitted τ=14 s and ν=3.45 (recoil gives τ_2=19.5 s and ν≈3). The Magnus angle is then extracted from the same fitted curves. This is largely a self-consistency test of the model rather than a direct verification that the construction yields the true response from raw fluctuations. A more convincing test would apply the one-sided derivatives in Eq. (25) directly to the unaveraged or unfitted correlation data, with error bars, or compare the extracted angle to the force-measured value with a statistical measure of the discrepancy.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Appendix A(f)] The sentence is incomplete: 'Next the ratio ν is extracted by measuring the velocity of the tracer immediately before and after the force is switched off in a recoil experiment- please add as shown in Fig. 1(a) (Inset).' This placeholder should be completed, and the Appendix figure numbering (Fig. 1, Fig. 2) duplicates the main-text numbering and should be relabeled.
  2. [Sec. VII, text near Fig. 3] Several figure cross-references appear incorrect: the text compares the theoretical MSD to 'Fig 1(b)' and says the experimental diffusion coefficient is 'extracted from experimental data in Fig 1(b)', but the experimental MSD is shown in Fig. 1(c). Please correct these references.
  3. [Sec. VI, Eq. (16)] The Fourier convention is stated as f(ω)=1/(2π)∫dt f(t)e^{-iωt}, but the factor in Eq. (16) depends sensitively on that convention and on the delta-function prefactor. After correcting the L normalization, please verify the prefactor in Eq. (16) explicitly and state the convention in the main text.
  4. [Fig. 4(c) inset] The comparison between correlation-derived and force-measured Magnus angles has no error bars or statistical test. Given the systematic overestimation, error bars and a simple significance statement are needed to support the 'qualitative agreement' claim.
  5. [Sec. VII, after Eq. (21)] The statement that C_12(t,t') 'is symmetric as a function of t around t=t'/2' is not immediately transparent from Eq. (19); a short derivation or clarification would help. Also, the text says 'the off diagonal components are antisymmetric in indices, C_12=-C_21, and therefore, by construction, antisymmetric in time arguments'—the second step uses C(t,t')=C(t',t)^T and should be spelled out.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the central construction (25) is a derived consequence of an explicitly stated model assumption; experiments are honestly reported as deviating.

full rationale

The derivation is self-contained. The model in Eq. (3) specifies noise variances and a divergence-free advection term; footnote [53] then states that the stationary distribution is the Boltzmann distribution for 1/2 k(x-y)^2, independent of Omega. This is an explicit model assumption, not a result imported from a self-citation or from the target conclusion. The fluctuation-dissipation relation (14) and the central geometric construction (25) are derived algebraically in the main text and SI from this assumption, with no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The Magnus angle from correlations is extracted by a parameter-free slope construction and compared with independent force measurements; the paper explicitly concedes that the correlation-derived values overestimate and 'hints that our experiments do not obey (25)', which is an honest falsification rather than circular reasoning. Self-citations such as Ref. [35] supply prior experimental observations and rotation calibration, but they are not load-bearing for the analytic derivation. The factor-of-2 discrepancy between Eq. (6) and SI Eq. (S3) is a normalization inconsistency that affects quantitative verification, but it does not make the derivation circular. Overall, no step reduces to its own input by construction; the score reflects only the presence of minor, non-load-bearing self-citations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 6 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central theory rests on a small set of linear thermal-bath assumptions plus two made-for-the-paper modeling choices: a divergence-free advection term that preserves the Boltzmann measure, and a rotating bath-particle representation. Four parameters are fitted or hand-set (γ, ν, τ, and effective Ω; plus C=1), partially anchored by independent recoil measurements.

free parameters (5)
  • ν (bath-to-tracer friction ratio) = ν≈3 (recoil), 3.45 (micellar correlation fit), 4.5 (polymer fit)
    Controls the amplitude of memory-induced rotation effects in (20) and (21); determined from recoil ratio and correlation fits.
  • τ (slow relaxation time) = τ=14 s (micellar correlation fit), 28 s (polymer fit); recoil gives slower mode 19.5 s
    The exponential relaxation scale in (6) and (19); fitted to correlations and checked against recoil.
  • effective Ω in the fit = 0.06 s^-1 (fit) vs nominal experimental Ω=0.02 s^-1
    The analytical curves of Fig. 4(c) are fitted with Ω=0.06 s^-1 although the stated experimental rotation is 0.02 s^-1; an unexplained factor-of-three offset.
  • γ (bare tracer friction) = β^{-1}γ^{-1}=2×10^-4 µm²
    Sets the noise amplitude and short-time diffusion; fitted to correlation data.
  • C (coupling parameter from Ref. [35]) = 1
    Footnote [49] sets the prior Magnus-coupling parameter C=1 by hand; it is not determined in this paper.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption Tracer and bath are overdamped and driven by white Gaussian noises with variances 2γkBT and 2νγkBT; the noise sources are independent.
    Eq. (3); standard but not proven for a real rotating tracer in a viscoelastic fluid.
  • ad hoc to paper For F=0 the stationary distribution of (x,y) is the Boltzmann distribution for ½k(x−y)² and is independent of Ω.
    Footnote [53]; ensures the FDR (14)-(18) and the central relation (25), but is not experimentally tested.
  • ad hoc to paper Rotation acts as the advective coupling Ω×(y−x) on the bath coordinate.
    Section III; the authors note the form may differ from realistic flow fields near a rotating particle.
  • domain assumption A single exponential relaxation mode is sufficient for the viscoelastic fluid.
    Recoil experiments show a double exponential (τ1≈0.83 s, τ2≈19.5 s); only the slower mode enters the model.
  • ad hoc to paper χ(0) is diagonal (used to fix the integration constant in (25)).
    Section VIII; true in the model but not guaranteed for the real system.
  • standard math Standard causal Fourier inverse and response relations; the frequency-domain FDT (17) holds.
    Used to obtain (18), (19), and (25).
invented entities (1)
  • Fictitious bath particle y no independent evidence
    purpose: Hidden slow degree of freedom that, when integrated out, produces the exponential memory kernel; carries the rotation advection term.
    Purely phenomenological (Section III); no direct measurement, only indirect support through recoil timescales and correlation fits.

reviewed 2026-08-04 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Memory with Onsager-Casimir symmetry: Rotating particle in a viscoelastic fluid." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MJX42CYN

@misc{pith2026260800344,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Memory with Onsager-Casimir symmetry: Rotating particle in a viscoelastic fluid},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MJX42CYN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.00344}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

We study the stochastic dynamics of a rotating Brownian particle in a non-Markovian fluid. Experimentally, we find that rotation enhances the long-time diffusivity of the particle and generates time-antisymmetric cross-correlations between orthogonal displacement components in the plane perpendicular to the rotation axis. To rationalize these observations, we introduce a minimal linear model in which a tracer is coupled to a slow bath degree of freedom and rotation enters through an advective coupling. Eliminating the bath variable yields a generalized Langevin equation with a non-reciprocal memory kernel. This kernel rotates in time, forming a logarithmic spiral, and it obeys Onsager-Casimir symmetry under reversal of the rotation vector, and the corresponding fluctuation-response relation. From the latter we obtain a geometric construction that links two-time cross-correlations to the transverse response of the particle in bulk. Unlike the ordinary Einstein relation, this relation involves the antisymmetric sector of the response. Our experiments and theory are in qualitative agreement, establishing rotating colloids in viscoelastic fluids as a minimal realization of Onsager-Casimir symmetry in time-nonlocal stochastic dynamics

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.00344 by Clemens Bechinger, Debankur Das, Matthias Kr\"uger, Niklas Windbacher, Niloyendu Roy.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Experimental Results: (a) Schematic of the rotating colloidal tracer in a viscoelastic fluid. (b) Magnus effect: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Magnus effect from the linear model: (a) Sketch [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Correlations predicted by the model with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Correlations and Magnus angle: (a) Same graph as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Relaxation timescale and recoil ratio from the ex [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. (a)Relative diffusion enhancement of spinning trac [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗

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

66 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Einstein, ¨Uber die von der molekularkinetischen the- orie der w¨ arme geforderte bewegung von in ruhenden fl¨ ussigkeiten suspendierten teilchen, Annalen der physik 4(1905)

    A. Einstein, ¨Uber die von der molekularkinetischen the- orie der w¨ arme geforderte bewegung von in ruhenden fl¨ ussigkeiten suspendierten teilchen, Annalen der physik 4(1905)

    1905

  2. [2]

    Smoluchowski, The kinetic theory of brownian molec- ular motion and suspensions, Ann

    M. Smoluchowski, The kinetic theory of brownian molec- ular motion and suspensions, Ann. Phys21, 756 (1906)

    1906

  3. [3]

    Langevin, On the theory of brownian motion., CR Acad Sci (Paris)146, 530 (1908)

    P. Langevin, On the theory of brownian motion., CR Acad Sci (Paris)146, 530 (1908)

    1908

  4. [4]

    Perrin, Mouvement brownien et r´ ealit´ e mol´ eculaire, Annales de Chimie et de Physique (1909)

    J. Perrin, Mouvement brownien et r´ ealit´ e mol´ eculaire, Annales de Chimie et de Physique (1909)

    1909

  5. [5]

    Frey and K

    E. Frey and K. Kroy, Brownian motion: a paradigm of soft matter and biological physics, Annalen der Physik 517, 20 (2005)

    2005

  6. [6]

    Blickle, T

    V. Blickle, T. Speck, L. Helden, U. Seifert, and C. Bechinger, Thermodynamics of a colloidal particle in a time-dependent nonharmonic potential, Physical review letters96, 070603 (2006)

    2006

  7. [7]

    Blickle, T

    V. Blickle, T. Speck, C. Lutz, U. Seifert, and C. Bechinger, Einstein relation generalized to nonequi- librium, Physical review letters98, 210601 (2007)

    2007

  8. [8]

    J. R. Howse, R. A. Jones, A. J. Ryan, T. Gough, R. Vafabakhsh, and R. Golestanian, Self-motile colloidal particles: from directed propulsion to random walk, Physical review letters99, 048102 (2007)

    2007

  9. [9]

    J¨ ulicher and J

    F. J¨ ulicher and J. Prost, Generic theory of colloidal trans- port, The European Physical Journal E29, 27 (2009)

    2009

  10. [10]

    Ritort, Nonequilibrium fluctuations in small systems: From physics to biology, Advances in chemical physics 137, 31 (2008)

    F. Ritort, Nonequilibrium fluctuations in small systems: From physics to biology, Advances in chemical physics 137, 31 (2008)

    2008

  11. [11]

    De Vega and D

    I. De Vega and D. Alonso, Dynamics of non-markovian open quantum systems, Reviews of Modern Physics89, 015001 (2017)

    2017

  12. [12]

    Zagorodny and J

    A. Zagorodny and J. Weiland, Statistical theory of turbu- lent transport (non-markovian effects), Physics of Plas- mas6, 2359 (1999)

    1999

  13. [13]

    Grimm and M

    J. Grimm and M. Dolgushev, Dynamics of networks in a viscoelastic and active environment, Soft Matter14, 1171 (2018)

    2018

  14. [14]

    Klochko, J

    L. Klochko, J. Baschnagel, J. Wittmer, and A. Semenov, Long-range stress correlations in viscoelastic and glass- forming fluids, Soft Matter14, 6835 (2018)

    2018

  15. [15]

    M¨ uller, J

    B. M¨ uller, J. Berner, C. Bechinger, and M. Kr¨ uger, Prop- erties of a nonlinear bath: Experiments, theory, and a stochastic prandtl–tomlinson model, New Journal of Physics22, 023014 (2020)

    2020

  16. [16]

    Onsager, Reciprocal relations in irreversible processes

    L. Onsager, Reciprocal relations in irreversible processes. i., Physical Review37, 405 (1931)

    1931

  17. [17]

    Onsager, Reciprocal relations in irreversible processes

    L. Onsager, Reciprocal relations in irreversible processes. ii., Physical Review38, 2265 (1931)

    1931

  18. [18]

    Agudo-Canalejo and R

    J. Agudo-Canalejo and R. Golestanian, Active phase sep- aration in mixtures of chemically interacting particles, Physical review letters123, 018101 (2019)

    2019

  19. [19]

    J. P. Banerjee, R. Mandal, D. S. Banerjee, S. Thutupalli, and M. Rao, Unjamming and emergent nonreciprocity in active ploughing through a compressible viscoelastic fluid, Nature Communications13, 4533 (2022)

    2022

  20. [20]

    I. D. Couzin, J. Krause, N. R. Franks, and S. A. Levin, Effective leadership and decision-making in ani- mal groups on the move, Nature433, 513 (2005)

    2005

  21. [21]

    Grauer, F

    J. Grauer, F. Schmidt, J. Pineda, B. Midtvedt, H. L¨ owen, G. Volpe, and B. Liebchen, Active droploids, Nature Communications12, 6005 (2021)

    2021

  22. [22]

    Rubenstein, A

    M. Rubenstein, A. Cornejo, and R. Nagpal, Pro- grammable self-assembly in a thousand-robot swarm, Sci- ence345, 795 (2014)

    2014

  23. [23]

    Fruchart, R

    M. Fruchart, R. Hanai, P. B. Littlewood, and V. Vitelli, Non-reciprocal phase transitions, Nature592, 363 (2021)

    2021

  24. [24]

    M. Han, M. Fruchart, C. Scheibner, S. Vaikuntanathan, J. J. De Pablo, and V. Vitelli, Fluctuating hydrodynam- ics of chiral active fluids, Nature Physics17, 1260 (2021)

    2021

  25. [25]

    A. R. Poggioli and D. T. Limmer, Odd mobility of a passive tracer in a chiral active fluid, Physical Review Letters130, 158201 (2023)

    2023

  26. [26]

    Markovich and T

    T. Markovich and T. C. Lubensky, Nonreciprocity and odd viscosity in chiral active fluids, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences121, e2219385121 (2024)

    2024

  27. [27]

    E. Kalz, H. D. Vuijk, J.-U. Sommer, R. Metzler, and A. Sharma, Oscillatory force autocorrelations in equilib- rium odd-diffusive systems, Physical Review Letters132, 057102 (2024)

    2024

  28. [28]

    E. Kalz, H. D. Vuijk, I. Abdoli, J.-U. Sommer, H. L¨ owen, and A. Sharma, Collisions enhance self-diffusion in odd- diffusive systems, Physical Review Letters129, 090601 (2022)

    2022

  29. [29]

    Fruchart, C

    M. Fruchart, C. Scheibner, and V. Vitelli, Odd viscosity and odd elasticity, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics14, 471 (2023)

    2023

  30. [30]

    Banerjee, A

    D. Banerjee, A. Souslov, A. G. Abanov, and V. Vitelli, Odd viscosity in chiral active fluids, Nature communica- tions8, 1573 (2017)

    2017

  31. [31]

    Banerjee, V

    D. Banerjee, V. Vitelli, F. J¨ ulicher, and P. Sur´ owka, Ac- tive viscoelasticity of odd materials, Physical Review Let- ters126, 138001 (2021)

    2021

  32. [32]

    Kur¸ suno˘ glu, Brownian motion in a magnetic field, An- nals of Physics17, 259 (1962)

    B. Kur¸ suno˘ glu, Brownian motion in a magnetic field, An- nals of Physics17, 259 (1962)

    1962

  33. [33]

    A. M. Jayannavar and M. Sahoo, Charged particle in a magnetic field: Jarzynski equality, Physical Review E: Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics75, 032102 (2007)

    2007

  34. [34]

    Abdoli, R

    I. Abdoli, R. Wittmann, and H. Lowen, Dynamical den- sity functional theory for dense odd-diffusive fluids, The Journal of Physical Chemistry B130, 4672 (2026)

    2026

  35. [35]

    X. Cao, D. Das, N. Windbacher, F. Ginot, M. Kr¨ uger, and C. Bechinger, Memory-induced magnus effect, Na- ture Physics19, 1904 (2023)

    1904

  36. [36]

    De Corato, K

    M. De Corato, K. Zhang, and L. Zhu, Colloidal magnus effect in polymer solutions, arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.17825 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  37. [37]

    L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz,Electrodynamics of Con- tinuous Media(Pergamon Press, Oxford and New York, 1984). 11

    1984

  38. [38]

    R. Kubo, M. Toda, and N. Hashitsume,Statistical Physics II: Nonequilibrium Statistical Mechanics, Vol. 31 (Springer Science & Business Media, 2012)

    2012

  39. [39]

    H. G. Magnus, ¨Uber die Abweichung der Geschosse (Druckerei der K¨ oniglichen Akademie der Wis- senschaften, 1853)

  40. [40]

    E. B. Sonin, Magnus force in superfluids and supercon- ductors, Physical Review B55, 485 (1997)

    1997

  41. [41]

    L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz,Statistical Physics(El- sevier, Oxford, 1980)

    1980

  42. [42]

    M. E. Cates and S. J. Candau, Statics and dynamics of worm-like surfactant micelles, Journal of Physics: Con- densed Matter2, 6869 (1990)

    1990

  43. [43]

    Caspers, N

    J. Caspers, N. Ditz, K. Krishna Kumar, F. Ginot, C. Bechinger, M. Fuchs, and M. Kr¨ uger, How are mobil- ity and friction related in viscoelastic fluids?, The Journal of Chemical Physics158(2023)

    2023

  44. [44]

    Goychuk, Viscoelastic subdiffusion: From anomalous to normal, Physical Review E-Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics80, 046125 (2009)

    I. Goychuk, Viscoelastic subdiffusion: From anomalous to normal, Physical Review E-Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics80, 046125 (2009)

    2009

  45. [45]

    J. R. Gomez-Solano and C. Bechinger, Transient dynam- ics of a colloidal particle driven through a viscoelastic fluid, New Journal of Physics17, 103032 (2015)

    2015

  46. [46]

    Ginot, J

    F. Ginot, J. Caspers, M. Kr¨ uger, and C. Bechinger, Bar- rier crossing in a viscoelastic bath, Physical Review Let- ters128, 028001 (2022)

    2022

  47. [47]

    Ginot, J

    F. Ginot, J. Caspers, L. F. Reinalter, K. K. Kumar, M. Kr¨ uger, and C. Bechinger, Recoil experiments deter- mine the eigenmodes of viscoelastic fluids, New Journal of Physics24, 123013 (2022)

    2022

  48. [48]

    J. K. Dhont,An introduction to dynamics of colloids(El- sevier, 1996)

    1996

  49. [49]

    [35] uses a coupling parameterC, which we set to C= 1 for simplicity

    Ref. [35] uses a coupling parameterC, which we set to C= 1 for simplicity

  50. [50]

    Zwanzig, Nonlinear generalized langevin equations, Journal of Statistical Physics9, 215 (1973)

    R. Zwanzig, Nonlinear generalized langevin equations, Journal of Statistical Physics9, 215 (1973)

    1973

  51. [51]

    K. A. Milton, X. Guo, G. Kennedy, N. Pourtolami, and D. M. DelCol, Vacuum torque, propulsive forces, and anomalous tangential forces: Effects of nonreciprocal me- dia out of thermal equilibrium, Physical Review A108, 022809 (2023)

    2023

  52. [52]

    Gelbwaser-Klimovsky, N

    D. Gelbwaser-Klimovsky, N. Graham, M. Kardar, and M. Kr¨ uger, Equilibrium forces on nonreciprocal materi- als, Physical Review B106, 115106 (2022)

    2022

  53. [53]

    We note that the stationary distribution ofxandyfor F=0is independent of Ω, i.e., it equals the Boltzmann distribution for potential 1 2 k(x−y) 2

  54. [54]

    EvaluatingC ii(t, t′) at different timestandt ′ provides no additional information as it can be expressed in terms of sums of MSD at different times

  55. [55]

    We note that taking time derivatives of (18) results in an expression involving the velocity autocorrelation, which however is hard to determine experimentally in over- damped systems

  56. [56]

    Squarcini, A

    A. Squarcini, A. Solon, P. Viot, and G. Oshanin, Frac- tional brownian gyrator, Journal of Physics A: Mathe- matical and Theoretical55, 485001 (2022)

    2022

  57. [57]

    Digregorio, I

    P. Digregorio, I. Pagonabarraga, and F. V. Reyes, Phase separation in a chiral active fluid of inertial self-spinning disks, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.08533 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  58. [58]

    Lan and E

    Y. Lan and E. Aurell, The stochastic thermodynamics of a rotating brownian particle in a gradient flow, Scientific reports5, 12266 (2015)

    2015

  59. [59]

    Berner, B

    J. Berner, B. M¨ uller, J. R. Gomez-Solano, M. Kr¨ uger, and C. Bechinger, Oscillating modes of driven colloids in overdamped systems, Nature communications9, 999 (2018)

    2018

  60. [60]

    D. Das, R. Vink, and M. Kr¨ uger, Friction of a driven chain: role of momentum conservation, goldstone and radiation modes, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 36, 215707 (2024)

    2024

  61. [61]

    Narinder, C

    N. Narinder, C. Bechinger, and J. R. Gomez-Solano, Memory-induced transition from a persistent random walk to circular motion for achiral microswimmers, Phys- ical review letters121, 078003 (2018)

    2018

  62. [62]

    Kralj, M

    N. Kralj, M. Ravnik, and ˇZ. Kos, Chirality, anisotropic viscosity and elastic anisotropy in three-dimensional ac- tive nematic turbulence, Communications Physics7, 222 (2024)

    2024

  63. [63]

    Janssen, A

    X. Janssen, A. Schellekens, K. van Ommering, L. van IJzendoorn, and M. Prins, Controlled torque on super- paramagnetic beads for functional biosensors, Biosensors and Bioelectronics24, 1937 (2009)

    1937

  64. [64]

    X. Cao, A. Silva, E. Panizon, A. Vanossi, N. Manini, E. Tosatti, and C. Bechinger, Moir´ e-pattern evolution couples rotational and translational friction at crystalline interfaces, Phys. Rev. X12, 021059 (2022). 12 Supporting Information In this document we provide supplemental figures and details related to the results presented in the main text. We pro...

    2022

  65. [65]

    Fluctuation dissipation relation Following Eq. 3(a) and 3(b) in the main text, one can construct the reciprocal interaction model in the complex variablesz(t) andw(t) as given below γ˙z=−(k−iγνΩ)(z−w) +σ,(S9a) γν˙w= (k−iγνΩ)(z−w) +ξ.(S9b) 13 Integrating outw(t), the resulting equation ofz(t) is as follows Z t −∞ ΓR(t−t ′) ˙z(t′)dt=σ R.(S10) The memory ker...

  66. [66]

    z(t) = F γt+γν γνk γν 2Ω2+k2 +t (γ+γν) 2 +i F γν5Ω3 2 p −γν 2Ω2(γ+γν) 2 +k(γ+γν) 2 (−γν2Ω2(γ+γν) 2)3/2 (γν 2Ω2 +k 2) , ˙z(t) = F γ(1 +ν)

    Magnus deflection Introducing an external forceF=F x in this model yields the following steady state values ofz(t) and hence the velocity ˙z(t). z(t) = F γt+γν γνk γν 2Ω2+k2 +t (γ+γν) 2 +i F γν5Ω3 2 p −γν 2Ω2(γ+γν) 2 +k(γ+γν) 2 (−γν2Ω2(γ+γν) 2)3/2 (γν 2Ω2 +k 2) , ˙z(t) = F γ(1 +ν) . (S14) The velocity ˙z(t) has no imaginary part indicating that in presenc...

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 4, 2026.