Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 74 references

Resonant TMD particles dark-trapped in a single bottle beam suppress photon-recoil decoherence by roughly three orders of magnitude versus equal-mass silica in bright traps.

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 ↗

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-14 14:44 UTC pith:ZU5CJDLG

load-bearing objection Solid theoretical proposal for single-beam MQ dark trapping of high-density TMDs; the Γ/Ω numbers are real under the stated multipole calculation, with the usual caveats on k and residual scattering at z_eq. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.09896 v1 pith:ZU5CJDLG submitted 2026-07-10 physics.optics quant-ph

Dark Optical Trapping of Resonant Transition-Metal Dichalcogenide Particles

Patrick Illetschek , Gleb Fedorovich , Albert Seredin , Gleb Tselikov , Valentin S. Volkov , Nikolai Kiesel , Markus Aspelmeyer , Mihail Petrov
show 1 more author
Anton V. Zasedatelev
This is my paper
classification physics.optics quant-ph
keywords dark optical trappingtransition-metal dichalcogenidesbottle beamMie resonancesmagnetic quadrupolephoton recoillevitodynamicsultra-high vacuum
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 paper argues that macroscopic particles made of high-index, high-density transition-metal dichalcogenides can be stably levitated at an optical intensity minimum (a dark trap) formed by a single bottle beam. Working near a magnetic-quadrupole Mie resonance lets the optical force push the particle into the dark region rather than out of it, while the low local intensity keeps photon scattering and absorption small. For a WS2 sphere of mass about half a trillion atomic mass units the calculated ratio of recoil rate to trap frequency drops to roughly 0.02 (or 0.009 with a compensating electrostatic force). That improvement, together with internal temperatures remaining well below the material melting point, is presented as a practical route to longer coherence times for large-mass quantum experiments in ultra-high vacuum.

Core claim

Full Mie calculations show that TMD spheres (refractive index 3.7–4.8, density up to 9.3 g cm^{-3}) of carefully chosen radius support simultaneous axial and radial confinement at the magnetic-quadrupole resonance inside a bottle beam; for a 0.5 × 10^{12} amu WS2 particle the recoil-to-frequency ratio reaches Γ/Ω ≃ 0.02, three orders of magnitude better than an equal-mass silica particle in a conventional bright trap, while absorbed power keeps the equilibrium temperature safely below melting.

What carries the argument

Magnetic-quadrupole Mie resonance of a high-index TMD sphere placed at the intensity node of a bottle beam (two co-propagating, π-phase-shifted Laguerre–Gauss modes). The resonance reverses the sign of the dominant gradient force so the particle is attracted to the dark region; multipole interference sets the exact equilibrium location and trap stiffness.

Load-bearing premise

The imaginary part of the TMD refractive index at 1550 nm is assumed to lie between 10^{-13} and 10^{-10}, values too small for standard measurement; if the true absorption is higher, heating and black-body decoherence erase the claimed advantage.

What would settle it

Fabricate a ~300 nm WS2 sphere, load it into a bottle-beam trap at 1550 nm and 0.8 W total power under UHV, and measure either the centre-of-mass heating rate (hence Γ/Ω) or the steady-state particle temperature; values substantially above the predicted Γ/Ω ≃ 0.02 or temperatures approaching 1520 K would refute the central claim.

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

If this is right

  • Coherence times for 0.5 × 10^{12} amu particles become long enough for free-space matter-wave or entanglement protocols previously limited by recoil.
  • Single-beam dark traps avoid the phase-diffusion decoherence that plagues standing-wave geometries.
  • Electrostatic compensation can further lower Γ/Ω to ~0.009 while enlarging the stable size window.
  • Other TMDs (MoS2, WSe2, MoTe2, MoSe2) offer similar dark-trapping windows at slightly different radii and densities.
  • Reduced internal heating removes two-photon absorption escape routes that currently limit silicon particles at telecom wavelengths.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the k values hold, the same bottle-beam geometry could be combined with cavity-assisted feedback to reach ground-state cooling of masses approaching the Planck scale.
  • The multipole interference that sets z_eq suggests that deliberate detuning of higher-order multipoles could engineer anharmonic potentials for non-Gaussian state preparation.
  • Fabrication routes already demonstrated for TMD nanoparticles make an experimental test feasible within existing levitodynamics laboratories.

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 / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript theoretically analyzes dark optical trapping of resonant high-index TMD particles (primarily WS2, with other TMDs in the Supplement) in a single-beam bottle-beam geometry for UHV levitodynamics. Using full Mie multipole expansions and Maxwell-stress-tensor forces (via the Optical Tweezer Toolbox), the authors identify particle-radius windows supporting stable 3D confinement near the magnetic-quadrupole resonance, compute trap frequencies and depths, and predict a photon-recoil-to-frequency ratio Γ/Ωz ≃ 0.02 (0.009 with electrostatic compensation) for a 0.5 × 10^12 amu WS2 particle. They claim this yields roughly three orders of magnitude longer coherence time than equal-mass silica in conventional bright traps, together with internal temperatures remaining well below the material melting point.

Significance. If the quantitative predictions hold, the work supplies a concrete materials-and-geometry route to larger levitated masses with suppressed recoil heating and reduced internal absorption, directly relevant to free-space quantum optomechanics and table-top tests of gravity-mediated entanglement or gravitational decoherence. Strengths include parameter-free Mie calculations (no fitting to the target Γ/Ω), explicit multipole decompositions (Figs. 1b, 2c), far-field scattering patterns, and systematic comparison across several TMDs. The single-sided bottle beam also sidesteps phase-diffusion issues of standing-wave traps. These elements make the proposal falsifiable and experimentally actionable.

major comments (3)
  1. [Photon recoil / Fig. 3 and Fig. 2c] The headline Γ/Ωz ≃ 0.02 (Fig. 3, solid red) is evaluated at the radiation-pressure-shifted z_eq, where Fig. 2c shows residual ED/MD/EQ multipoles reappear and MQ no longer fully dominates. While the full Maxwell-stress calculation already includes this floor, the three-order coherence claim relative to equal-mass silica is load-bearing on that residual Q_sca remaining low. A short sensitivity analysis of Q_sca(z_eq) (and thus Γ/Ω) to ± few-percent variations in the LG waists, relative power, or particle radius would confirm robustness; without it the numerical advantage could be overstated.
  2. [Internal heating and thermal emission / Fig. 4] Internal-temperature curves (Fig. 4 and Suppl. Fig. S5) rest on k spanning 10^{-13}–10^{-10}, values below reliable ellipsometric resolution (explicitly noted). If the true infrared extinction is even modestly higher, Teq rises sharply and the “well below melting” claim fails. The manuscript should either (i) supply tighter theoretical or experimental bounds on k for bulk TMDs at 1550 nm or (ii) quantify the black-body COM decoherence rate that accompanies the elevated Teq, so that the combined recoil-plus-thermal coherence advantage can be assessed.
  3. [Photon recoil paragraph and Fig. 3] Electrostatic compensation is invoked to restore the particle to the intensity node and lower Γ/Ωz to 0.009 (Fig. 3, dashed red), yet no force-balance calculation, electrode geometry, or required field strength is given. Because the residual multipole scattering (and therefore the compensated Γ/Ω) depends on the precise equilibrium location, a quantitative multipole-plus-electrostatic force map is needed to substantiate the improved number.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Photon-recoil paragraph] The factor of 5 appearing in the definition Γ = ω Psca/(5 m c^{2} Ω_{0}) is not derived or referenced; a one-sentence justification or citation would help readers reproduce the ratio.
  2. [Final discussion paragraph] Thermo-optic resonance shifts are acknowledged but left unquantified. Even a simple estimate of the temperature-induced detuning of the MQ resonance relative to the trap bandwidth would clarify whether the stable windows of Fig. 2 remain open under the predicted Teq.
  3. [Table I and surrounding text] Table I lists upper bounds on k; the main-text narrative sometimes treats them as measured values. Consistent language (“upper bound”) would avoid over-precision.
  4. [Supplementary Material] Supplementary multipole-force maps (Fig. S1) and multi-TMD Γ/Ω curves (Fig. S3) are useful; a brief cross-reference in the main text would improve accessibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: Γ/Ω and trapping predictions follow from independent full-Mie force and scattering calculations on literature material parameters; minor author-overlapping citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The central claims (stable MQ dark trapping for a range of TMD radii, Γ/Ω_z ≃ 0.02 for 0.5×10^12 amu WS2, three-order coherence-time gain vs equal-mass silica) are obtained by direct numerical evaluation of the Maxwell stress tensor and multipole amplitudes (Eq. 1) inside a prescribed bottle-beam field, using the Optical Tweezer Toolbox. Material indices n,k and densities are taken from external tables; no free parameter is fitted to the target ratio or to the stability boundaries. The electrostatic-compensation curve is an optional post-processing step that does not redefine the uncompensated result. Self-citations to prior multipole-force papers by overlapping authors supply qualitative context but are not invoked as uniqueness theorems or as the sole justification for the force balance; the quantitative results stand on the present Mie computation alone. Hence the derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks and exhibits only the most minor, non-load-bearing self-citation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central numerical claims rest on standard electromagnetic scattering theory plus a handful of material and beam parameters taken from literature or chosen for numerical convenience. No new physical entities are postulated. The largest uncertainty is the unmeasured infrared extinction coefficient of the TMDs.

free parameters (3)
  • LG beam waists w1, w2 = 1.59e-6 m, 8.66e-7 m
    Chosen as 1.59 µm and 0.866 µm to form a convenient bottle; different waists shift the stable-radius window.
  • total optical power P0 = 0.8 W
    Set to 0.8 W for all frequency and heating plots; scales trap frequencies and absorbed power linearly.
  • imaginary refractive index k of TMDs = 10^{-13}–10^{-10}
    Literature upper bounds spanning 1e-13 to 1e-10 are scanned because measured values are unavailable; heating curves depend directly on k.
axioms (3)
  • standard math Optical forces are given by the surface integral of the Maxwell stress tensor of the total (incident + scattered) field obtained from Mie multipole expansion.
    Invoked throughout Sec. “The dark trap” and Fig. 1; standard result of classical electromagnetism.
  • domain assumption In UHV the only cooling channel for the internal temperature is thermal radiation weighted by the particle’s absorption cross-section.
    Stated in the internal-heating paragraph and used to compute Teq in Fig. 4; neglects residual gas conduction and thermo-optic feedback.
  • domain assumption Bulk refractive indices and densities of TMDs apply unchanged to sub-micron spheres.
    Table I and all Mie calculations; surface and size effects on n,k are ignored.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 19497 in / 2827 out tokens · 29267 ms · 2026-07-14T14:44:46.876289+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Mitigating recoil events and minimizing optically induced heating are central challenges in the precise control and cooling of macroscopic particles. To overcome this, we propose trapping resonant dielectric particles for applications in ultra-high vacuum (UHV) levitodynamics. Contrary to other approaches, where suppressing the parasitic resonant scattering was achieved in a standing wave geometry, here we propose a single beam geometry in a dark trap regime. As a promising material platform, we focus on a class of transition-metal dichalcogenide (TMD) particles with high polarizability, characterized by refractive indices in the range $3.7$-$4.8$ and densities up to $9.3~\mathrm{g\,cm^{-3}}$. Using full Mie theory, we identify a range of TMD particle radii that support stable axial and radial magnetic quadrupole trapping in a bottle-beam configuration. We predict that for WS$_2$ particles with a mass of $0.5 \times 10^{12}\,\mathrm{amu}$, one can expect suppression of the scattering rate relative to the mechanical frequency down to $\Gamma/\Omega \simeq 0.02$. This corresponds to a coherence time extended by approximately three orders of magnitude compared with silica particles of the same mass trapped in conventional bright optical traps at UHV. Combined with significantly reduced internal heating, remaining well below the melting point of the material, dark trapping of resonant TMD macroscopic particles emerges as a promising platform for exploring quantum physics with large masses.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.09896 by Albert Seredin, Anton V. Zasedatelev, Gleb Fedorovich, Gleb Tselikov, Markus Aspelmeyer, Mihail Petrov, Nikolai Kiesel, Patrick Illetschek, Valentin S. Volkov.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.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

74 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Gonzalez-Ballestero, M

    C. Gonzalez-Ballestero, M. Aspelmeyer, L. Novotny, R. Quidant, and O. Romero-Isart, Science 374, 10.1126/science.abg3027 (2021)

    doi:10.1126/science.abg3027 2021

  2. [2]

    Magrini, P

    L. Magrini, P. Rosenzweig, C. Bach, A. Deutschmann- Olek, S. G. Hofer, S. Hong, N. Kiesel, A. Kugi, and M. Aspelmeyer, Nature 595, 373 (2021)

    2021

  3. [3]

    Tebbenjohanns, M

    F. Tebbenjohanns, M. L. Mattana, M. Rossi, M. Frim- mer, and L. Novotny, Nature 595, 378 (2021)

    2021

  4. [4]

    Kamba, R

    M. Kamba, R. Shimizu, and K. Aikawa, Nature Commu- nications 14, 7943 (2023)

    2023

  5. [5]

    Magrini, V

    L. Magrini, V. A. Camarena-Chávez, C. Bach, A. John- son, and M. Aspelmeyer, Physical Review Letters 129, 053601 (2022)

    2022

  6. [6]

    Militaru, M

    A. Militaru, M. Rossi, F. Tebbenjohanns, O. Romero- Isart, M. Frimmer, and L. Novotny, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 053602 (2022)

    2022

  7. [7]

    Kamba, N

    M. Kamba, N. Hara, and K. Aikawa, Science 389, 1225 (2025) , https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.ady4652

    doi:10.1126/science.ady4652 2025

  8. [8]

    Rieser, M

    J. Rieser, M. A. Ciampini, H. Rudolph, N. Kiesel, K. Hornberger, B. A. Stickler, M. Aspelmeyer, and U. Delić, Science 377, 987 (2022)

    2022

  9. [9]

    Reisenbauer, H

    M. Reisenbauer, H. Rudolph, L. Egyed, K. Hornberger, A. V. Zasedatelev, M. Abuzarli, B. A. Stickler, and U. Delić, Nature Physics 20, 1629 (2024)

    2024

  10. [10]

    Vijayan, Z

    J. Vijayan, Z. Zhang, J. Piotrowski, D. Windey, F. van der Laan, M. Frimmer, and L. Novotny, Nature nanotechnology 18, 49 (2023)

    2023

  11. [11]

    Rudolph, U

    H. Rudolph, U. Delić, M. Aspelmeyer, K. Hornberger, and B. A. Stickler, Physical review letters 129, 193602 (2022)

    2022

  12. [12]

    Winkler, A

    K. Winkler, A. V. Zasedatelev, B. A. Stickler, U. Delić, A. Deutschmann-Olek, and M. Aspelmeyer, Physical Re- view Research 7, 043298 (2025)

    2025

  13. [13]

    A. N. Poddubny, K. Winkler, B. A. Stickler, U. Delić, M. Aspelmeyer, and A. V. Zasedatelev, arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.06251 (2024)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  14. [14]

    V. Jain, J. Gieseler, C. Moritz, C. Dellago, R. Quidant, and L. Novotny, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 243601 (2016)

    2016

  15. [15]

    S. Dago, J. Rieser, M. A. Ciampini, V. Mlynář, A. Kugi, M. Aspelmeyer, A. Deutschmann-Olek, and N. Kiesel, Opt. Express 32, 45133 (2024)

    2024

  16. [16]

    Dania, O

    L. Dania, O. S. Kremer, J. Piotrowski, D. Candoli, J. Vijayan, O. Romero-Isart, C. Gonzalez-Ballestero, L. Novotny, and M. Frimmer, Nature Physics 21, 1603– 1608 (2025)

    2025

  17. [17]

    K. Dare, J. J. Hansen, I. Coroli, A. Johnson, M. As- pelmeyer, and U. c. v. Delić, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, L042025 (2024)

    2024

  18. [18]

    Weiser, T

    Y. Weiser, T. Faorlin, L. Panzl, T. Lafenthaler, L. Dania, D. S. Bykov, T. Monz, R. Blatt, and G. Cerchiari, Phys. Rev. A 111, 013503 (2025)

    2025

  19. [19]

    Gajewski and J

    R. Gajewski and J. Bateman, Physical Review Research 7, 10.1103/physrevresearch.7.023041 (2025)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.7.023041 2025

  20. [21]

    M. Juan, C. Bradac, B. Besga, M. Johnsson, G. Brennen, G. Molina-Terriza, and T. Volz, Nature Physics 13, 241 (2017)

    2017

  21. [22]

    Toftul, M

    I. Toftul, M. Petrov, R. Quidant, and Y. Kivshar, ACS Photonics 12, 3447 (2025)

    2025

  22. [23]

    L. Mao, I. Toftul, S. Balendhran, M. Taha, Y. Kivshar, and S. Kruk, Laser & Photonics Reviews 19, 2400767 (2025)

    2025

  23. [24]

    Arlt and M

    J. Arlt and M. J. Padgett, Opt. Lett. 25, 191 (2000)

    2000

  24. [25]

    Alpmann, M

    C. Alpmann, M. Esseling, P. Rose, and C. Denz, Applied Physics Letters 100, 111101 (2012)

    2012

  25. [26]

    Y. Xiao, Z. Yu, R. A. Wambold, H. Mei, G. Hickman, R. H. Goldsmith, M. Saffman, and M. A. Kats, Nanopho- tonics 10, 2893 (2021)

    2021

  26. [27]

    C. Fang, M. Kim, H. Mei, X. Yang, Z. Yu, Y. Xiao, S. Deshpande, P. Huft, A. M. Di- bos, D. A. Czaplewski, M. Saffman, J. T. Choy, and M. A. Kats, ACS Photonics 0, null (0) , https://doi.org/10.1021/acsphotonics.6c01311

    work page doi:10.1021/acsphotonics.6c01311

  27. [28]

    P. Xu, X. He, J. Wang, and M. Zhan, Opt. Lett. 35, 2164 (2010)

    2010

  28. [29]

    Barredo, V

    D. Barredo, V. Lienhard, P. Scholl, S. de Léséleuc, T. Boulier, A. Browaeys, and T. Lahaye, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 023201 (2020)

    2020

  29. [30]

    Almeida, I

    F. Almeida, I. Sousa, O. Kremer, B. P. da Silva, D. Tasca, A. Khoury, G. Temporão, and T. Guerreiro, Physi- cal Review Letters 131, 10.1103/physrevlett.131.163601 (2023)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.131.163601 2023

  30. [31]

    B. Melo, I. Brandão, B. S. Pinheiro da, R. Rodrigues, A. Khoury, and T. Guerreiro, Physical Review Applied 14, 10.1103/physrevapplied.14.034069 (2020)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.14.034069 2020

  31. [32]

    V. G. Shvedov, C. Hnatovsky, A. V. Rode, and W. Kro- likowski, Optics InfoBase Conference Papers 19, 273 (2011), iSBN: 9780977565771

    2011

  32. [33]

    Carney, P

    D. Carney, P. C. Stamp, and J. M. Taylor, Classical and Quantum Gravity 36, 034001 (2019)

    2019

  33. [34]

    S. Bose, I. Fuentes, A. A. Geraci, S. M. Khan, S. Qvar- fort, M. Rademacher, M. Rashid, M. Toroš, H. Ulbricht, and C. C. Wanjura, Reviews of Modern Physics 97, 015003 (2025)

    2025

  34. [35]

    Mueller and E

    T. Mueller and E. Malic, npj 2D Materials and Applica- tions 2, 29 (2018)

    2018

  35. [36]

    G. I. Tselikov, G. A. Ermolaev, A. A. Popov, G. V. Tikhonowski, D. A. Panova, A. S. Taradin, A. A. Vysh- nevyy, A. V. Syuy, S. M. Klimentov, S. M. Novikov, A. B. Evlyukhin, A. V. Kabashin, A. V. Arsenin, K. S. Novoselov, and V. S. Volkov, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 119, e2208830119 (2022) , https://www.pnas.org/doi/pdf/10.1073/pnas.2208830119

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.2208830119 2022

  36. [37]

    G. I. Tselikov, A. A. Minnekhanov, G. A. Ermolaev, G. V. Tikhonowski, I. S. Kazantsev, D. V. Dyubo, D. A. Panova, D. I. Tselikov, A. A. Popov, A. B. Maz- itov, S. Smirnov, F. Lipilin, U. Ahsan, N. D. Orekhov, I. Kruglov, A. V. Syuy, A. V. Kabashin, B. N. Chichkov, Z. Sofer, A. V. Arsenin, K. S. Novoselov, and V. S. Volkov, ACS Nano 19, 22820 (2025) , pMID...

    work page doi:10.1021/acsnano.5c00546 2025

  37. [38]

    Verre, D

    R. Verre, D. G. Baranov, B. Munkhbat, J. Cuadra, M. Käll, and T. O. Shegai, Nature Nanotechnology 14, 679 (2019)

    2019

  38. [39]

    Autere, H

    A. Autere, H. Jussila, A. Marini, J. R. M. Saavedra, Y. Dai, A. Säynätjoki, L. Karvonen, H. Yang, B. Amir- solaimani, R. A. Norwood, N. Peyghambarian, H. Lipsa- nen, K. Kieu, F. J. G. de Abajo, and Z. Sun, Phys. Rev. B 98, 115426 (2018) . 7

    2018

  39. [40]

    Trovatello, C

    C. Trovatello, C. Ferrante, B. Yang, J. Bajo, B. Braun, Z. H. Peng, X. Xu, P. K. Jenke, A. Ye, M. Delor, D. N. Basov, J. Park, P. Walther, C. R. Dean, L. A. Rozema, A. Marini, G. Cerullo, and P. J. Schuck, Nature Photon- ics 19, 291 (2025)

    2025

  40. [41]

    R. Wu, H. Zhang, H. Ma, B. Zhao, W. Li, Y. Chen, J. Liu, J. Liang, Q. Qin, W. Qi, et al. , Chemical Reviews 124, 10112 (2024)

    2024

  41. [42]

    Afridi, B

    A. Afridi, B. Melo, N. Meyer, and R. Quidant, Nature Communications 17, 1163 (2026)

    2026

  42. [43]

    Toftul, G

    I. Toftul, G. Fedorovich, D. Kislov, K. Frizyuk, K. Koshelev, Y. Kivshar, and M. Petrov, Physical Re- view Letters 130, 243802 (2023)

    2023

  43. [44]

    Y. Li, E. Valenton, S. Nagasamudram, J. Parker, M. Perez, U. Manna, M. Biswas, S. A. Rice, and N. F. Scherer, Nature Communications 16, 10397 (2025)

    2025

  44. [45]

    Isenhower, W

    L. Isenhower, W. Williams, A. Dally, and M. Saffman, Optics Letters 34, 1159 (2009)

    2009

  45. [48]

    Munkhbat, P

    B. Munkhbat, P. Wróbel, T. J. Antosiewicz, and T. O. Shegai, ACS Photonics 9, 2398 (2022) , https://doi.org/10.1021/acsphotonics.2c00433

    doi:10.1021/acsphotonics.2c00433 2022

  46. [49]

    J. R. Rumble, ed., CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 105th ed. (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2024)

    2024

  47. [50]

    Degallaix, R

    J. Degallaix, R. Flaminio, D. Forest, M. Granata, C. Michel, L. Pinard, T. Bertrand, and C. Gianpietro, Optics Letters 38, 2047 (2013)

    2047

  48. [51]

    Franta, D

    D. Franta, D. Nečas, I. Ohlídal, and A. Giglia, in Opti- cal Micro- and Nanometrology VI , Vol. 9890, edited by C. Gorecki, A. K. Asundi, and W. Osten, International Society for Optics and Photonics (SPIE, 2016) p. 989014

    2016

  49. [52]

    Mie, Annalen der Physik 330, 377 (1908)

    G. Mie, Annalen der Physik 330, 377 (1908)

    1908

  50. [53]

    M. I. Mishchenko, L. D. Travis, and A. A. Lacis, Scatter- ing, Absorption, and Emission of Light by Small Particles (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002)

    2002

  51. [54]

    Nieminen, V

    T. Nieminen, V. Loke, A. Stilgoe, G. Knoener, A. Branczyk, N. Heckenberg, and H. Rubinsztein- Dunlop, Journal of Optics A Pure and Applied Optics 9 (2007)

    2007

  52. [55]

    Farsund and B

    O. Farsund and B. U. Felderhof, Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 227, 108 (1996)

    1996

  53. [56]

    Lindner, P

    S. Lindner, P. Juschitz, J. Rieser, Y. Y. Fein, M. De- biossac, M. A. Ciampini, M. Aspelmeyer, and N. Kiesel, Applied Physics Letters 124, 143501 (2024)

    2024

  54. [57]

    Rossi, A

    M. Rossi, A. Militaru, N. C. Zambon, A. Riera-Campeny, O. Romero-Isart, M. Frimmer, and L. Novotny, Quan- tum delocalization of a levitated nanoparticle (2024), arXiv:2408.01264 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  55. [58]

    Jünnemann, N

    M. Jünnemann, N. C. Zambon, H. Sugimoto, M. Fujii, L. Novotny, and M. Frimmer, Physical Review B 111, 195304 (2025)

    2025

  56. [59]

    Romero-Isart, Phys

    O. Romero-Isart, Phys. Rev. A 84, 052121 (2011)

    2011

  57. [60]

    Kallel, R

    H. Kallel, R. Carminati, and K. Joulain, Physical Review B 95, 115402 (2017)

    2017

  58. [61]

    G. P. Zograf, M. I. Petrov, S. V. Makarov, and Y. S. Kivshar, Advances in Optics and Photonics 13, 1 , 2104.01964

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  59. [62]

    Y. S. Duh, Y. Nagasaki, Y. L. Tang, P. H. Wu, H. Y. Cheng, T. H. Yen, H. X. Ding, K. Nishida, I. Hotta, J. H. Yang, Y. P. Lo, K. P. Chen, K. Fujita, C. W. Chang, K. H. Lin, J. Takahara, and S. W. Chu, Nature Communications 11, 4101

  60. [63]

    Ryabov, O

    D. Ryabov, O. Pashina, G. Zograf, S. Makarov, and M. Petrov, Nanophotonics 11, 3981 , 2202.09614 [cond- mat, physics:physics]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  61. [64]

    Nishida, P.-H

    K. Nishida, P.-H. Tseng, Y.-C. Chen, P.-H. Wu, C.-Y. Yang, J.-H. Yang, W.-R. Chen, O. Pashina, M. I. Petrov, K.-P. Chen, and S.-W. Chu, Nano Letters 23, 11727 ()

  62. [65]

    Nishida, H.-Y

    K. Nishida, H.-Y. Cheng, M. Petrov, K.-P. Chen, J. Takahara, X. Li, K.-H. Lin, and S.-W. Chu, Journal of the Optical Society of America B 41, D61 ()

  63. [66]

    Maurer, C

    P. Maurer, C. Gonzalez-Ballestero, and O. Romero-Isart, Phys. Rev. A 108, 033714 (2023)

    2023

  64. [67]

    Neumeier, M

    L. Neumeier, M. A. Ciampini, O. Romero-Isart, M. As- pelmeyer, and N. Kiesel, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 121, e2306953121 (2024) . Supplementary Material for Dark Optical Trapping of Resonant Transition-Metal Dichalcogenide Particles Patrick Illetschek, 1, 2 Gleb Fedorovich,3, 4 Albert Seredin, 5 Gleb Tselikov,5 Valentin S. Volkov, 5 ...

    2024

  65. [68]

    Munkhbat, P

    B. Munkhbat, P. Wróbel, T. J. Antosiewicz, and T. O. Shegai, ACS Photonics 9, 2398 (2022)

    2022

  66. [69]

    J. R. Rumble, ed., CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics , 105th ed. (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2024)

    2024

  67. [70]

    B. E. Brown, Acta Crystallographica 20, 268 (1966)

    1966

  68. [71]

    A. A. Vyshnevyy, G. A. Ermolaev, D. V. Grudinin, K. V. Voronin, I. Kharichkin, A. Mazitov, I. A. Kruglov, D. I. Yakubovsky, P. Mishra, R. V. Kirtaev, A. V. Arsenin, K. S. Novoselov, L. Martin-Moreno, and V. S. Volkov, Nano Letters 23, 8057 (2023) , pMID: 37615652

    2023

  69. [72]

    Eagleson, Concise Encyclopedia of Chemistry (Walter de Gruyter, 1994) p

    M. Eagleson, Concise Encyclopedia of Chemistry (Walter de Gruyter, 1994) p. 1129

    1994

  70. [73]

    Magrini, P

    L. Magrini, P. Rosenzweig, C. Bach, A. Deutschmann-Olek, S. G. Hofer, S. Hong, N. Kiesel, A. Kugi, and M. Aspelmeyer, Nature 595, 373 (2021)

    2021

  71. [74]

    Lepeshov, N

    S. Lepeshov, N. Meyer, P. Maurer, O. Romero-Isart, and R. Quidant, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 233601 (2023)

    2023

  72. [75]

    Accessed 2026-03-09

    Molybdenum disulfide (mos2) — pubchem compound, https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/ Molybdenum-disulfide (accessed 2026), contains compiled melting point / sublimation data (used above: melting point 2375 °C). Accessed 2026-03-09

    2026

  73. [76]

    Ahmed, A

    F. Ahmed, A. M. Shafi, D. M. A. Mackenzie, M. A. Qureshi, H. A. Fernandez, H. H. Yoon, M. G. Uddin, M. Kuittinen, Z. Sun, and H. Lipsanen, Advanced Materials Interfaces 8, 2100950 (2021)

    2021

  74. [77]

    Accessed 2026-03-09

    Tungsten diselenide (wse2) american elements datasheet, https://www.americanelements.com/ tungsten-diselenide-12067-46-8 (accessed 2026), vendor/datasheet listing melting point 1200 °C. Accessed 2026-03-09

    2026