Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Diffraction-free natural optical skyrmions and their subwavelength confinement around vortices

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A naturally occurring skyrmion of transverse-axial polarization around an optical vortex's phase singularity is claimed to propagate without change in shape or size inside a tube whose radius is set by the vortex's orbital and spin angular

desk verdict A real and convincing observation on vortex-core skyrmion propagation, but the 'indefinite non-diffraction' claim is an asymptotic limit, not an exact property. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.06555 v2 pith:OTHYDOZF submitted 2025-09-08 physics.optics

Nilo Mata-Cervera , Deepak K. Sharma , Ramon Paniagua-Dominguez , Yijie Shen , Miguel A. Porras This is my paper
classification physics.optics PACS 42.25.Bs42.25.Ja
keywords opticalskyrmionsnon-diffractingpropagationvorticestransverse-axialpolarizationspin-orbitangularmomentumsubwavelengthconfinementStokesskyrmiontopologicallight
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

Diffraction usually hard-wires a trade-off: tighter confinement means faster spreading. This paper claims that an ordinary vortex beam, without special shaping, breaks that trade-off in a small region. Around the vortex's dark phase singularity, Gauss's law forces the electric field to acquire an axial component, and the resulting transverse-axial polarization texture is a skyrmion whose structure is fixed by the ratio of axial to transverse field; that ratio is independent of propagation distance and of the beam's width. The skyrmion therefore travels unchanged inside a tube that can be a fraction of a wavelength wide while the rest of the beam spreads normally. The authors confirm the effect in a focused circularly polarized vortex over hundreds of micrometres, more than three orders of magnitude beyond the Rayleigh range expected from the subwavelength texture, and show that changing the light's spin shrinks the tube from about half a wavelength to zero. If right, this gives finite-power, non-diffracting subwavelength structure in ordinary light, with direct implications for topological information transfer and super-resolution metrology.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the complex quotient ψz/ψ⊥ (Eq. 5), which defines the transverse-axial polarization texture, a skyrmion mapping a plane onto a sphere of polarization states. Near the vortex axis, Gauss's law forces an axial field component with a fixed spatial form, so the quotient factors as ρ e^{iγ} with ρ = (|ℓ|/(kr)) sqrt(1+sign(ℓ)σz) and γ = -sign(ℓ)φ - π/2. Because every observable of the texture — Stokes parameters, polarization-plane geometry, and skyrmion number — depends only on this quotient, and the quotient is independent of z and w, the texture itself cannot spread even though the underlying vortex beam does.

What would settle it

Record the transverse profile of the s3=0 iso-surface (or the full TA-Stokes texture) over many hundreds of Rayleigh ranges of the host beam in a clean, astigmatism-free setup; if the skyrmion diameter drifts from the predicted √2λ/π for ℓ=1 and σz=1, the z-independence in Eq. (5) is falsified. A complementary calculation: keep the next-order r^{|ℓ|+2} term in Eq. (2) and check whether the z-dependent phase and amplitude it introduces measurably changes the quotient over a given propagation distance.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that the natural skyrmion in an optical vortex is diffraction-free. For a vortex of topological charge ℓ embedded in a uniform transverse polarization with spin parameter σz, the axial and transverse field components satisfy ψz/ψ⊥ = (i|ℓ|/(kr)) sqrt(1+sign(ℓ)σz) e^{-i sign(ℓ)φ}. This quotient contains no z and no beam-width w, and since the TA-Stokes parameters, the polarization-plane azimuth and inclination, and the skyrmion number are all functions of this quotient, the entire texture is immutable along propagation even as the envelope diffracts. The texture is confined to a tube of radius r_sk ≈ 1.59|ℓ|λ sqrt(1+sign(ℓ)σz), where 99% of the TA Poi

Load-bearing premise

The z-independence of the skyrmion texture rests on keeping only the leading term in the near-axis expansion of the vortex field, dropping terms of order r^{|ℓ|+2}, and on the paraxial form of Gauss's law; those neglected terms are small but nonzero and carry propagation dependence, so the claim of truly indefinite non-diffraction is exact only in the r→0 limit and is observed over a finite 600 μm window.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Ordinary vortex beams, with finite power and no special shaping, turn out to contain a structure that does not diffract, removing the infinite-power idealization attached to Bessel and Airy non-diffracting beams.
  • The skyrmion radius can be dialed from about 2.25λ|ℓ| down to zero by rotating the input polarization from circular with orbital and spin angular momenta aligned to circular with them antiparallel, a control no intensity-based focal spot offers below the diffraction limit.
  • Because the texture's topology survives while the host beam spreads, the skyrmion could serve as a propagation-robust information carrier or as a wavelength-scale fixed reference for super-resolution imaging and metrology.
  • The mechanism follows from Gauss's law and the phase singularity rather than from beam shaping, so the non-diffracting behavior should transfer to acoustic, electron, and water-wave vortices.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension not reported here: compute how the neglected r^{|ℓ|+2} terms in the near-axis expansion accumulate with z, and search for slow drift of the s3=0 cylinder in scans much longer than the 600 μm window; the paper's 'indefinitely' is exact only in the r→0 limit.
  • Because the quotient is independent of the beam width w, the texture may survive in non-ideal host beams such as aberrated or turbulent vortices as long as the leading-order vortex structure holds; the paper only tests a clean focused beam.
  • The paper treats a 2D transverse-axial polarization subspace; a natural next step would be to ask whether a fully 4D polarization skyrmion can also be made z-independent by an analogous ratio argument.
  • The practical power inside r_sk can be a fraction of a percent of the host beam for weak focusing, so real applications would need tighter focusing or background suppression; the paper notes this but does not propose an engineering solution.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper claims that the transverse-axial (TA) polarization skyrmion naturally present around the phase singularity of a paraxial optical vortex is exempt from diffraction. Using the leading-order near-axis expansion of the vortex field (Eq. 2) and the paraxial form of Gauss's law (Eq. 3), the authors derive the quotient ψ_z/ψ_⊥ = i|ℓ|/(kr) sqrt(1 + sign(ℓ)σ_z) e^{-i sign(ℓ)ϕ} (Eq. 5), which is independent of propagation distance z and beam width w. They then derive the skyrmion radius r_sk (Eq. 9) and FWHM formula |ℓ|λ sqrt(1+sign(ℓ)σ_z)/π, and report measurements in a focused LG beam (ℓ=1, RCP, w_0=6.1 μm) over a 600 μm window, observing collimated s_3=0 contours and SAM-dependent skyrmion size. The authors conclude that natural skyrmions provide a real-world, finite-power form of ideal non-diffracting propagation.

Significance. The paper is conceptually appealing and, if properly qualified, represents a useful contribution. The derivation of Eq. (5) is clean, parameter-free, and makes a falsifiable prediction that the experimental data support over the observed window. The observation that a subwavelength polarization texture can propagate without appreciable change while the hosting beam diffracts is striking and likely to stimulate follow-up work in optical skyrmion physics and topological photonics. The experiment is competent, and the independent measurement of σ_z rules out circularity in the size comparison. The main weakness is that the central claim of exact, indefinite non-diffraction outruns the mathematics: the z-independence is an asymptotic near-axis property, not an exact property of any finite-power beam.

major comments (3)
  1. [Theory, Eq. (2) and Eq. (5)] The claim that the quotient (5) is 'independent of z and the vortex beam scaling w' is a leading-order result, not an exact statement. Eq. (2) is obtained by neglecting a term of order r^{|ℓ|+2}. For an exact paraxial LG beam with ℓ=1 and RCP, the next-order correction is z-dependent: ψ_z/ψ_⊥ = (i√2/(kr)) [1 − r²/w(z)² + ikr²/(2R(z))] e^{-iφ}, where w(z) and R(z) vary with z. The correction is of order (r/w_0)², which is ~4×10^{-4} at the nominal FWHM radius r≈0.225λ for w_0=6.1 μm, so it is small in the experiment, but it is nonzero and z-dependent. The paper's statement that the skyrmion 'propagates indefinitely without any change in shape and size' is therefore not established; the exact quotient is non-diffracting only in the limit r/w→0. The manuscript should explicitly state this asymptotic nature and quantify the correction for the quoted parameters.
  2. [Experiment, Fig. 3(d) and Discussion] The experimental evidence for 'indefinite' non-diffraction is limited to a 600 μm window. For the quoted beam waist w_0=6.1 μm at λ=532 nm, the Rayleigh range is z_R=πw_0²/λ≈219 μm, so the window covers about 2.7 Rayleigh ranges. The observed collimation of the s_3=0 lines is fully consistent with the small, slowly varying correction noted above, but it cannot certify propagation over arbitrarily long distances. I recommend reporting the window length in Rayleigh ranges and providing a quantitative estimate of the maximum expected drift of the s_3=0 isocontours over that window using the exact LG amplitude. As written, the 'above three orders of magnitude' comparison is relative to the skyrmion size, not to the characteristic scale of the host-beam diffraction, and the indefinite claim is not directly supported by the data.
  3. [Discussion and Conclusion; Supplementary Material S3] The paper argues that natural skyrmions are compatible with finite power and non-diffraction, unlike Bessel or Airy beams. This is only true in the asymptotic sense: the finite-power vortex beam's higher-order terms cause a slow z-dependent modification of the texture at any fixed finite radius. The power carried within r_sk also decays as the host beam diffracts, as acknowledged in S3. The authors should reconcile the abstract's 'exempt from diffraction' and 'ideal non-diffracting propagation' with this qualification. A revised wording along the lines of 'asymptotically non-diffracting' or 'non-diffracting to leading order in r/w' would make the claim precise without diminishing the significance of the result.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Introduction] The abstract calls the propagation 'exempt from diffraction' and 'ideal non-diffracting'; these terms should be qualified as asymptotic/effective to match the derivation, as the neglected r^{|ℓ|+2} terms are z-dependent.
  2. [Eq. (9) and S2] The formula FWHM = |ℓ|λ sqrt(1+sign(ℓ)σ_z)/π gives zero when sign(ℓ)σ_z = -1. In that limit the axial field vanishes identically at leading order, so the skyrmion texture disappears rather than shrinking continuously to a point. The paper should state this degeneracy explicitly.
  3. [Fig. 3 and Fig. 4] The color scale for the TA-Stokes parameters is referenced but not visible in the provided figures; a scale bar and colorbar would improve reproducibility. Also, the experimental data in Fig. 4 would benefit from error bars or a quantitative agreement metric, since the claim of 'great agreement' is otherwise qualitative.
  4. [Notation, Eq. (2)] The definition of A(z) in Eq. (2) is given implicitly. Writing it out explicitly would make the subsequent cancellation in Eq. (5) easier to follow, especially for readers not working in this subfield.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central skyrmion quotient is derived from paraxial Maxwell equations with no fitted constants, and the experimental size comparisons are parameter-free; only minor non-load-bearing self-citations are present.

full rationale

The central claim—the z-independent skyrmion quotient ψz/ψ⊥ = (i|ℓ|/(kr)) sqrt(1+sign(ℓ)σ_z) e^{-i sign(ℓ)ϕ} (Eq. 5)—is derived from the Fresnel propagation integral (Eq. 1), the leading-order near-axis expansion (Eq. 2), and the paraxial Gauss law (Eq. 3). The z-dependent prefactor A(z) cancels in the quotient, so the result follows algebraically from Maxwell/paraxial equations without any fitted parameter. This is not equivalent to an input by construction; the quotient is a mathematical consequence, not a definition. The experimental FWHM formula FWHM = |ℓ|λ sqrt(1+sign(ℓ)σ_z)/π is likewise derived from Eq. (5) and the TA-PS coverage, with σ_z measured independently from intensity ratios; no parameter is fitted to the observed skyrmion size. The reconstruction of ψ_z from measured ψ⊥ via the exact divergence law is a standard Maxwell-consistent analysis, not a circular input. The paper cites its own prior PRL [26] for the existence and observation of natural skyrmions and the Z-point singularity, but the non-diffraction claim is independently rederived here and also supported by external refs. [37,38] for non-diffracting axial polarization features. These self-citations are contextual, not load-bearing. The strongest caveat is that Eq. (5) is obtained by neglecting the r^{|ℓ|+2} term in Eq. (2), so the exact finite-power fields carry small z-dependent corrections; this makes the 'without any change' claim asymptotic rather than exact. That is a correctness/scope limitation, not circularity, and the paper itself notes perturbing effects in focused settings. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained and the experimental tests are parameter-free.

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

No fitted constants underlie the central claim. The formula for the skyrmion quotient (Eq. 5) and the FWHM follow analytically from ℓ, λ, and the measured σ_z. The 0.99 value used to define the tube radius r_sk in Eq. (9) is a conventional threshold, not a parameter fitted to the data. The paper introduces no new entities. The main modeling assumptions are paraxial propagation, cylindrical symmetry, uniform transverse polarization, and the leading-order near-axis expansion.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Paraxial approximation for beam propagation and for the axial field component (Eq. 3, approximate equality).
    Used to derive ψz from Gauss's law and to keep the Fresnel propagation integral. Valid for the experimental beam (w0≈11.5λ, divergence 0.03 rad), but restricts the claim to paraxial regimes.
  • domain assumption The vortex beam has cylindrical symmetry and a uniform transverse polarization state u⊥.
    Required for the field ansatz ψ(r/w) e^{iℓφ} u⊥ and for the simple form of the quotient (5). Imperfections in real beams perturb the texture, as noted for the focused case of ref. [26].
  • standard math Leading-order near-axis expansion of the Fresnel integral (Eq. 2), neglecting r^{|ℓ|+2} terms and using J_ν(x)≈x^ν/(2^ν ν!).
    Gives the z-independent quotient (5), but only exactly in the limit r→0; higher-order terms carry z-dependence.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Diffraction-free natural optical skyrmions and their subwavelength confinement around vortices." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OTHYDOZF

@misc{pith2026250906555,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Diffraction-free natural optical skyrmions and their subwavelength confinement around vortices},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OTHYDOZF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.06555}
}
read the original abstract

Diffraction causes waves to spread out as they propagate freely. The tighter the lateral confinement, the faster the spreading. Past research on how to suppress diffraction has been based on wave engineering and has led so far to idealized waves that, in real settings, eventually diffract. Here, we find a propagating light wave structure naturally present in optical vortices, a natural skyrmion, that is exempt from diffraction. Moreover, diffraction-free propagation occurs with lateral confinement at any scale below the wavelength of light. In our experiments, we observe non-diffraction over a propagation distance above three orders of magnitude greater than expected from the skyrmion subwavelength size. We thus provide a factual, real-world form of ideal non-diffracting propagation. This form substantially differs from previous forms of light propagation, including propagating optical skyrmions known to date, and could open up new perspectives in its various applications.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.06555 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [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 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]

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. Non-diffracting meronic spin defects of light

    physics.optics 2026-04 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The spin field around an optical vortex core is a non-diffracting meronic defect: a point of zero spin wrapped by a half-sphere spin texture, shrinkable below the wavelength.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Bateman, Electrical and Optical Wave Motion (Cam- bridge University Press, Cambridge, 1915)

    H. Bateman, Electrical and Optical Wave Motion (Cam- bridge University Press, Cambridge, 1915)

    work page 1915

  2. [2]

    Yessenov, J

    M. Yessenov, J. Free, Z. Chen, E. G. Johnson, M. P. J. Lavery, M. A. Alonso, and A. F. Abouraddy, Nat. Com- mun.13, 4573 (2022)

    2022

  3. [3]

    Berry and N

    M. Berry and N. Balazs, Am. J. Phys.47, 264 (1979)

    work page 1979

  4. [4]

    G. A. Siviloglou, J. Broky, A. Dogariu, and D. N. Christodoulides, Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 213901 (2007)

    work page 2007

  5. [5]

    S. Fu, Y. Tsur, J. Zhou, L. Shemer, and A. Arie, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 034501 (2015)

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    Z. Lin, X. Guo, J. Tu, Q. Ma, J. Wu, and D. Zhang, J. Appl. Phys.117, 104503 (2015)

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    Voloch-Bloch, Y

    N. Voloch-Bloch, Y. Lereah, Y. Lilach, A. Gover, and A. Arie, Nature494, 331–335 (2013)

    work page 2013

  8. [8]

    Sarenac, O

    D. Sarenac, O. Lailey, M. E. Henderson, H. Ekinci, C. W. Clark, D. G. Cory, L. DeBeer-Schmitt, M. G. Huber, J. S. White, K. Zhernenkov, and D. A. Pushin, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 153401 (2025)

    work page 2025

Show all 59 references
  1. [9]

    Durnin, J

    J. Durnin, J. J. Miceli, and J. H. Eberly, Phys. Rev. Lett.58, 1499 (1987)

    1987

  2. [10]

    McGloin and K

    D. McGloin and K. Dholakia, Contemporary Physics46, 15–28 (2005)

    2005

  3. [11]

    Grillo, E

    V. Grillo, E. Karimi, G. C. Gazzadi, S. Frabboni, M. R. Dennis, and R. W. Boyd, Phys. Rev. X4, 011013 (2014)

    2014

  4. [12]

    Gori and G

    F. Gori and G. Guattari, Opt. Commun.64, 491 (1987)

    1987

  5. [13]

    Deng and H

    D. Deng and H. Li, Appl. Phys. B106, 677–681 (2012)

    2012

  6. [14]

    Lu and J

    J. Lu and J. Greenleaf, IEEE Trans. Ultrason, Ferroel. Freq. Control39, 441 (1992)

    1992

  7. [15]

    Grittingham, J

    J. Grittingham, J. Appl. Phys.57, 1179 (1983)

    1983

  8. [16]

    Mackinnon, Found

    L. Mackinnon, Found. Phys.8, 157 (1978)

    1978

  9. [17]

    H. E. Hern´ andez-Figueroa, M. Zamboni-Rached, and E. Recami, Localized waves (John Wiley & Sons, 2008)

    2008

  10. [18]

    H. E. Hern´ andez-Figueroa, M. Zamboni-Rached, and E. Recami, Non-diffracting waves (John Wiley & Sons, 2013)

    2013

  11. [19]

    Yessenov, B

    M. Yessenov, B. Bhaduri, H. E. Kondakci, and A. F. Abouraddy, Phys. Rev. A99, 023856 (2019)

    2019

  12. [20]

    Y. Shen, N. Papasimakis, and N. I. Zheludev, Nature Communications15, 4863 (2024)

    2024

  13. [21]

    M. R. Dennis, K. O’holleran, and M. J. Padgett, in Progress in optics, Vol. 53 (Elsevier, 2009) pp. 293–363

    2009

  14. [22]

    M. V. Berry, Light: Science & Applications12, 238 7 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    W. Gao, Y. Zhou, X. Li, Y. Zhang, Q. Zhang, M. Li, X. Yu, S. Yan, X. Xu, and B. Yao, Journal of Optics27, 083001 (2025)

    2025

  16. [24]

    M. R. Dennis and K. Y. Bliokh, Newton (2025)

    2025

  17. [25]

    Born and E

    M. Born and E. Wolf, Principles of optics (Elsevier, 2013)

    2013

  18. [26]

    Mata-Cervera, D

    N. Mata-Cervera, D. K. Sharma, Y. Shen, R. Paniagua- Dominguez, and M. A. Porras, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 033805 (2025)

    2025

  19. [27]

    P. Chen, K. X. Lee, T. C. Meiler, and Y. Shen, Nanopho- tonics14, 2211 (2025)

    2025

  20. [28]

    S. Wang, Z. Zhou, Z. Zheng, J. Sun, H. Cao, S. Song, Z.-L. Deng, F. Qin, Y. Cao, and X. Li, Physical Review Letters133, 073802 (2024)

    2024

  21. [29]

    Guti´ errez-Cuevas and E

    R. Guti´ errez-Cuevas and E. Pisanty, Journal of Optics 23, 024004 (2021)

    2021

  22. [30]

    H. Xu, X. Xie, C. Zhang, Y. Zhang, X. Yuan, Y. Shen, and C. Min, Nano Letters25, 10611 (2025)

    2025

  23. [31]

    Tsesses, E

    S. Tsesses, E. Ostrovsky, K. Cohen, B. Gjonaj, N. Lind- ner, and G. Bartal, Science361, 993 (2018)

    2018

  24. [32]

    C. Liu, S. Zhang, S. A. Maier, and H. Ren, Physical Review Letters129, 267401 (2022)

    2022

  25. [33]

    Schwab, A

    J. Schwab, A. Neuhaus, P. Dreher, S. Tsesses, K. Co- hen, F. Mangold, A. Mantha, B. Frank, G. Bartal, F.-J. Meyer zu Heringdorf, et al., Nature Physics , 1 (2025)

    2025

  26. [34]

    S. Gao, F. C. Speirits, F. Castellucci, S. Franke-Arnold, S. M. Barnett, and J. B. G¨ otte, Physical Review A102, 053513 (2020)

    2020

  27. [35]

    A. M. Beckley, T. G. Brown, and M. A. Alonso, Optics express18, 10777 (2010)

    2010

  28. [36]

    Mata-Cervera, Z

    N. Mata-Cervera, Z. Xie, C. Li, H. Yu, H. Ren, Y. Shen, and S. A. Maier, Nanophotonics (2025)

    2025

  29. [37]

    Afanasev, J

    A. Afanasev, J. J. Kingsley-Smith, F. J. Rodr ´ ıguez- Fortu˜ no, and A. V. Zayats, Advanced Photonics Nexus 2, 026001 (2023)

    2023

  30. [38]

    A. J. Vernon, A. Kille, F. J. Rodr ´ ıguez-Fortu˜ no, and A. Afanasev, Optica11, 120 (2024)

    2024

  31. [39]

    Kille and A

    A. Kille and A. Afanasev, Phys. Rev. B109, 184305 (2024)

    2024

  32. [40]

    M. A. Porras, Phys. Rev. A103, 033506 (2021)

    2021

  33. [41]

    I. S. Gradshteyn and I. M. Ryzhik, Table of Integrals, Series, and Products, eighth ed. (Academic Press, Boston, 2014)

    2014

  34. [42]

    M. Lax, W. H. Louisell, and W. B. McKnight, Physical Review A11, 1365 (1975)

    1975

  35. [43]

    S. M. Barnett, Journal of Optics B: Quantum and Semi- classical Optics4, S7 (2001)

    2001

  36. [44]

    Poincar´ e, Th´ eorie math´ ematique de la lumi` ere II., Vol

    H. Poincar´ e, Th´ eorie math´ ematique de la lumi` ere II., Vol. 1 (G. Carr´ e, 1889)

  37. [45]

    Marco and M

    D. Marco and M. A. Alonso, Physical Review Letters 134, 123805 (2025)

    2025

  38. [46]

    W. m. Goldman, Complex Hyperbolic Geometry (Ox- ford University Press, 1999)

    1999

  39. [47]

    Shen, Optics Letters46, 3737 (2021)

    Y. Shen, Optics Letters46, 3737 (2021)

    2021

  40. [48]

    J. A. Davis, D. M. Cottrell, J. Campos, M. J. Yzuel, and I. Moreno, Applied optics38, 5004 (1999)

    1999

  41. [49]

    Rosales-Guzm´ an and A

    C. Rosales-Guzm´ an and A. Forbes, in How to shape light with spatial light modulators (Soci- ety of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE), 2017)

    2017

  42. [50]

    Takeda, H

    M. Takeda, H. Ina, and S. Kobayashi, Journal of the optical society of America72, 156 (1982)

    1982

  43. [51]

    R. L. Phillips and L. C. Andrews, Applied optics22, 643 (1983)

    1983

  44. [52]

    J. Chen, X. Shen, Q. Zhan, and C.-W. Qiu, Laser & Photonics Reviews19, 2400327 (2025)

    2025

  45. [53]

    T. He, Y. Meng, L. Wang, H. Zhong, N. Mata-Cervera, D. Li, P. Yan, Q. Liu, Y. Shen, and Q. Xiao, Nature Communications15, 10141 (2024)

    2024

  46. [54]

    C. J. Zapata-Rodr ´ ıguez and M. A. Porras, Opt. Lett.31, 034501 (2006)

    2006

  47. [55]

    E. T. Rogers, J. Lindberg, T. Roy, S. Savo, J. E. Chad, M. R. Dennis, and N. I. Zheludev, Nature materials11, 432 (2012)

    2012

  48. [56]

    T. A. Hensel, J. O. Wirth, O. L. Schwarz, and S. W. Hell, Nature Physics , 1 (2025)

    2025

  49. [57]

    D. A. Smirnova, F. Nori, and K. Y. Bliokh, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 054003 (2024)

    2024

  50. [58]

    Verbeeck, H

    J. Verbeeck, H. Tian, and P. Schattschneider, Nature 467, 301–304 (2010)

    2010

  51. [59]

    K. Y. Bliokh, M. A. Alonso, and M. R. Dennis, Reports on Progress in Physics82, 122401 (2019). 8 Supplementary Material for Observation of the Non-diffraction of Natural Skyrmions with Subwavelength Confinement around Optical V ortices S1. Tilt and azimuth of the polarization ...

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.