Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Hydrogen 21-cm constraints on the photon’s spin scale

Aidan Reilly1,2,*, Alessandro Russo1,2,†, Philip Schuster1,‡, and Natalia Toro1,§

  • *Contact author: areilly8@stanford.edu
  • †Contact author: arusso00@stanford.edu
  • ‡Contact author: schuster@slac.stanford.edu
  • §Contact author: ntoro@slac.stanford.edu

Phys. Rev. D 113, 075037 – Published 28 April, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/tkk2-1j69

Abstract

We explore the fundamental but untested possibility that the photon is a continuous spin particle (CSP) with a small but nonzero spin Casimir ρ. When ρ≠0, the familiar polarization modes of the photon transform nontrivially under Lorentz boosts, leading to deviations from familiar QED. Surprisingly, these deviations are strongest at low energy, but smoothly vanish in the ρ→0 limit. In this letter, we compute corrections to the hydrogen 21-cm transition rate, which is expected to be particularly sensitive given the small hyperfine energy splitting ω. We find deviations from QED∝ρ2α2/ω2 at leading order, suggesting experimental constraints ρ≲1  meV. Building on this work, we expect that a range of other atomic, molecular, or condensed matter systems could be used to provide even more stringent tests of ρ in electromagnetic interactions.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (48)

  1. E. P. Wigner, Ann. Math. 40, 149 (1939).
  2. P. Schuster and N. Toro, Phys. Rev. D 91, 025023 (2015).
  3. P. Schuster, N. Toro, and K. Zhou, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2023) 010.
  4. P. Schuster and N. Toro, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2013) 104.
  5. P. Schuster and N. Toro, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2013) 105.
  6. P. Schuster, G. Sundaresan, and N. Toro, Phys. Rev. D 111, 056019 (2025).
  7. V. O. Rivelles, Phys. Rev. D 91, 125035 (2015).
  8. V. O. Rivelles, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 433 (2017).
  9. X. Bekaert, M. Najafizadeh, and M. R. Setare, Phys. Lett. B 760, 320 (2016).
  10. X. Bekaert and E. D. Skvortsov, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 32, 1730019 (2017).
  11. M. Najafizadeh, Phys. Rev. D 97, 065009 (2018).
  12. M. Najafizadeh, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2020) 027.
  13. M. Najafizadeh, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2022) 038.
  14. R. R. Metsaev, Phys. Lett. B 781, 568 (2018).
  15. I. L. Buchbinder, V. A. Krykhtin, and H. Takata, Phys. Lett. B 785, 315 (2018).
  16. I. L. Buchbinder, S. J. Gates, and K. Koutrolikos, Phys. Lett. B 793, 445 (2019).
  17. I. L. Buchbinder, M. V. Khabarov, T. V. Snegirev, and Y. M. Zinoviev, Nucl. Phys. B946, 114717 (2019).
  18. I. L. Buchbinder, A. P. Isaev, and S. A. Fedoruk, Proc. Steklov Inst. Math. 309, 46 (2020).
  19. I. L. Buchbinder, S. A. Fedoruk, A. P. Isaev, and V. A. Krykhtin, Phys. Lett. B 829, 137139 (2022).
  20. Y. M. Zinoviev, Universe 3, 63 (2017).
  21. K. B. Alkalaev and M. A. Grigoriev, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2018) 030.
  22. Č. Burdík, V. K. Pandey, and A. Reshetnyak, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 35, 2050154 (2020).
  23. R. R. Metsaev, Phys. Lett. B 767, 458 (2017).
  24. R. R. Metsaev, Phys. Lett. B 773, 135 (2017).
  25. R. R. Metsaev, J. Phys. A 51, 215401 (2018).
  26. M. V. Khabarov and Y. M. Zinoviev, Nucl. Phys. B928, 182 (2018).
  27. R. R. Metsaev, Phys. Lett. B 793, 134 (2019).
  28. R. R. Metsaev, Phys. Lett. B 820, 136497 (2021).
  29. B. Bellazzini, S. De Angelis, and M. Romano, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2025) 166.
  30. S. Kundu, A. Russo, P. Schuster, and N. Toro, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2025) 125.
  31. A. Reilly, P. Schuster, and N. Toro, Phys. Rev. D 113, 015028 (2026).
  32. S. Kundu, P. Schuster, and N. Toro, arXiv:2503.03817.
  33. G. J. Iverson and G. Mack, Phys. Rev. D 2, 2326 (1970).
  34. J. R. Pritchard and A. Loeb, Rep. Prog. Phys. 75, 086901 (2012).
  35. H. M. Goldenberg, D. Kleppner, and N. F. Ramsey, Phys. Rev. Lett. 5, 361 (1960).
  36. D. Kleppner, H. M. Goldenberg, and N. F. Ramsey, Phys. Rev. 126, 603 (1962).
  37. P. Schuster and N. Toro, Phys. Rev. D 109, 096008 (2024).
  38. O. Corradini, C. Schubert, J. P. Edwards, and N. Ahmadiniaz, arXiv:1512.08694.
  39. M. J. Strassler, Nucl. Phys. B385, 145 (1992).
  40. L. Brink, S. Deser, B. Zumino, P. D. Vecchia, and P. S. Howe, Phys. Lett. 64B, 435 (1976); 68B, 488(E) (1977).
  41. L. Brink, P. Di Vecchia, and P. S. Howe, Nucl. Phys. B118, 76 (1977).
  42. M. Diermaier, C. B. Jepsen, B. Kolbinger, C. Malbrunot, O. Massiczek, C. Sauerzopf, M. C. Simon, J. Zmeskal, and E. Widmann, Nat. Commun. 8, 5749 (2017).
  43. H. Hellwig, R. F. C. Vessot, M. W. Levine, P. W. Zitzewitz, D. W. Allan, and D. J. Glaze, IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 19, 200 (1970).
  44. L. Essen, R. Donaldson, M. Bangham, and E. Hope, Nature (London) 229, 110 (1971).
  45. N. F. Ramsey, Rev. Mod. Phys. 62, 541 (1990).
  46. D. Hanneke, S. Fogwell, and G. Gabrielse, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 120801 (2008).
  47. X. Fan, T. G. Myers, B. A. D. Sukra, and G. Gabrielse, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 071801 (2023).
  48. J. Redondo and A. Ringwald, Contemp. Phys. 52, 211 (2011).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation