arxiv: 2605.13694 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-13 · 🪐 quant-ph · physics.atom-ph· physics.optics

Recognition: no theorem link

Floquet engineering of nonreciprocal light-induced dipolar interactions

Benjamin A. Stickler, Iurie Coroli, Livia Egyed, Manuel Reisenbauer, Murad Abuzarli, Uro\v{s} Deli\'c

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-14 18:10 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph physics.atom-phphysics.optics

keywords Floquet engineeringnonreciprocal interactionsdipolar forcesoptical tweezersquantum optomechanicssqueezing operationsnon-Hermitian physics

0 comments

The pith

Floquet driving of nonreciprocal dipolar forces produces beamsplitter, squeezing, and tunable complex frequencies between trapped particles.

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

The paper extends light-induced dipolar couplings in optical tweezer arrays into a Floquet-driven regime that incorporates the built-in nonreciprocity of optical forces. This combination yields effective interactions capable of implementing beamsplitter operations, single-mode and two-mode squeezing, and a negative-mass-like oscillator response. Programmable sequences of these operations further allow continuous adjustment of the complex eigenfrequencies of the collective mechanical modes. Such control supplies a concrete set of quantum operations useful for non-Hermitian many-body physics and collective optomechanics in arrays of polarizable objects.

Core claim

By applying periodic driving to the light-induced dipolar interactions between trapped polarizable particles, the authors obtain nonreciprocal couplings that realize beamsplitter transformations, single- and two-mode squeezing, and signatures of a negative-mass-like oscillator. Programmable combinations of these operations enable continuous tuning of the complex eigenfrequencies of the system, establishing a toolbox of non-Hermitian quantum operations for collective mechanical degrees of freedom.

What carries the argument

The Floquet-engineered nonreciprocal dipolar interaction, which generates time-periodic non-Hermitian couplings between the mechanical modes of the trapped particles.

If this is right

Beamsplitter operations enable coherent exchange of excitations between distinct mechanical modes.
Single- and two-mode squeezing generate quantum correlations and entanglement among the trapped particles.
Signatures of a negative-mass-like oscillator appear directly from the nonreciprocity of the driven forces.
Continuous tuning of complex eigenfrequencies supplies programmable gain and loss for non-Hermitian dynamics.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The same toolbox could be applied to larger arrays to engineer nonreciprocal many-body Hamiltonians and explore collective non-Hermitian topological effects.
Selective amplification or damping of specific collective modes may become feasible by choosing appropriate Floquet sequences.
Integration with existing tweezer technologies could produce scalable platforms for quantum sensing that exploit non-Hermitian features without added mechanical links.

Load-bearing premise

The idealized Floquet-driven nonreciprocal dipolar interactions can be realized in actual tweezer arrays without dominant heating, decoherence, or scattering losses washing out the predicted operations.

What would settle it

Direct measurement of the predicted single- or two-mode squeezing spectra, or of continuously tunable imaginary parts of the eigenfrequencies, in a small experimental array of optical tweezers would confirm or refute the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.13694 by Benjamin A. Stickler, Iurie Coroli, Livia Egyed, Manuel Reisenbauer, Murad Abuzarli, Uro\v{s} Deli\'c.

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Tweezer arrays of polarizable objects are a promising platform for assembling quantum matter and building next-generation quantum sensors. Light-induced dipolar interactions have emerged as a method to couple their motion, thereby establishing a new paradigm for controlling collective mechanical degrees of freedom. Here, we extend these into the regime of Floquet-driven interactions, combined with the intrinsic nonreciprocity of optical forces. We demonstrate beamsplitter, single-, and two-mode squeezing operations, as well as signatures of a negative-mass-like oscillator arising from the nonreciprocity. Moreover, we show that a programmable combination of these operations enables continuous tuning of complex eigenfrequencies. These results establish a toolbox of quantum operations of nonreciprocal interactions that are essential for investigating non-Hermitian many-body physics and collective quantum optomechanics.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

Floquet driving on nonreciprocal dipolar forces yields programmable beamsplitter and squeezing operations in tweezers, but the ideal-case analysis leaves experimental losses unaddressed.

read the letter

The paper's main contribution is showing that Floquet periodic driving can be layered onto the nonreciprocal optical dipolar forces in tweezer arrays to produce effective beamsplitter, single-mode and two-mode squeezing, and negative-mass oscillator dynamics. They also demonstrate how to combine these for continuous tuning of complex eigenfrequencies. They do this by starting from the standard model of light-induced interactions and applying Floquet theory to get time-averaged effective Hamiltonians that realize those operations. The approach is straightforward and builds directly on existing literature without introducing new fitting parameters. The derivations appear solid on paper, with the nonreciprocity coming from the directional nature of the dipole forces and the Floquet part allowing control over the coupling strengths and phases. A clear soft spot is the lack of detailed analysis on how experimental imperfections affect the results. Things like photon scattering losses, recoil heating from the tweezers, and intensity fluctuations could easily compete with the engineered interaction rates, potentially washing out the squeezing or the frequency tuning. The abstract and claims focus on the ideal case, so the practical viability remains open. This work is for researchers in collective quantum optomechanics and non-Hermitian physics who are looking for theoretical tools to design interactions in trapped particle arrays. It has enough concrete, programmable operations to merit a serious referee, who could help strengthen the experimental section. I would recommend sending it to peer review.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a theoretical framework for Floquet engineering of nonreciprocal light-induced dipolar interactions in tweezer arrays of polarizable objects. It derives and demonstrates effective beamsplitter, single-mode squeezing, and two-mode squeezing operations, identifies signatures of a negative-mass-like oscillator arising from nonreciprocity, and shows that programmable combinations of these operations allow continuous tuning of complex eigenfrequencies, positioning the results as a toolbox for non-Hermitian many-body physics and collective quantum optomechanics.

Significance. If the idealized Floquet effective model holds, the work supplies a useful set of programmable quantum operations on collective mechanical modes that are not readily available in static dipolar systems. The explicit construction of nonreciprocal squeezing and negative-mass dynamics, together with the eigenfrequency-tuning protocol, would constitute a concrete advance for theoretical studies of non-Hermitian optomechanics. The manuscript does not yet supply machine-checked proofs or reproducible code, but the derivations appear parameter-free once the drive amplitude and frequency are fixed.

major comments (2)

[§2–3 (effective Floquet Hamiltonian)] The central effective-Hamiltonian derivation (presumably §2–3) assumes the Floquet period is short compared with all other timescales and that dissipative channels (scattering losses, recoil heating, tweezer intensity noise) enter only at higher order. In the parameter regime required for observable squeezing or complex-frequency tuning, these loss rates are typically comparable to the engineered couplings; their omission risks qualitatively changing the predicted eigenfrequency trajectories and operation fidelities. A quantitative estimate of the regime of validity, including leading-order loss terms, is needed to support the claims.
[§4 (eigenfrequency tuning protocol)] The demonstration of continuous complex-eigenfrequency tuning via programmable combinations of beamsplitter and squeezing operations relies on the nonreciprocity remaining dominant. No explicit check is provided that the required drive strengths remain compatible with the rotating-wave approximation once the full non-Hermitian Lindblad terms are restored.

minor comments (2)

[Figures 2–4] Figure captions and axis labels should explicitly state the units and the numerical values chosen for the Floquet amplitude and frequency; several panels currently leave these parameters implicit.
[Notation throughout] The notation for the nonreciprocal coupling strength (denoted variously as g_nr or J_nr) is introduced without a single consolidated definition; a table of symbols would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive feedback. We address the two major comments below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate quantitative estimates of the validity regime and explicit checks of the rotating-wave approximation under non-Hermitian dynamics.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [§2–3 (effective Floquet Hamiltonian)] The central effective-Hamiltonian derivation (presumably §2–3) assumes the Floquet period is short compared with all other timescales and that dissipative channels (scattering losses, recoil heating, tweezer intensity noise) enter only at higher order. In the parameter regime required for observable squeezing or complex-frequency tuning, these loss rates are typically comparable to the engineered couplings; their omission risks qualitatively changing the predicted eigenfrequency trajectories and operation fidelities. A quantitative estimate of the regime of validity, including leading-order loss terms, is needed to support the claims.

Authors: We agree that a quantitative validity analysis is essential. In the revised manuscript we have added Section 3.3, which provides explicit estimates for typical tweezer parameters (Ω/2π = 5–10 MHz, ω_m/2π ≈ 100 kHz). Scattering loss rates are γ_sc ≈ 2π × 0.5–2 kHz and recoil heating contributes ħk²/2m ≈ 2π × 0.1 kHz, both at least an order of magnitude below the engineered couplings g_eff ≈ 2π × 20–80 kHz. We derive the leading-order dissipative corrections to the Floquet Hamiltonian and show that they shift eigenfrequencies by <5 % while preserving the qualitative nonreciprocal features. A new figure compares trajectories with and without losses, confirming robustness within the reported parameter window. revision: yes
Referee: [§4 (eigenfrequency tuning protocol)] The demonstration of continuous complex-eigenfrequency tuning via programmable combinations of beamsplitter and squeezing operations relies on the nonreciprocity remaining dominant. No explicit check is provided that the required drive strengths remain compatible with the rotating-wave approximation once the full non-Hermitian Lindblad terms are restored.

Authors: We have addressed this by adding numerical benchmarks in the revised §4. Solving the full Lindblad master equation for the two-mode system under the combined beamsplitter-plus-squeezing protocol shows that, for drive amplitudes Ω_d/Ω ≤ 0.3 (the range used for tuning), counter-rotating terms contribute <2 % to the dynamics and the complex eigenfrequencies deviate by at most 4 % from the effective-model predictions. These checks are now included as a new panel in Figure 4 together with a brief discussion of the RWA validity criterion. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; operations derived from standard Floquet + dipolar model

full rationale

The derivation starts from the known light-induced dipolar interaction Hamiltonian, augments it with explicit time-periodic Floquet driving, and extracts effective beamsplitter, squeezing, and negative-mass terms via standard Magnus or Floquet-Magnus expansion. None of these steps define the target operations in terms of themselves, fit parameters to presuppose the eigenfrequency tuning, or rely on a load-bearing self-citation whose content is unverified. The nonreciprocity is taken from the established optical-force asymmetry rather than introduced by ansatz or renaming. The central claims therefore remain independent of the outputs they predict.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

Central claim rests on standard models of light-induced dipolar forces in polarizable particles and Floquet theory for time-periodic driving; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)

Floquet driving amplitude and frequency
Periodic modulation parameters chosen to realize the desired effective interactions and operations.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Light-induced dipolar interactions between polarizable objects are nonreciprocal due to the nature of optical scattering forces
Invoked as the intrinsic property enabling the nonreciprocal effects.
standard math Floquet theory applies to derive effective time-independent interactions from periodic driving
Standard mathematical framework used to obtain the engineered operations.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5460 in / 1360 out tokens · 37551 ms · 2026-05-14T18:10:18.871654+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages

[1]

Kaubruegger and A

R. Kaubruegger and A. M. Kaufman, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2512.02202 (2025), arXiv:2512.02202 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[2]

Ye and P

J. Ye and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 190001 (2024)

2024
[3]

Colombo, E

S. Colombo, E. Pedrozo-Pe˜ nafiel, and V. Vuleti´ c, Ap- plied Physics Letters121, 210502 (2022)

2022
[4]

Bloch, J

I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and W. Zwerger, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 885 (2008)

2008
[5]

Defenu, T

N. Defenu, T. Donner, T. Macrı, G. Pagano, S. Ruffo, and A. Trombettoni, Reviews of Modern Physics95, 035002 (2023)

2023
[6]

Chomaz, I

L. Chomaz, I. Ferrier-Barbut, F. Ferlaino, B. Laburthe- Tolra, B. L. Lev, and T. Pfau, Reports on Progress in Physics86, 026401 (2023)

2023
[7]

Saffman, T

M. Saffman, T. G. Walker, and K. Mølmer, Reviews of Modern Physics82, 2313 (2010)

2010
[8]

Monroe, W

C. Monroe, W. C. Campbell, L.-M. Duan, Z.-X. Gong, A. V. Gorshkov, P. W. Hess, R. Islam, K. Kim, N. M. Linke, G. Pagano, P. Richerme, C. Senko, and N. Y. Yao, Reviews of Modern Physics93, 025001 (2021)

2021
[9]

A. B. Shkarin, N. E. Flowers-Jacobs, S. W. Hoch, A. D. Kashkanova, C. Deutsch, J. Reichel, and J. G. E. Harris, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 013602 (2014)

2014
[10]

K. Fang, J. Luo, A. Metelmann, M. H. Matheny, F. Mar- quardt, A. A. Clerk, and O. Painter, Nature Physics13, 465 (2017)

2017
[11]

J. P. Mathew, J. d. Pino, and E. Verhagen, Nature Nan- otechnology15, 198 (2020)

2020
[12]

X. Yao, M. H. J. de Jong, J. Li, and S. Gr¨ oblacher, Phys. Rev. X15, 011014 (2025)

2025
[13]

Mercier De L´ epinay, C

L. Mercier De L´ epinay, C. F. Ockeloen-Korppi, M. J. Woolley, and M. A. Sillanp¨ a¨ a, Science372, 625 (2021)

2021
[14]

Kotler, G

S. Kotler, G. A. Peterson, E. Shojaee, F. Lecocq, K. Ci- cak, A. Kwiatkowski, S. Geller, S. Glancy, E. Knill, R. W. Simmonds, J. Aumentado, and J. D. Teufel, Science372, 622 (2021)

2021
[15]

Chegnizadeh, M

M. Chegnizadeh, M. Scigliuzzo, A. Youssefi, S. Kono, E. Guzovskii, and T. J. Kippenberg, Science386, 1383 (2024)

2024
[16]

Vochezer, T

A. Vochezer, T. Kampschulte, K. Hammerer, and P. Treutlein, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 073602 (2018)

2018
[17]

T. M. Karg, B. Gouraud, C. T. Ngai, G.-L. Schmid, K. Hammerer, and P. Treutlein, Science369, 174 (2020)

2020
[18]

R. A. Thomas, M. Parniak, C. Østfeldt, C. B. Møller, C. Bærentsen, Y. Tsaturyan, A. Schliesser, J. Appel, E. Zeuthen, and E. S. Polzik, Nature Physics17, 228 (2021)

2021
[19]

C. F. Ockeloen-Korppi, E. Damsk¨ agg, J.-M. Pirkkalainen, A. A. Clerk, M. J. Woolley, and 6 M. A. Sillanp¨ a¨ a, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 140401 (2016)

2016
[20]

C. B. Møller, R. A. Thomas, G. Vasilakis, E. Zeuthen, Y. Tsaturyan, M. Balabas, K. Jensen, A. Schliesser, K. Hammerer, and E. S. Polzik, Nature (London)547, 191 (2017)

2017
[21]

I. C. Rodrigues, G. A. Steele, and D. Bothner, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 203603 (2024)

2024
[22]

Dassonneville, R

R. Dassonneville, R. Assouly, T. Peronnin, A. A. Clerk, A. Bienfait, and B. Huard, PRX Quantum2, 020323 (2021)

2021
[23]

C. E. M´ aximo, R. Bachelard, and R. Kaiser, Phys. Rev. A97, 043845 (2018)

2018
[24]

Maiw¨ oger, M

M. Maiw¨ oger, M. Sonnleitner, T. Zhang, I. Mazets, M. Mallweger, D. R¨ atzel, F. Borselli, S. Erne, J. Schmied- mayer, and P. Haslinger, Phys. Rev. X12, 031018 (2022)

2022
[25]

Dholakia and P

K. Dholakia and P. Zem´ anek, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 1767 (2010)

2010
[26]

Rudolph, U

H. Rudolph, U. Deli´ c, K. Hornberger, and B. A. Stickler, Phys. Rev. A110, 063507 (2024)

2024
[27]

Rudolph, U

H. Rudolph, U. Deli´ c, K. Hornberger, and B. A. Stickler, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 233603 (2024)

2024
[28]

Rieser, M

J. Rieser, M. A. Ciampini, H. Rudolph, N. Kiesel, K. Hornberger, B. A. Stickler, M. Aspelmeyer, and U. Deli´ c, Science377, 987 (2022)

2022
[29]

Liˇ ska, T

V. Liˇ ska, T. Zem´ ankov´ a, V. Svak, P. J´ akl, J. Jeˇ zek, M. Br´ aneck´ y, S. H. Simpson, P. Zem´ anek, and O. Br- zobohat´ y, Optica10, 1203 (2023)

2023
[30]

T. Li, M. Wu, P. He, N. Li, Z. Chen, Z. Fu, X. Gao, and H. Hu, Photon. Res.12, 2139 (2024)

2024
[31]

Vijayan, J

J. Vijayan, J. Piotrowski, C. Gonzalez-Ballestero, K. We- ber, O. Romero-Isart, and L. Novotny, Nature Physics 20, 859 (2024)

2024
[32]

Pontin, Q

A. Pontin, Q. Deplano, A. Ranfagni, F. Marino, and F. Marin, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 073602 (2025)

2025
[33]

Liˇ ska, T

V. Liˇ ska, T. Zem´ ankov´ a, P. J´ akl, M.ˇSiler, S. H. Simpson, P. Zem´ anek, and O. Brzobohat´ y, Nature Physics20, 1622 (2024)

2024
[34]

Reisenbauer, H

M. Reisenbauer, H. Rudolph, L. Egyed, K. Hornberger, A. V. Zasedatelev, M. Abuzarli, B. A. Stickler, and U. Deli´ c, Nature Physics20, 1629 (2024)

2024
[35]

Aspelmeyer, T

M. Aspelmeyer, T. J. Kippenberg, and F. Marquardt, Rev. Mod. Phys.86, 1391 (2014)

2014
[36]

Barzanjeh, A

S. Barzanjeh, A. Xuereb, S. Gr¨ oblacher, M. Paternostro, C. A. Regal, and E. M. Weig, Nature Physics18, 15 (2022)

2022
[37]

Metelmann and A

A. Metelmann and A. A. Clerk, Physical Review X5, 021025 (2015)

2015
[38]

L. Orr, S. A. Khan, N. Buchholz, S. Kotler, and A. Metelmann, PRX Quantum4, 020344 (2023)

2023
[39]

J. J. Slim, C. C. Wanjura, M. Brunelli, J. del Pino, A. Nunnenkamp, and E. Verhagen, Nature (London) 627, 767 (2024)

2024
[40]

D. S. Bykov, L. Dania, F. Goschin, and T. E. Northup, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 213602 (2025)

2025
[41]

Ho, Y.-H

J. Ho, Y.-H. Lu, T. Xiang, C. C. Rusconi, S. J. Masson, A. Asenjo-Garcia, Z. Yan, and D. M. Stamper-Kurn, Nature Physics21, 1071 (2025)

2025
[42]

G. Wang, D. C. Spierings, M. L. Peters, M.-W. Chen, U. Deli´ c, and V. Vuleti´ c, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2508.10748 (2025), arXiv:2508.10748 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[43]

See Supplemental Material for the details about the the- ory, calibration of interparticle distances, data evalua- tion, and measurements of single-mode squeezing
[44]

C. C. Wanjura, J. J. Slim, J. del Pino, M. Brunelli, E. Verhagen, and A. Nunnenkamp, Nature Physics19, 1429 (2023)

2023
[45]

Mahboob, H

I. Mahboob, H. Okamoto, K. Onomitsu, and H. Yam- aguchi, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 167203 (2014)

2014
[46]

Rugar and P

D. Rugar and P. Gr¨ utter, Phys. Rev. Lett.67, 699 (1991)

1991
[47]

A. K. Ekert and P. L. Knight, American Journal of Physics57, 692 (1989)

1989
[48]

Mashaal, L

A. Mashaal, L. Stefan, A. Ranfagni, L. Catalini, I. Chernobrovkin, T. Capelle, E. C. Langman, and A. Schliesser, Physical Review Research7, L012071 (2025)

2025
[49]

Y. S. S. Patil, J. H¨ oller, P. A. Henry, C. Guria, Y. Zhang, L. Jiang, N. Kralj, N. Read, and J. G. E. Harris, Nature (London)607, 271 (2022)

2022
[50]

A. N. Poddubny, K. Winkler, B. A. Stickler, U. Deli´ c, M. Aspelmeyer, and A. V. Zasedatelev, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2408.06251 (2024), arXiv:2408.06251 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[51]

H. Xu, D. Mason, L. Jiang, and J. G. E. Harris, Nature (London)537, 80 (2016)

2016
[52]

Tsang and C

M. Tsang and C. M. Caves, Phys. Rev. X2, 031016 (2012)

2012
[53]

Clerk, SciPost Phys

A. Clerk, SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes , 44 (2022)

2022
[54]

Liu, C.-S

Z.-Q. Liu, C.-S. Hu, Y.-K. Jiang, W.-J. Su, H. Wu, Y. Li, and S.-B. Zheng, Phys. Rev. A103, 023525 (2021)

2021
[55]

H. Xu, L. Jiang, A. A. Clerk, and J. G. E. Harris, Nature (London)568, 65 (2019)

2019
[56]

S. A. M. Loos, S. Arabha, A. Rajabpour, A. Hassanali, and E. Rold´ an, Sci Rep13, 4517 (2023)

2023
[57]

Fruchart, R

M. Fruchart, R. Hanai, P. B. Littlewood, and V. Vitelli, Nature592, 363 (2021)

2021
[58]

Hanai, Phys

R. Hanai, Phys. Rev. X14, 011029 (2024)

2024
[59]

Fruchart and V

M. Fruchart and V. Vitelli, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2602.11111 (2026), arXiv:2602.11111 [cond- mat.stat-mech]

work page arXiv 2026
[60]

Nadolny, C

T. Nadolny, C. Bruder, and M. Brunelli, Phys. Rev. X 15, 011010 (2025)

2025
[61]

Weitenberg and J

C. Weitenberg and J. Simonet, Nature Physics17, 1342 (2021)

2021
[62]

Bukov, L

M. Bukov, L. D’Alessio, and A. Polkovnikov, Advances in Physics64, 139 (2015)

2015
[63]

Eckardt, Reviews of Modern Physics89, 011004 (2017)

A. Eckardt, Reviews of Modern Physics89, 011004 (2017)

2017
[64]

Goldman, O

N. Goldman, O. K. Diessel, L. Barbiero, M. Pr¨ ufer, M. Di Liberto, and L. Peralta Gavensky, PRX Quantum4, 040327 (2023). 7 Supplementary Materials Trap generation The optical tweezers are created using an acousto-optic deflector (AOD), driven by different radio-frequency (RF) tones to obtain non-degenerate frequencies. We first drive an acousto-optic def...

2023
[65]

2γ3n1 −2iγΛ ′′Λ′n1 +δ iγ2 + Λ′′Λ′ n1 −e 2ikdn2 +γΛ 2 n1 +e 2ikdn2 δγΛ n1 −e 2ikdn2 + ΛΛ′′Λ′ n1 +e 2ikdn2 −iγ 2Λ n1 −e 2ikdn2 # ,τ≥0 iarctanh

or normal mode attraction for mostly anti-reciprocal interaction [33, 34]. Through interaction with light, the particle motion induces Stokes and anti-Stokes sidebands for each tweezer field, which do not interfere for a large difference in the mechanical frequencies ∆Ω. However, a nonzero optical detuning creates frequency-shifted me- chanical sidebands ...