Past exam of the MPhil in micro- and nanotechnology enterprise course of the University of Cambridge / 2023 / Paper 2 / Section A(iii) / 19

Refraction changes the propagation direction, and hence the momentum, of transmitted light. The particle receives the opposite momentum change by conservation of momentum. For a ray carrying power $P_r$, a useful force scale iswith corrections for reflected rays and their momentum fluxes. Here $n_m$ is the surrounding refractive index; this is a ray-force scaling rather than a complete electromagnetic stress calculation.

For fixed geometry and refractive indices, $P_r=I\delta A$, so the force contribution is proportional to the local intensity $I$. Refraction toward the normal on entry and away from the normal on exit must both be included: a force inferred from only the first interface can have the wrong direction.

The specified size is larger than the wavelength, so a geometrical optics treatment is appropriate despite the generic “nanoparticle” label. A dipole/Rayleigh-particle formula would use the opposite size limit.

Because the sphere lies below the optical axis, a ray passing through its upper half samples a brighter part of the Gaussian beam than a comparable ray through its lower half. For a particle with higher refractive index than its surroundings, the stronger upper ray is deflected downward overall and transfers an upward reaction to the particle. The weaker lower ray gives a smaller downward reaction. Their transverse sum is therefore upward, toward the brighter axis.

If the displacement reverses, the force reverses, so the central position is transversely stable. Summing all the rays gives an optical gradient force toward the intensity maximum. There is also a forward optical scattering force. A tightly focused beam can have an axial restoring component that balances it, generally at a small displacement downstream of the ideal focus.^[ref]

Three-dimensional stability requires the restoring axial component to exceed the forward force over part of the trajectory. A Gaussian transverse intensity profile alone does not prove that condition; insufficient focusing can yield transverse confinement while the particle still moves downstream.

Homeotropic anchoring means that the nematic director is locally normal to the particle surface, hence radial on a sphere. Far away, the uniform nematic liquid crystal has a fixed director ${\mathbf{n}}_{\infty }$, with $\mathbf{n}$ and $-\mathbf{n}$ physically equivalent.

One plausible configuration is a quadrupolar Saturn-ring defect: the director is radial near the particle, bends into ${\mathbf{n}}_{\infty }$ far away, and has a disclination loop just outside the particle's equator, in the plane perpendicular to ${\mathbf{n}}_{\infty }$. A meridional section cuts the loop at two points.

The defect compensates the topological distortion introduced by the radial surface boundary condition. A dipolar configuration with a nearby hyperbolic point defect is another possible texture. Which is stable depends on particle size, anchoring strength, elastic constants and external confinement; the boundary conditions alone do not uniquely select one.^[ref]

Absorption converts part of the incident optical power into heat. Increasing laser power can therefore raise the local temperature, potentially driving a thermotropic nematic liquid crystal through its nematic-isotropic transition. The associated loss or change of orientational order, refractive index and anchoring can alter the trapping force or destabilize the trap.

Even below that transition, thermal gradients can induce convection, thermophoretic drift and changes in viscosity or Brownian fluctuations; sufficiently strong heating can damage the particle or host. Thus increasing laser power need not simply strengthen an otherwise unchanged optical trap.