Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 41 references

Robust chiral optical force via electric dipole interactions, inspired by a sea creature

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper identifies a chiral optical force, arising solely from electric dipole interactions, that pushes the two enantiomers of a chiral molecule in opposite directions and is orders of magnitude stronger than earlier proposals.

desk verdict A clean derivation and impressive fenchone numbers, but the 'essentially all chiral molecules' claim overreaches and the paper's own eucalyptol result undercuts it. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.13206 v1 pith:2WIKNZNR submitted 2024-12-03 physics.optics quant-ph

Robert P. Cameron , Duncan McArthur , Alison M. Yao , Nick Vogeley , Daqing Wang This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.opticsquant-ph
keywords chiralopticalforceenantiomerseparationelectricdipoleinteractionmolecularorientationoff-diagonalpolarizabilitystandingwaveisotopicallymoleculesVelella
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

The paper proposes a new kind of chiral optical force—a force that acts in opposite directions on the two mirror-image forms (enantiomers) of a chiral molecule—and argues that it is orders of magnitude stronger than earlier proposals. The force arises purely from electric dipole interactions: a molecule oriented by a static field and a traveling wave sits in a standing wave made of two orthogonal linear polarizations, and scattering photons between the two polarizations gives the molecule a push whose direction encodes its handedness. The paper works through the full rotational quantum mechanics, uses realistic quantum-chemical molecular data for fenchone and eucalyptol, and simulates a beam-deflection experiment that would spatially separate the enantiomers on a detector. If the numbers hold, this would be a practical path toward separating mirror-image molecules with light alone, including isotopically chiral species that current methods struggle with.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the force formula $F \approx kE_yE_x\alpha_{yx}(\omega)\|\Omega\cos(2kZ_0)\,\hat{z}$, where $E_y$ and $E_x$ are the amplitudes of the two orthogonal linear polarizations of the standing wave, $\alpha_{yx}(\omega)$ is the off-diagonal electric-dipole polarizability element evaluated in the laboratory frame (the molecule-fixed component $\alpha_{ba}(\omega)$ rotated by the direction-cosine matrix $\ell$), $\Omega$ labels the oriented molecular geometry selected by the static and traveling-wave fields, and $\cos(2kZ_0)$ gives the standing-wave periodicity. This identity turns molecular chirality into a mechanical push: the sign of the product $\mu_{0z}\alpha_{yx}$ at the oriented geometry changes with handedness, so opposite enantiomers move toward opposite nodes of the standing wave, and the field's own handedness (set by $E_zE_yE_x$) can be chosen independently. The paper derives the force from the translational potential energy $U$ of the standing wave and evaluates the necessary rotational matrix elements for asymmetric rigid rotors, covering the strong-field (pendular), weak-field (perturbative), and intermediate regimes.

What would settle it

A recalculation of $\alpha_{yx}(\omega)$ at the two wavelengths using a correlated wavefunction method (e.g., coupled cluster) that changes the sign of this element relative to the density-functional value used here would reverse the force direction predicted by Eq. (15), so the proposed beam-deflection experiment would send each enantiomer to the wrong side of the detector screen.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the chiral optical force $F \approx kE_yE_x\alpha_{yx}(\omega)\|\Omega\cos(2kZ_0)\,\hat{z}$ (Eq. 15) gives opposite enantiomers opposite forces in a fixed field geometry while being roughly three orders of magnitude larger than the established optical helicity gradient force $F' \propto G'(\omega)$. The force depends on the off-diagonal electric-dipole polarizability element $\alpha_{yx}$ in the laboratory frame, which becomes non-zero because the static field $E_0\hat{z}$ and the traveling wave $E'_x\hat{x}$ jointly orient the molecule; the standing wave's orthogonal linear polarizations then transfer photons between its $y$- and $x$-polarized components, and the recoil pushes the molecule along $z$. The paper shows that in the strong-field (pendular) limit the force is near maximal and enantioselective for 148 of the first 150 rotational states of fenchone, and that even isotopically chiral eucalyptol, whose electronic structure is essentially achiral, feels a force near $10^{-20}$ N through its chiral mass distribution in the weak-field limit.

Load-bearing premise

The direction of the force for a given handed molecule rests on the sign of a small computed off-diagonal electric polarizability; if that sign is wrong, the molecules would be pushed in the opposite direction or not separated at all.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In the strongest field limit, fenchone's two enantiomers experience opposite forces of magnitude $4.18\times 10^{-19}$ N, and the simulated beam profiles place the diffraction orders 49 µm apart on the detector.
  • Because the interaction is off-resonance and purely electric-dipole, the force does not rely on a specific molecular energy-level structure and should apply to essentially all chiral molecules in their vibronic ground state.
  • Isotopically chiral eucalyptol, whose electronics are nearly achiral, still feels a force of order $10^{-20}$ N in the weak-field regime, where previous helicity-gradient forces vanish.
  • The sign of the force is set by the product $E_zE_yE_x$, so experimenters can choose which handed form is pushed to which side simply by reversing the field geometry.
  • The proposed buffer-gas beam experiment, with a mechanical grating and free-flight detection, yields resolvable enantiomer separation in the full numerical simulation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A deflection experiment that resolves the direction of the force would be a direct mechanical measurement of the off-diagonal polarizability $\alpha_{yx}(\omega)$, a quantity normally inferred from spectroscopy; it could therefore serve as an independent benchmark for quantum-chemistry codes.
  • The paper's closing suggestion that surfaces might replace the static and traveling-wave fields points toward a chip-scale geometry in which oriented molecules are pushed laterally by a single standing wave, potentially with much higher throughput.
  • Because the strong-field force vanishes for isotopically chiral molecules, separating such species in practice would require selecting or preparing the higher rotational states where the per-state enantioselectivity is perfect, a step the paper does not develop.
  • The mechanism's reliance on off-resonance electric dipole interactions suggests it could be extended to non-polar chiral molecules if the required orientation is produced by an intense optical field instead of a static one.
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

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a chiral optical force on small polar diamagnetic chiral molecules based on electric-dipole interactions, in analogy with the wind-driven separation of Velella velella forms. The molecule is partially oriented by a static electric field and a linearly polarized traveling wave, and a lin⊥lin standing wave exerts a state-dependent force F = k Ey Ex <r|ℓ_yβ' ℓ_xα'|r> α_{β'α'}(ω) cos(2kZ0) ẑ (Eq. 14), which has opposite sign for opposite enantiomers in a fixed field geometry. Strong-field and weak-field limits are given in Eqs. 15 and 16. Numerical calculations for fenchone show forces around 4×10^-19 N, nearly three orders of magnitude larger than the helicity-gradient force, and a proposed matter-wave deflection experiment predicts spatial separation of enantiomers. For isotopically chiral eucalyptol the force is nonzero, but the authors report poor overall enantioselectivity.

Significance. The derivation is clean and parameter-free once molecular constants and polarizabilities are supplied: no adjustable parameters are fitted, the force follows from the rigid-rotor Hamiltonian, and the numerical deflection simulation accounts for the full rotational state distribution. If the predicted sign of the off-diagonal polarizability is correct, this would be a substantial advance in chiral optical forces. The strength of the fenchone demonstration is credible. However, the headline generalization to essentially all chiral molecules, including isotopic chiral species, is not supported by the paper's own eucalyptol results, and the direction of the force hinges on small, unbenchmarked DFT off-diagonal polarizability components. The paper is therefore a promising but overreaching Letter.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and §4, Eqs. 15 and 16] The claim that the force applies to 'essentially all chiral molecules, including isotopically chiral varieties' is contradicted by the paper's own eucalyptol example: Fig. 4 reports poor overall enantioselectivity (Fz<0 for 87/150 rotational states), and the strong-field limit in Eq. 15 vanishes for isotopically chiral molecules, leaving the much weaker weak-field force of Eq. 16 at an optimized intensity of I' = 1.26×10^11 W cm^-2. No general argument or survey establishes that typical chiral molecules meet the orientation and polarizability-tensor conditions needed for a sizeable enantioselective force. Please either narrow the general-applicability claim or support it with additional evidence.
  2. [Appendix, 'Calculated molecular properties', and Eqs. 15–16] The sign of the force, and therefore the predicted enantiomer separation in Fig. 5, is determined by small off-diagonal polarizability components such as α_ba(ω) = 0.79×10^-42 C^2 m^2/J for fenchone, compared with diagonal entries around 1900×10^-42 C^2 m^2/J. These signs come from a single DFT method (B3LYP/AUG-cc-pVDZ) with no benchmark or uncertainty estimate; a sign error would reverse or erase enantioselectivity. The authors should validate the signs with independent quantum-chemistry methods or experimental constraints.
  3. [Eq. 15 and Fig. 3] The strong-field limit that gives the claimed orders-of-magnitude enhancement assumes pendular orientation with V ≫ H^(0), which requires a large permanent dipole moment and fields as high as I' = 5.00×10^11 W cm^-2 and I = 1.00×10^10 W cm^-2. The manuscript does not discuss whether such intensities remain safely far off-resonance for generic chiral molecules or whether molecules with small dipole moments can be oriented at all. This is load-bearing for the 'robust' and 'essentially all chiral molecules' claims.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Eq. 15] The notation 'αyx(ω)∣Ω' should be written as α_yx(ω)|_Ω or otherwise explained; as typeset it is ambiguous, and the orientation variable Ω is never defined.
  2. [Footnote 2] 'M ∼ 102 Da or less' should read 'M ∼ 10^2 Da or less' (or the intended value should be stated explicitly).
  3. [Fig. 3 caption] The caption refers to 'two-fold quasi-degenerate (5% tolerance)' but does not define the 5% tolerance criterion used to classify the rotational states.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the chiral force is derived from the assumed light-matter interaction Hamiltonian, and the molecular response tensors are ab initio DFT inputs rather than fitted parameters.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained and does not reduce any prediction to its inputs. The central result, Eq. 14, is obtained by differentiating the explicitly written ac-Stark potential U (Eq. 7) with respect to the molecular position Z0, i.e., F = −⟨ψ|∂Z0 U|ψ⟩ zhat; the strong-field and weak-field limits (Eqs. 15 and 16) are derived limits of the same expression rather than independent postulated formulas. The molecular dipole moments and polarizability tensors are obtained from DFT (B3LYP/AUG-cc-pVDZ) and reported in the appendix; they are inputs, not adjustable parameters, and the signs controlling enantioselectivity are computed consequences of those tensor components. The comparison force F′ is the published helicity-gradient expression of Refs. [13,14], and the coefficients Cr, Br, Ar in Eq. 16 are re-derived in the appendix (Eqs. 65–67) even though Ref. [29] is also cited, so no load-bearing argument rests on an unexamined self-citation. The paper's own admission that the isotopically chiral eucalyptol case shows poor overall enantioselectivity (Fz < 0 for only 87/150 states) is a scope limitation on the general-applicability claim, but it is an honest computed outcome and does not indicate that any result was fitted or defined into existence.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central derivation has no fitted parameters; molecular constants are ab initio inputs. The main hand-chosen quantities are field intensities, wavelengths, and the unstated static field strength. The physics relies on standard rigid-rotor electrodynamics plus domain assumptions about off-resonance behavior, adiabatic following, and DFT accuracy.

free parameters (2)
  • Field intensities and wavelengths = I'=5e11 W/cm², I=1e10 W/cm², λ'=1064 nm, λ=532 nm
    Chosen by hand to reach the strong-field orientation regime and to keep α(ω') and α(ω) ellipsoids from aligning; these values set the reported force magnitudes but are not fitted to the target result.
  • Static field strength Ez = not specified in text
    Required for the strong-field orientation regime; its absence is a reproducibility gap and is flagged separately.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math The rigid-rotor Hamiltonian H=V+U+H(0) (Eqs. 5-8) captures the molecule-field interaction to leading order.
    Rigid rotor and electric dipole interaction are standard; used throughout the derivation of Eq. 14.
  • domain assumption Fields are far off resonance, so V and U act as Stark potentials and no population transfer or absorption occurs.
    The paper states 'off-resonance interactions' and uses ac Stark forms for V and U; this excludes resonant heating and resonant forces.
  • domain assumption The molecule remains in a single rotational energy eigenstate (adiabatic following) as fields ramp from zero to their interaction-region values.
    Used to assign Boltzmann weights Pr from unperturbed states to pendular states near Eq. 90.
  • domain assumption DFT B3LYP/AUG-cc-pVDZ molecular properties have correct signs and magnitudes for the chirally sensitive polarizability components.
    Force direction depends on small off-diagonal tensor elements; no benchmark or error bar is provided.
  • domain assumption The two rotational orientations Ω (V has two-fold symmetry) give α_yx(ω)|Ω with opposite signs for opposite enantiomers, and the chosen molecule is in its vibronic ground state with rigid conformation.
    This underlies Eq. 15 and the claim of general applicability to 'essentially all chiral molecules'.
  • domain assumption ω'≠ω guarantees the principal axes of α(ω') and α(ω) are not aligned, making F non-vanishing in the strong-field limit.
    Stated in the main text after Eq. 4; essential for a non-zero strong-field force.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Robust chiral optical force via electric dipole interactions, inspired by a sea creature." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2WIKNZNR

@misc{pith2026241213206,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Robust chiral optical force via electric dipole interactions, inspired by a sea creature},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2WIKNZNR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.13206}
}
read the original abstract

Inspired by a sea creature, we identify a robust chiral optical force that pushes the opposite enantiomers of a chiral molecule towards regions of orthogonal linear polarization in an optical field via electric dipole interactions. Our chiral optical force can be orders of magnitude stronger than others proposed to date and applies to essentially all chiral molecules, including isotopically chiral varieties which are notoriously difficult to separate using existing methods. We propose a realistic experiment supported by full numerical simulations, potentially enabling optical separation of opposite enantiomers for the first time.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.13206 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) The two distinct mirror-image forms of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) The key elements of a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. A scatter plot of our chiral optical force [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. As in Fig. 3 but for a single enantiomer of isotopically [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (a) A proposed experiment to separate the opposite [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [29]

    A. C. Neville, Animal Asymmetry (Edward Arnold, 1976)

    work page 1976

  2. [1]

    Cipparrone, A

    G. Cipparrone, A. Mazzulla, A. Pane, R. J. Hernan- dez, and R. Bartolino, Chiral self-assembled solid micro- spheres: a novel multifunctional microphotonic device, Adv. Mater. 23, 5703 (2011)

    work page 2011

  3. [2]

    R. J. Hern´ andez, A. Mazzulla, A. Pane, K. Volke- Sep´ ulveda, and G. Cipparrone, Attractive-repulsive dy- namics on light-responsive chiral microparticles induced by polarized tweezers, Lab Chip 13, 459 (2013)

    work page 2013

  4. [3]

    Tkachenko and E

    G. Tkachenko and E. Brasselet, Spin controlled optical radiation pressure, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 033605 (2013)

    work page 2013

  5. [4]

    M. G. Donato et al., Polarization-dependent optome- chanics mediated by chiral microresonators, Nat. Com- mun. 5, 3656 (2014)

    work page 2014

  6. [5]

    Tkachenko and E

    G. Tkachenko and E. Brasselet, Optofluidic sorting of material chirality by chiral light, Nat. Commun. 5, 3577 (2014)

    work page 2014

  7. [6]

    Tkachenko and E

    G. Tkachenko and E. Brasselet, Helicity-dependent three-dimensional optical trapping of chiral microparti- cles, Nat. Commun. 5, 4491 (2014)

    work page 2014

  8. [7]

    Kravets, A

    N. Kravets, A. Aleksanyan, and E. Brasselet, Chiral op- tical Stern-Gerlach Newtonian experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 024301 (2019)

    work page 2019

Show all 41 references
  1. [8]

    Kravets, A

    N. Kravets, A. Aleksanyan, H. Chra ¨ ıbi, J. Leng, and E. Brasselet, Optical enantioseparation of racemic emul- sions of chiral microparticles, Phys. Rev. Appl. 11, 044025 (2019)

    2019

  2. [9]

    Y. Zhao, A. A. Saleh, M. A. van de Haar, B. Baum, J. A. Briggs, A. Lay, O. A. Reyes-Becerra, and J. A. Dionne, Nanoscopic control and quantification of enantioselective optical forces, Nat. Nanotechnol. 12, 1055 (2017)

    2017

  3. [10]

    Yamanishi, H.-Y

    J. Yamanishi, H.-Y. Ahn, H. Yamane, S. Hashiyada, H. Ishihara, K. T. Nam, and H. Okamoto, Optical gradient force on chiral particles, Sci. Adv. 8, eabq2604 (2022)

    2022

  4. [11]

    Yamanishi, H.-Y

    J. Yamanishi, H.-Y. Ahn, and H. Okamoto, Nanoscopic observation of chiro-optical force, Nano Lett. 23, 9347 (2023)

    2023

  5. [12]

    Canaguier-Durand, J

    A. Canaguier-Durand, J. A. Hutchison, C. Genet, and T. W. Ebbesen, Mechanical separation of chiral dipoles by chiral light, New J. Phys. 15, 123037 (2013)

    2013

  6. [13]

    R. P. Cameron, S. M. Barnett, and A. M. Yao, Discrim- inatory optical force for chiral molecules, New J. Phys. 16, 013020 (2014)

    2014

  7. [14]

    R. P. Cameron, A. M. Yao, and S. M. Barnett, Diffraction gratings for chiral molecules and their applications, J. Phys. Chem. A 118, 3472 (2014)

    2014

  8. [15]

    elec- tric dipole revolution in chiral measurements

    In contrast, Eq. 1 gives ∣F′∣ ≤ 7× 10−22 N for the enantiomers of fenchone in a one-dimensional optical he- licity lattice with commensurate parameters [13, 14]; our chiral optical force F is nearly three orders of magnitude stronger here than the corresponding optical helicit...

  9. [16]

    D. S. Bradshaw and D. L. Andrews, Laser optical sepa- ration of chiral molecules, Opt. Lett. 40, 677 (2015)

    2015

  10. [17]

    Hayat, J

    A. Hayat, J. P. B. Mueller, and F. Capasso, Lateral chirality-sorting optical forces, PNAS 112, 13190 (2015)

    2015

  11. [18]

    J. A. Jones, B. Regan, J. Painter, J. Mills, I. Dutta, B. Khajavi, and E. J. Galvez, Searching for the helical gradi- ent force on chiral molecules, Proc. SPIE 10120, Complex Light and Optical Forces XI, 101200M (2017)

    2017

  12. [19]

    K. A. Forbes and D. Green, Enantioselective optical gra- dient forces using 3D structured vortex light, Opt. Com- mun. 515, 128197 (2022)

    2022

  13. [20]

    Mart ´ ınez-Romeu, I

    J. Mart ´ ınez-Romeu, I. Diez, S. Golat, F. J. Rodriguez- Fortu˜ no, and A. Mart ´ ınez, Chiral forces in longitudinally invariant dielectric photonic waveguides, Photonics Res. 12, 431 (2024)

    2024

  14. [21]

    B. A. Stickler, M. Diekmann, R. Berger, and D. Wang, Enantiomer superpositions from matter-wave interfer- ence of chiral molecules, Phys. Rev. X 11, 031056 (2021)

    2021

  15. [22]

    Isaule, R

    F. Isaule, R. Bennett, and J. B. G¨ otte, Quantum phases of Bosonic chiral molecules in helicity lattices, Phys. Rev. A 106, 013321 (2022)

    2022

  16. [23]

    Marichez, A

    V. Marichez, A. Tassoni, R. P. Cameron, S. M. Barnett, R. Eichhorn, C. Genet, and T. M. Hermans, Mechanical chiral resolution, Soft Matter 15, 4593 (2019)

    2019

  17. [24]

    Kakkanattu, N

    A. Kakkanattu, N. Eerqing, S. Ghamari, and F. Vollmer, Review of optical sensing and manipulation of chiral molecules and nanostructures with the focus on plas- monic enhancements [Invited], Opt. Express 29, 12543 (2021)

    2021

  18. [25]

    Genet, Chiral light-chiral matter interactions: an op- tical force perspective, ACS Photonics 9, 319 (2022)

    C. Genet, Chiral light-chiral matter interactions: an op- tical force perspective, ACS Photonics 9, 319 (2022)

    2022

  19. [26]

    Golat, J

    S. Golat, J. J. Kingsley-Smith, I. Diez, J. Martinez- Romeu, A. Mart ´ ınez, and F. J. Rodr ´ ıguez-Fortu˜ no, Op- tical dipolar chiral sorting forces and their manifestation in evanescent waves and nanofibers, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 023079 (2024)

    2024

  20. [27]

    Habibovi´ c, K

    D. Habibovi´ c, K. R. Hamilton, O. Neufeld, and L. Rego, Emerging tailored light sources for studying chirality and symmetry Nat. Rev. Phys., (2024)

    2024

  21. [28]

    Toftul, S

    I. Toftul, S. Golat, F. J. Rodr ´ ıguez-Fortu˜ no, F. Nori, Y. Kivshar, and K. Y. Bliokh 2024 Radiation forces and torques in optics and acoustics, arXiv:2410.23670, (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  22. [30]

    R. P. Cameron, D. McArthur, and A. M. Yao, Strong chiral optical force for small chiral molecules based on electric-dipole interactions, inspired by the asymmetri- cal hydrozoan Velella velella, New J. Phys. 25, 083006 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    Cohen-Tannoudji and D

    C. Cohen-Tannoudji and D. Gu´ ery-Odelin, Advances in Atomic Physics: An Overview(World Scientific, 2011)

    2011

  24. [32]

    L. D. Barron, Molecular Light Scattering and Optical Ac- tivity (Cambridge, 2004)

    2004

  25. [33]

    P. R. Bunker and P. Jensen, Fundamentals of Molecular Symmetry (Institute of Physics Publishing, 2005)

    2005

  26. [34]

    See the appendices for more information about the asym- metric rigid rotor; the Cr, Br, and Ar coefficients; our cal- culated molecular properties; and our theory of molecular deflection

  27. [35]

    Ravid, E

    U. Ravid, E. Putievsky, I. Katzir, and R. Ikan, Chiral gc analysis of enantiomerically pure fenchone in essential oils, Flavour Frag. J. 7, 169 (1992)

    1992

  28. [36]

    Nathan-Maister, The Absinthe Encyclopedia(Oxyge- nee Ltd, 2009)

    D. Nathan-Maister, The Absinthe Encyclopedia(Oxyge- nee Ltd, 2009)

    2009

  29. [37]

    Kimata, K

    K. Kimata, K. Hosoya, T. Araki, and N. Tanaka, Direct chromatographic separation of racemates on the basis of isotopic chirality, Anal. Chem. 69, 2610 (1997)

    1997

  30. [38]

    N. R. Hutzler, H.-I. Lu, and J. M. Doyle, The buffer gas beam: an intense, cold, and slow source for atoms and molecules, Chem. Rev. 102, 4803 (2012)

    2012

  31. [39]

    Ayuso, A

    D. Ayuso, A. F. Ordonez, and O. Smirnova, Ultrafast chirality: the road to efficient chiral measurements, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 24, 26962 (2022)

    2022

  32. [40]

    Ayuso, A

    D. Ayuso, A. F. Ordonez, P. Decleva, M. Ivanov, and O. Smirnova, Enantio-sensitive unidirectional light bending, Nat. Commun. 12, 3951 (2021)

    2021

  33. [41]

    Khokhlova, E

    M. Khokhlova, E. Pisanty, S. Patchkovskii, O. Smirnova, and M. Ivanov, Enantioselective steering of free- induction decay, Sci. Adv. 8, eabq1962 (2022). 7 Asymmetric rigid rotor The quantum-mechanical description of the asymmetric rigid rotor has been covered extensively elsew...

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.