Abstract
Nonreciprocal components, such as isolators and circulators, provide highly desirable functionalities for optical circuitry. This motivates the active investigation of mechanisms that break reciprocity, and pose alternatives to magnetooptic effects in onchip systems. In this work, we use optomechanical interactions to strongly break reciprocity in a compact system. We derive minimal requirements to create nonreciprocity in a wide class of systems that couple two optical modes to a mechanical mode, highlighting the importance of optically biasing the modes at a controlled phase difference. We realize these principles in a silica microtoroid optomechanical resonator and use quantitative heterodyne spectroscopy to demonstrate up to 10 dB optical isolation at telecom wavelengths. We show that nonreciprocal transmission is preserved for nondegenerate modes, and demonstrate nonreciprocal parametric amplification. These results open a route to exploiting various nonreciprocal effects in optomechanical systems in different electromagnetic and mechanical frequency regimes, including optomechanical metamaterials with topologically nontrivial properties.
Introduction
Lorentz reciprocity stipulates that electromagnetic wave transmission is invariant under a switch of source and observer^{1}, and its implications widely permeate physics. To violate reciprocity and obtain asymmetric transmission, suitable forms of timereversal symmetry breaking are required^{2}. In optical and microwave systems this is usually achieved using magnetooptic material responses. However, a vibrant search for alternative methods to break reciprocity, mimicking a magnetic bias, has taken shape in recent years^{3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13}. This is fuelled by the typically weak magnetooptic coefficients in natural materials and/or their associated losses, and the technological promise of integrated onchip nonreciprocal devices^{14}, including isolators and circulators. A promising approach relies on spatiotemporal modulation of the refractive index to break timereversal symmetry. Such modulation allows imparting a nonreciprocal phase on the transfer of a signal between two optical modes^{6,15} or establishing a form of angular momentum biasing to create nonreciprocity^{4,16,17}.
Pronounced optical timemodulation can be realized in cavity optomechanics^{18,19}, where the displacement x of a mechanical resonator alters the resonance frequency ω_{c} of an optical cavity^{20}. Simultaneously, light can control the mechanical motion through radiation pressure, surpassing the need for external modulation. In recent years, these interaction dynamics have been exploited for mechanical cooling^{21,22,23}, optical amplification^{24}, wavelength conversion^{25,26,27} and optomechanically induced transparency^{28} (OMIT). Hafezi and Rabl^{29} theoretically predicted that optomechanical interactions in ring resonators can enable nonreciprocal responses, and associated asymmetric cavity spectra were recently observed^{10,11,30}. In other recent work, it was recognized that the mechanicallymediated signal transfer between two optical modes can be made nonreciprocal with suitable optical driving^{31,32}, a mechanism that enables phonon circulators and networks with topological phases for sound and light^{31,33,34}.
Here we show that all of the above systems can be understood from a single description involving two optical modes coupled to a joint mechanical mode. This allows the definition of minimal conditions to achieve ideal optomechanical nonreciprocity, that is, a nonreciprocal phase shift of π or unity isolation with vanishing insertion loss in any optomechanical system. As we show in the following, optimal nonreciprocity requires (1) driving the optical modes with a π/2 phase difference and (2) an asymmetry between the optical modes with respect to the output ports. Experimental results obtained on a ring resonator system that meets these minimal conditions are presented, showing the onchip implementation of an optical isolator and demonstration of a nonreciprocal optomechanical amplifier.
Results
Nonreciprocal mode transfer and optomechanical isolation
Consider a basic system (Fig. 1a) of two optical modes with frequencies (ω_{1}, ω_{2}), both coupled to a mechanical mode with frequency Ω_{m}^{35}. The Hamiltonian of this system is^{20}
where a and b denote the photon and phonon annihilation operators, respectively, and , with x_{zpf} the mechanical zeropoint motion and G_{j} the optical frequency shift per unit displacement. If both optical modes are driven by a strong coherent laser to an intracavity field α_{j} exp(−iω_{control}t), the linearized Hamiltonian in a frame rotating at ω_{control} reads
where is the control detuning from the cavity frequency (shifted by the mean displacement ), and δa_{j} and describe the small amplitude changes of the optical field. The interaction terms on the right describe coupling between the optical and mechanical modes at rates g_{j}=G_{j}x_{zpf}α_{j}, controlled through the fields α_{j}.
The crucial role of the relative phases of g_{j} is immediately revealed when considering energyconserving pairs that mediate intermode transfer. For example, photon annihilation in mode 1 upon phonon creation , and the subsequent annihilation of the phonon with photon creation in mode 2 leads to a phase pickup Δϕ=arg(g_{2})−arg(g_{1}), whereas the reverse process provides an opposite phase −Δϕ (Fig. 1b)^{31,32}. Strongest nonreciprocity is thus achieved when the two optical modes are driven with a phase difference Δϕ=π/2.
Interestingly, this requirement is readily met in ring resonators, such as the silica microtoroid^{36} studied here. This wellknown optomechanical system supports a mechanical breathing mode coupled to an even and an odd optical mode (Fig. 1c)^{37}. A control beam incident through an evanescently coupled waveguide excites an equal superposition of even and odd modes with π/2 phase difference^{38}, such that the requirement on the control phase to maximally break reciprocity is automatically fulfilled. Note that our choice of the even/odd basis (in contrast to the clockwise/counterclockwise basis considered in other work^{10,29,30}) immediately reveals the role of a nonreciprocal phase in intermode coupling, unifying the description of ring resonators and other systems.
The nature of the nonreciprocal response is determined by the direct coupling between the two channels: if it is forbidden (Fig. 1a), the system primarily functions as a nonreciprocal phase shifter. If a direct pathway exists (Fig. 1c), its interference with the resonant path that collects a nonreciprocal π phase shift enables ideal isolation under appropriate conditions. In our experiment, we demonstrate optical isolation by studying the twoway transmittance of a probe signal at frequency ω_{probe} through a tapered fibre that is coupled to a microcavity (ω_{1,2}/2π=194.5 THz) with linewidth κ/2π=28 MHz. With the control laser incident from one direction, the transmittance is quantified using a heterodyne spectroscopic technique, where a probe beam propagating in the forward or backward direction is recombined with the control, and their beat analysed (see Fig. 2a and Methods). The fact that the measurement technique used here allows to quantify the resulting transmittance provides a means to extract the obtained optical isolation, in contrast to the qualitative measurements reported in^{10,30}.
The resulting probe transmittance (Fig. 2b) for and nearcritical coupling conditions shows a bidirectional transmission dip as the probe frequency is scanned across the cavity resonance. Importantly, the OMIT window^{28}, which results from destructive intracavity interference of antiStokes scattering of the control beam from the probeinduced mechanical vibrations with the probe beam itself, is solely present for copropagating control and probe (dark green circles). For reversed probe direction OMIT is absent (light green squares). The device thus acts as an optical isolator, reaching up to 10 dB of isolation (Fig. 2c).
The nonreciprocal scattering matrix
To predict the magnitude of such nonreciprocal transmission, we use temporal coupled mode theory^{39} to formulate the scattering matrix S of a general system described by equation (2), relating input and output waves at frequency ω_{probe} in the ports j=1, 2 via . The dynamics of a twomode system described by a linear timeevolution operator reads
where D describes the mutual coupling to the input/output fields. The output fields are found from
where C describes the direct coupling between the two ports. Note that these expressions can be related to the quantum optics input/output formalism via a redefinition of the input fields (Supplementary Notes 1, 2 and 6). Here we prescribe the individual optical modes to be reciprocal, such that coupling to in and outgoing fields is identical^{39}. In our system, it necessitates the choice of the even/odd mode basis. In the frequency domain, equations (3 and 4) yield the total scattering matrix
with I the identity matrix, M the Fourier transform of operator , and ω=ω_{probe}−ω_{control}. In a general twomode system, the difference between forward and backward complex transmission coefficients thus reads
showing that reciprocity can be broken as long as det(D)≠0 and m_{12}≠m_{21} (with m_{ij} the elements of M). This important result identifies the minimal conditions to break reciprocity: a fullrank D matrix, requiring an asymmetry in the coupling between the two optical modes and the channels s_{1} and s_{2}, and an asymmetric evolution matrix, enforcing the coupling rate from mode 1 to mode 2 to be different from that of mode 2 to mode 1. As explained above, this can be implemented through optomechanical interactions.
The evolution matrix M that describes optomechanical interactions (Fig. 1) is obtained from the equations of motion
derived from the linearized Hamiltonian (2) including dissipation and coupling between the mechanical resonator and its thermal bath (rightmost term in equation (8)), which under the experimental conditions studied here can be ignored in the analysis (Methods). Likewise we neglect optical quantum noise. Note that we have set coupling between the optical modes to zero, which can always be realized through diagonalization (see Supplementary Note 4). Solving these equations in the frequency domain, applying the rotating wave approximation and using the inputoutput relation (4), the evolution matrix (M+ωI) for ω≈±Ω_{m} reads
Here, is the inverse optical susceptibility, the inverse mechanical susceptibility and Γ_{m} the mechanical damping rate. Importantly, (m_{12}−m_{21})∝sinΔϕ, highlighting the importance of the control phase difference to obtain nonreciprocal transmission.
We define individual cooperativities by and the total cooperativity . By combining (6) and (9), the asymmetric transmission through a twomode system can be written (Supplementary Notes 3 and 5) as
where we defined the relative detuning of the probe frequency and from the mechanical and optical resonance, respectively, and η_{j} is the fraction of energy mode j radiates in both output channels. Inspection of equation (10) shows that the magnitude of asymmetric transmission at critical coupling (η_{1,2}=1/2) is maximally 1, when the cooperativities are large and equal. These conditions, implemented in our experiment, enable the observed strong optical isolation.
Dependence on power and detuning and mode degeneracy
For degenerate optical modes and the control field tuned to either mechanical sideband, the maximum contrast between forward and backward transmittance is at , where . The pronounced increase of ΔT with increasing , and concomitant decrease of insertion loss, are confirmed by varying the optical drive power (Fig. 3a). The mechanism has strong potential for nearideal isolation at negligible insertion losses, for example in optimized silica microtoroids, where was demonstrated^{23}. Moreover, cooperativity enhances the bandwidth, which is ultimately limited by the optical linewidth^{29}. An important aspect of this mechanism is that the isolation is independent of probe power (Fig. 3b), differing fundamentally from mechanisms exploiting static nonlinearity^{40,41} to create asymmetric transmission. Note that noise photons originating from the mechanical thermal bath contribute only 0.4% to the measured probe signal (Methods).
For bluedetuned control , the probe beam experiences parametric amplification if control and probe are copropagating, while it is fully dissipated when counterpropagating with the pump, thus yielding a nonreciprocal optical amplifier (Fig. 3c). This feature could pose interesting signal processing functionality, including nonreciprocal narrowband RF filtering and insertion loss compensation.
Importantly, equation (10) shows that strong nonreciprocity can also be obtained without optical degeneracy. If the two modes have different frequency and/or linewidth, an optimal control frequency can be chosen to satisfy δ_{1}=−δ_{2}=β. Then asymmetric transmittance is maximally
showing that larger cooperativity can compensate the effects of mode splitting for β>1. Figure 4 shows nonreciprocal amplitude and phase transmission with a split optical mode. A probe beam tuned between the even and odd mode frequencies excites both modes with unequal phases. These opposing phases are added to the a_{1}→a_{2} and a_{2}→a_{1} optomechanical mode conversion processes, respectively, changing the interference condition with the nonresonant transmission. As a result, both co and counterpropagating probe fields now interact with the mechanical mode. For a bluedetuned control beam, this yields induced absorption for the copropagating probe and induced transparency for the counterpropagating probe (Fig. 4b). Note that the induced absorption for the copropagating beam is related to the relatively low coupling rate (η_{1,2}<0.5). It can be turned into gain, as presented in Fig. 3c, for η_{1,2}>0.5 and/or for increased optical control power. Crucially, since for our system the relation holds (Methods), the deviation of Δϕ from optimal is only 0.2%. As such, a control beam incident from one side still ensures Δϕ≈π/2 and , thus fulfilling the requirements for optimal nonreciprocity and maximizing the contrast between forward and backward transmission. In a more general case, optimal conditions may be implemented, for example by supplying control fields with suitable phase and amplitude through both input waveguides. Importantly, the fact that nonreciprocity can be obtained without optical degeneracy increases the range of systems that may be employed.
Discussion
We stress that the demonstrated principles are not limited to the experimental implementation using ring resonators shown here, but can be realized in a wide range of optomechanical platforms^{20}, such as LC circuits^{27} and photonic crystal resonators^{22,26} (Fig. 5a,b). In fact, the high (GHz) frequency of such devices has the prospect of enhancing the bandwidth with respect to the relatively narrow range demonstrated here, towards a range commensurate with typical signal modulation rates. While the resonant nature of the demonstrated mechanism is of course a limit to the general application capability, we foresee several applications that could benefit from magneticfree isolation over a finite bandwidth. These include in particular the protection of onchip monochromatic laser sources and, with groundstate cooling^{21,22} or in the strong coupling regime^{23}, lowloss routing of signals carrying quantum information at negligible added noise, either at optical or microwave frequencies^{13,29}.
The specific nonreciprocal functionality is governed by the way these systems are coupled to input/output channels. This, in turn, is directly related to the nonresonant scattering matrix C, as reciprocity of optical modes dictates CD*=−D (ref. 39). For the scenarios in Fig. 5a, described by a diagonal C matrix, each waveguide couples to a single optical mode, and the system operates as a nonreciprocal phase shifter (gyrator) in the absence of other optical loss. Importantly, an onchip gyrator that is placed in one arm of an integrated MachZehnder interferometer could be used to build an onchip circulator^{42}. In contrast, isolation is most naturally achieved if C is the exchange matrix, meaning a direct path between the two ports is present (Fig. 5b). We note that nonreciprocity occurs also outside the resolved sideband regime, although the behaviour there is more complex due to mixing of sidebands at ±ω.
In conclusion, we demonstrated and quantified nonreciprocal transmission through a compact optomechanical isolator and parametric amplifier, and developed a general theory explaining the mechanism and unifying the description of various implementations of optomechanical nonreciprocity in multimode systems. Our findings identify two general requirements for any optomechanical system to optimally break reciprocity: asymmetric coupling of the optical modes to input/output channels, and a drive phasedifference of π/2. Since the requirements for optimal nonreciprocity derived here do not rely on the handedness of optical^{29,30} or mechanical^{10,11} modes, our theoretical formalism can be used to realize optomechanical nonreciprocity in systems that do not exhibit circular symmetry (Fig. 5). Extending the demonstrated principles to more modes or channels would enable a variety of nonreciprocal functionality for both light and sound, including onchip circulation, gyration^{31} and enhanced isolation bandwidth. Finally, these nonreciprocal systems can form the unit cell of optomechanical metamaterials with topologically nontrivial properties, where the nonreciprocal phase takes the role of an effective gauge field to establish new phases for sound and light^{33,34}.
Note added in proof: After submission, we became aware of related work by Fang et al.^{43} that reports nonreciprocal transmission in an optomechanical crystal circuit that relies on the same principle with bluedetuned control.
Methods
Coupling matrix and drive condition in ring resonator
Timereversal symmetry and energy conservation dictate that CD*=−D and D^{†}D=diag(η_{1}κ_{1}, η_{2}κ_{2})^{39}. Applying these to the even and odd optical modes (δa_{1}, δa_{2}) of an evanescently coupled ring resonator, and choosing c_{21}=c_{12}=1, constrains the coupling matrix D to
Together with equations (5 and 9), this D matrix yields the complete expressions for the scattering matrix elements
where A_{ij} is given by
used to fit the data in Figs 2, 3, 4.
For a single drive field with amplitude incident through port 1 and using G_{1}=G_{2}=G, the coupling rates g_{1} and g_{2} are given by
Thus for large detuning , the optimal phase difference Δϕ=π/2 is automatically satisfied by pumping through a single channel.
Experimental setup
The silica microtoroid (diameter 41 μm) is fabricated using techniques as previously reported (see for example ref. 37). A tuneable fibrecoupled external cavity diode laser (New Focus, TLB6728) is locked (using the electrooptic modulator) to a mechanical sideband of a whispering gallery mode at 1,542 nm using a modified PoundDreverHall scheme that can be used independent of the probe beam direction. The probe light is generated using a commercial doubleparallel Mach–Zehnder interferometer (Thorlabs, LN86SFC) operated in singlesideband carriersuppressed mode, driven by the output of a vector network analyser (VNA) at frequency Ω. The resulting probe light has frequency ω_{probe}=ω_{control}±Ω. The sign of the frequency shift, as well as the suppression of the carrier (by 50 dB with respect to the generated probe) is controlled by bias voltages applied to the doubleparallel Mach–Zehnder interferometer. Pump and probe amplitude and polarization are controlled with variable optical attenuators and fibre polarization controllers (Fig. 2a). The probe beam propagating in forward or backward direction is recombined with the control beam and their beat on fast (125 MHz) lownoise photo receivers (D1/D2) is analysed with a VNA. It should be noted that fluctuations of the optical length difference of probe and control paths generate phase fluctuations of the beat analysed by the VNA. To minimize these phase fluctuations on the time scale of the inverse bandwidth (5 kHz)^{−1} of the VNA, the lengths of the paths Laser/C1/D2 and Laser/Switch/C1/D2 are matched, as well as those of the paths Laser/D1 and Laser/Switch/C2/D1 (see Fig. 2a).
Measurement procedure and fitting
Before each measurement the probe power in both propagation directions is balanced using a variable optical attenuator in one of the probe arms. The polarization of both probe directions is controlled via fibre polarization controllers, which are tuned separately to optimize the fibretocavitymode coupling. To calibrate the transmittance at the probe frequency, a reference measurement is performed with control and probe tuned away from the cavity resonance. Both the reference and measurement are averages of 75 traces of a frequencyswept probe. For each measurement, S_{ij}^{2} is fitted over a wide ω range used to determine and κ_{j}. Fixing these values, the same equation is fitted to a smaller frequency range surrounding the OMIT peak to yield values for η_{j} and g_{j}. In all fits, Ω_{m}/2π and Γ_{m}/2π are kept fixed at the independently determined values from thermal noise spectra obtained with a spectrum analyser. For the splitmode experiment, the fit result yields Ω_{m}/2π≈35.4 MHz, ≈4 MHz and κ_{1,2}/2π≈12 MHz. Using these values in (15) directly gives a deviation from the optimal drive phase Δϕ of only ∼0.2%. The solid curves in Fig. 4c are directly obtained from the fit results from Fig. 4b, with no other fit parameters than a vertically offset. The theory curve in Fig. 3a is obtained using the average value η_{j}=0.453 as determined from the four measurements at different control powers.
Noise due to the thermal bath
In the resolvedsideband regime, for degenerate modes with equal driving and linewidth, the amount of detected photons per second (N_{noise}) that is generated through a coupling between the mechanical resonator and the heat bath reads
where , and the measurement bandwidth (in our experiment the VNA bandwidth) is given by ΔB. From left to right, the terms in this equation can be associated with the number of noise photons generated in the resonator, the fraction of noise photons leaving through the optical channel, and the fraction of noise photons in the signal bandwidth, respectively. Note that the expression can be rewritten to yield , from which N_{noise}≈4 × 10^{8} is obtained for our system. As a probe power of 15 nW at 1,542 nm corresponds to ≈1 × 10^{11} photons/s, the thermal noise in our system contributes only marginally (0.4%) to the measured probe signal.
Data availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Additional information
How to cite this article: Ruesink, F. et al. Nonreciprocity and magneticfree isolation based on optomechanical interactions. Nat. Commun. 7, 13662 doi: 10.1038/ncomms13662 (2016).
Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
Deák, L. & Fülöp, T. Reciprocity in quantum, electromagnetic and other wave scattering. Ann. Phys. 327, 1050–1077 (2012).
Haldane, F. D. M. & Raghu, S. Possible realization of directional optical waveguides in photonic crystals with broken timereversal symmetry. Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 013904 (2008).
Poulton, C. G. et al. Design for broadband onchip isolator using stimulated Brillouin scattering in dispersionengineered chalcogenide waveguides. Opt. Express 20, 21235–21246 (2012).
Sounas, D. L., Caloz, C. & Alù, A. Giant nonreciprocity at the subwavelength scale using angular momentumbiased metamaterials. Nat. Commun. 4, 2407 (2013).
Li, E., Eggleton, B. J., Fang, K. & Fan, S. Photonic AharonovBohm effect in photonphonon interactions. Nat. Commun. 5, 3225 (2014).
Tzuang, L. D., Fang, K., Nussenzveig, P., Fan, S. & Lipson, M. Nonreciprocal phase shift induced by an effective magnetic flux for light. Nat. Photon. 8, 701–705 (2014).
Sliwa, K. M. et al. Reconfigurable Josephson circulator/directional amplifier. Phys. Rev. X 5, 041020 (2015).
Guo, X., Zou, C.L., Jung, H. & Tang, H. X. Onchip strong coupling and efficient frequency conversion between telecom and visible optical modes. Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 123902 (2016).
Sayrin, C. et al. Nanophotonic optical isolator controlled by the internal state of cold atoms. Phys. Rev. X 5, 041036 (2015).
Kim, J., Kuzyk, M. C., Han, K., Wang, H. & Bahl, G. Nonreciprocal Brillouin scattering induced transparency. Nat. Phys. 11, 275–280 (2015).
Dong, C.H. et al. Brillouinscatteringinduced transparency and nonreciprocal light storage. Nat. Commun. 6, 6193 (2015).
Ranzani, L. & Aumentado, J. Graphbased analysis of nonreciprocity in coupledmode systems. New J. Phys. 17, 023024 (2015).
Metelmann, A. & Clerk, A. A. Nonreciprocal photon transmission and amplification via reservoir engineering. Phys. Rev. X 5, 021025 (2015).
Shoji, Y., Mizumoto, T., Yokoi, H., Hsieh, I. W. & Osgood, R. M. Magnetooptical isolator with silicon waveguides fabricated by direct bonding. Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 071117 (2008).
Fang, K., Yu, Z. & Fan, S. Photonic AharonovBohm effect based on dynamic modulation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 153901 (2012).
Estep, N. A., Sounas, D. L., Soric, J. & Alù, A. Magneticfree nonreciprocity and isolation based on parametrically modulated coupledresonator loops. Nat. Phys. 10, 923–927 (2014).
Sounas, D. L. & Alù, A. Angularmomentumbiased nanorings to realize magneticfree integrated optical isolation. ACS Photonics 1, 198–204 (2014).
Carmon, T., Rokhsari, H., Yang, L., Kippenberg, T. J. & Vahala, K. J. Temporal behavior of radiationpressureinduced vibrations of an optical microcavity phonon mode. Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 223902 (2005).
Kippenberg, T. J., Rokhsari, H., Carmon, T., Scherer, A. & Vahala, K. J. Analysis of radiationpressure induced mechanical oscillation of an optical microcavity. Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 033901 (2005).
Aspelmeyer, M., Kippenberg, T. J. & Marquardt, F. Cavity optomechanics. Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 1391–1452 (2014).
Teufel, J. D. et al. Sideband cooling of micromechanical motion to the quantum ground state. Nature 475, 359–363 (2011).
Chan, J. et al. Laser cooling of a nanomechanical oscillator into its quantum ground state. Nature 478, 89–92 (2011).
Verhagen, E., Deléglise, S., Weis, S., Schliesser, A. & Kippenberg, T. J. Quantumcoherent coupling of a mechanical oscillator to an optical cavity mode. Nature 482, 63–67 (2012).
Massel, F. et al. Microwave amplification with nanomechanical resonators. Nature 480, 351–354 (2011).
Dong, C., Fiore, V., Kuzyk, M. C. & Wang, H. Optomechanical dark mode. Science 338, 1609–1613 (2012).
Hill, J. T., SafaviNaeini, A. H., Chan, J. & Painter, O. Coherent optical wavelength conversion via cavity optomechanics. Nat. Commun. 3, 1196 (2012).
Lecocq, F., Clark, J. B., Simmonds, R. W., Aumentado, J. & Teufel, J. D. Mechanically mediated microwave frequency conversion in the quantum regime. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 043601 (2016).
Weis, S. et al. Optomechanically induced transparency. Science 330, 1520–1523 (2010).
Hafezi, M. & Rabl, P. Optomechanically induced nonreciprocity in microring resonators. Opt. Express 20, 7672–7684 (2012).
Shen, Z. et al. Experimental realization of optomechanically induced nonreciprocity. Nat. Photon. 10, 657–661 (2016).
Habraken, S. J. M., Stannigel, K., Lukin, M. D., Zoller, P. & Rabl, P. Continuous mode cooling and phonon routers for phononic quantum networks. New J. Phys. 14, 115004 (2012).
Xu, X. W. & Li, Y. Optical nonreciprocity and optomechanical circulator in threemode optomechanical systems. Phys. Rev. A 91, 053854 (2015).
Peano, V., Brendel, C., Schmidt, M. & Marquardt, F. Topological phases of sound and light. Phys. Rev. X 5, 031011 (2015).
Schmidt, M., Kessler, S., Peano, V., Painter, O. & Marquardt, F. Optomechanical creation of magnetic fields for photons on a lattice. Optica 2, 635–641 (2015).
Grudinin, I. S., Lee, H., Painter, O. & Vahala, K. J. Phonon laser action in a tunable twolevel system. Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 083901 (2010).
Armani, D. K., Kippenberg, T. J., Spillane, S. M. & Vahala, K. J. UltrahighQ toroid microcavity on a chip. Nature 421, 925–928 (2003).
Schliesser, A., Rivière, R., Anetsberger, G., Arcizet, O. & Kippenberg, T. J. Resolvedsideband cooling of a micromechanical oscillator. Nat. Phys. 4, 415–419 (2008).
Yu, Z. & Fan, S. Optical isolation based on nonreciprocal phase shift induced by interband photonic transitions. Nat. Photon. 3, 91–94 (2009).
Suh, W., Wang, Z. & Fan, S. Temporal coupledmode theory and the presence of nonorthogonal modes in lossless multimode cavities. IEEE J. Quant. Electron 40, 1511–1518 (2004).
Manipatruni, S., Robinson, J. T. & Lipson, M. Optical nonreciprocity in optomechanical structures. Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 213903 (2009).
Fan, L. et al. An Allsilicon passive optical diode. Science 335, 447–450 (2012).
Hogan, C. L. The ferromagnetic Faraday effect at microwave frequencies and its applications: the microwave gyrator. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 31, 1–31 (1952).
Fang, K. et al. Generalized nonreciprocity in an optomechanical circuit via synthetic magnetism and reservoir engineering. Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/1608.03620 (2016).
Acknowledgements
This work is part of the research programme of the Foundation for Fundamental Research on Matter (FOM), which is part of the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO). It has been supported by the Office of Naval Research, and the Simons Foundation. We acknowledge F. Alpeggiani for useful comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
F.R. fabricated the samples and carried out the experiments. F.R. and E.V. developed the experimental setup. M.A.M. developed the theoretical model, with contributions from E.V., A.A. and F.R. F.R. and M.A.M. analysed the data. E.V. and A.A. supervised the project. All authors contributed to the writing of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Supplementary information
Supplementary Information
Supplementary Notes 16 and Supplementary References (PDF 218 kb)
Rights and permissions
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
About this article
Cite this article
Ruesink, F., Miri, MA., Alù, A. et al. Nonreciprocity and magneticfree isolation based on optomechanical interactions. Nat Commun 7, 13662 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms13662
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms13662
Further reading

Topological phonon transport in an optomechanical system
Nature Communications (2022)

Optomechanics for quantum technologies
Nature Physics (2022)

Atomic spincontrolled nonreciprocal Raman amplification of fibreguided light
Nature Photonics (2022)

Mirror symmetric onchip frequency circulation of light
Nature Photonics (2022)

Gigahertz freespace electrooptic modulators based on Mie resonances
Nature Communications (2022)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.