An electron beam in a liquid-cell transmission electron microscope can trap and manipulate individual nanoparticles in solution: Zheng et al. (Nano Lett. 12, 5644, 2012) showed that gold nanoparticles move toward regions of higher electron density with trapping forces in the piconewton range, and that converging the beam collects particles into clusters. The microscopic origin of this attraction remains unidentified — direct electron-scattering momentum transfer, static charging, simple beam heating/vaporization, and thermophoresis were each estimated in the source work to be insufficient, and swift-electron electromagnetic theory developed for vacuum gives only qualitative agreement. The open problem is to determine which combination of beam-induced electromagnetic, charging, radiolytic, and fluid-mechanical couplings quantitatively produces the measured attractive force in the liquid-cell geometry, and thereby to place deterministic electron-beam trapping, piconewton force spectroscopy, and controlled nanoparticle assembly on a mechanistic footing. The problem is not resolved by the existing literature.

Background

Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) of specimens in liquid became practical with liquid cells: two electron-transparent silicon nitride membranes (thin amorphous SiNx windows, typically tens of nanometers thick) enclose a nanometer-to-micrometer-thick liquid layer, so nanoparticles suspended in solution can be imaged at nanometer resolution while undergoing Brownian motion, growth, and self-assembly. In the scanning mode (STEM) the electron probe is focused to a sub-nanometer spot and rastered across the field of view, so the local electron flux varies strongly across space.

Manipulating single nanoscale objects in liquid is difficult for optical tweezers — traps formed by focused laser light — because optical forces shrink rapidly with particle size and become too weak for objects below roughly 10 nm. This motivated 'electron tweezers', the use of the forces the electron beam itself exerts on nano-objects. Batson and co-workers (2011) demonstrated on dry surfaces that a passing swift electron attracts a metal nanoparticle at moderate impact parameters (the lateral distance between the electron's trajectory and the particle) through its plasmonic response (the collective oscillation of conduction electrons excited by the electron's electromagnetic field) and repels it at small impact parameters, consistent with classical-electrodynamic theory of momentum transfer from 'aloof' electron beams (García de Abajo, 2004).

Zheng, Mirsaidov, Wang, and Matsudaira (Nano Lett. 2012) carried the idea into a liquid cell: gold nanoparticles in an aqueous environment were trapped by the electron beam and moved dynamically toward the location with higher electron density, following the beam as it was displaced; analysis of particle trajectories inside the beam yielded a trapping force in the piconewton range (10−1210^{-12} N) at electron-density gradients of 10310^3–10410^4 (e nm−2^{-2} s−1^{-1}) nm−1^{-1}; several particles could be trapped simultaneously, and rapidly converging the beam 'collected' particles onto the membrane surface and assembled them into a cluster. The microscopic origin of this attraction is not known. Candidate mechanisms span several physics regimes: direct momentum transfer from elastically scattered electrons; static charging of the particle, its ligand shell, or the SiNx membranes; radiolysis of the liquid (ionization of solvent molecules by the beam, producing solvated electrons, radicals, and molecular products) with associated electrokinetic flows and concentration gradients; local beam heating and possible vaporization; and thermophoresis (particle drift along a temperature gradient). In the source work these standard mechanisms were each estimated and found individually insufficient to account for the measured forces, and contemporaneous observations showed the beam–particle interaction is not universal in sign or mechanism: for example, platinum nanoparticles in an aqueous cell were driven radially outward from the STEM field of view by electrophoretic charging effects (motion of charged particles under the beam-induced electric field; White et al., 2012), while beam-guided assembly of surfactant-coated gold nanoparticles was attributed to radiolytic charge reduction (Liu et al., 2013).

Subsequent theory (Lagos et al. 2016; Castrejón-Figueroa et al. 2021; Castellanos-Reyes et al. 2023) treats the force between a single swift electron and a metallic nanoparticle in vacuum by classical electrodynamics, finding attractive momentum transfer that is only in qualitative agreement with the manipulation experiments; after correcting the optical dielectric data for causality, the momentum transfer to 1-nm aluminum and gold spheres is predicted to be always attractive, leaving the experimentally observed repulsive interactions theoretically undescribed — so even the dry-limit theory is unfinished. On the experimental side, beam-induced nanoparticle motion in liquid cells has been attributed to different mechanisms in different systems (charge-mediated assembly; radiolysis-driven solvent flow at an ionic-liquid interface; electron-flux-enhanced diffusion; local heating of a few to tens of kelvin), and reviews as late as 2025 treat beam–object forces in liquid-phase electron microscopy as an open, system-specific problem. What is missing is a validated mechanistic model, with predictive force laws, for the liquid-cell electron-beam trap itself.

Problem Statement

Determine the microscopic physical origin of the attractive trapping force that draws nanoparticles toward regions of higher electron density in a liquid-cell TEM/STEM. Concretely: identify which combination of phenomena — direct electromagnetic/plasmonic momentum transfer from swift electrons, beam-induced charging of the particle, its ligand shell, and the silicon nitride membranes, radiolysis-driven electrokinetic and fluid-flow effects, local heating and vaporization, or thermophoresis — generates the net piconewton-range lateral force measured at electron-density gradients of 10310^3–10410^4 (e nm−2^{-2} s−1^{-1}) nm−1^{-1} in the liquid-cell geometry (membranes, liquid, and ligands present, many-electron beam), accounting quantitatively for the measured magnitudes. The mechanism may involve dependencies on beam energy, electron flux (dose rate), electron-density gradient, particle size, particle material, ligand chemistry, and liquid-layer thickness, and in-plane trapping is to be distinguished from out-of-plane (vertical, membrane-directed) motion; these parameters are part of the physical setting in which the mechanism must be identified. An acceptable answer must identify the mechanism (or combination of mechanisms) that quantitatively accounts for the measured piconewton-range attractive trapping force at electron-density gradients of 10310^3–10410^4 (e nm−2^{-2} s−1^{-1}) nm−1^{-1} in the liquid-cell geometry; merely enumerating plausible mechanisms without quantitative sufficiency, or treating only the vacuum single-electron limit, does not resolve the problem.

References

  1. Zheng H., Mirsaidov U. M., Wang L.-W., Matsudaira P., 'Electron Beam Manipulation of Nanoparticles', Nano Letters 12, 5644–5648 (2012). DOI:10.1021/nl302788g, https://doi.org/10.1021/nl302788g
  2. García de Abajo F. J., 'Momentum transfer to small particles by aloof electron beams', arXiv:physics/0402005 (2004), https://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0402005
  3. Oleshko V. P., Howe J. M., 'Are electron tweezers possible?', Ultramicroscopy 111, 1599–1606 (2011). DOI:10.1016/j.ultramic.2011.08.015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2011.08.015
  4. Batson P. E., Reyes-Coronado A., Barrera R. G., Rivacoba A., Echenique P. M., Aizpurua J., 'Plasmonic Nanobilliards: Controlling Nanoparticle Movement Using Forces Induced by Swift Electrons', Nano Letters 11, 3388–3393 (2011). DOI:10.1021/nl201795u, https://doi.org/10.1021/nl201795u
  5. White E. R., Mecklenburg M., Shevitski B., Singer S. B., Regan B. C., 'Charged Nanoparticle Dynamics in Water Induced by Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy', Langmuir 28, 3695–3698 (2012). DOI:10.1021/la2048486, https://doi.org/10.1021/la2048486
  6. Liu Y., Lin X.-M., Sun Y., Rajh T., 'In Situ Visualization of Self-Assembly of Charged Gold Nanoparticles', Journal of the American Chemical Society 135, 3764–3767 (2013). DOI:10.1021/ja312620e, https://doi.org/10.1021/ja312620e
  7. Zheng H., 'Using molecular tweezers to move and image nanoparticles', Nanoscale 5, 4070–4078 (2013). DOI:10.1039/c3nr00737e, https://doi.org/10.1039/c3nr00737e
  8. Chen Y.-T., Wang C.-Y., Hong Y.-J., Kang Y.-T., Lai S.-E., Chang P., Yew T. R., 'Electron beam manipulation of gold nanoparticles external to the beam', RSC Advances 4, 31652 (2014). DOI:10.1039/C4RA03350G, https://doi.org/10.1039/C4RA03350G
  9. Lagos M. J., Reyes-Coronado A., Konečná A., Echenique P. M., Aizpurua J., Batson P. E., 'Attosecond and femtosecond forces exerted on gold nanoparticles induced by swift electrons', Physical Review B 93, 205440 (2016). DOI:10.1103/PhysRevB.93.205440, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.93.205440
  10. Liao H.-G., Zheng H., 'Liquid Cell Transmission Electron Microscopy', Annual Review of Physical Chemistry 67, 719–747 (2016). DOI:10.1146/annurev-physchem-040215-112501, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-physchem-040215-112501
  11. Powers A. S., Liao H.-G., Raja S. N., Bronstein N. D., Alivisatos A. P., Zheng H., 'Tracking Nanoparticle Diffusion and Interaction during Self-Assembly in a Liquid Cell', Nano Letters 17, 15–20 (2017). DOI:10.1021/acs.nanolett.6b02972, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.6b02972
  12. Yesibolati M. N., Mortensen K. I., Sun H., Brostrøm A., Tidemand-Lichtenberg S., Mølhave K., 'Unhindered Brownian Motion of Individual Nanoparticles in Liquid-Phase Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy', Nano Letters 20, 7108–7115 (2020). DOI:10.1021/acs.nanolett.0c02352, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.0c02352
  13. Bakalis E., Parent L. R., Vratsanos M., Park C., Gianneschi N. C., Zerbetto F., 'Complex Nanoparticle Diffusional Motion in Liquid-Cell Transmission Electron Microscopy', The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 124, 14881–14890 (2020). DOI:10.1021/acs.jpcc.0c03203, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcc.0c03203
  14. Fritsch B., Hutzler A., Wu M., Khadivianazar S., Vogl L., Jank M. P. M., März M., Spiecker E., 'Accessing local electron-beam induced temperature changes during in situ liquid-phase transmission electron microscopy', Nanoscale Advances 3, 2466–2474 (2021). DOI:10.1039/d0na01027h, https://doi.org/10.1039/d0na01027h
  15. Castrejón-Figueroa J., Castellanos-Reyes J., Maciel-Escudero C., Reyes-Coronado A., Barrera R. G., 'Time-dependent forces between a swift electron and a small nanoparticle within the dipole approximation', Physical Review B 103, 155413 (2021). DOI:10.1103/PhysRevB.103.155413, arXiv:2105.05367, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.103.155413
  16. Castrejón-Figueroa J., Castellanos-Reyes J., Reyes-Coronado A., 'Effects of a noncausal electromagnetic response on the linear momentum transfer from a swift electron to a metallic nanoparticle', Physical Review B 104, 235416 (2021). DOI:10.1103/PhysRevB.104.235416, arXiv:2106.04032, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.104.235416
  17. Castellanos-Reyes J., Castrejón-Figueroa J., Reyes-Coronado A., 'Theory and simulations of angular momentum transfer from swift electrons to spherical nanoparticles in scanning transmission electron microscopy', Physical Review B 107, 054307 (2023). DOI:10.1103/PhysRevB.107.054307, arXiv:2211.09883, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.107.054307
  18. Raybin J. G., Dunsworth E. J., Guo V., Ginsberg N. S., 'Reversible Electron-Beam Patterning of Colloidal Nanoparticles at Fluid Interfaces', ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 16, 68611–68620 (2024). DOI:10.1021/acsami.4c14882, arXiv:2409.08192, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.4c14882
  19. Fritsch B., Lee S., Körner A., Schneider N. M., Ross F. M., Hutzler A., 'The Influence of Ionizing Radiation on Quantification for In Situ and Operando Liquid-Phase Electron Microscopy', Advanced Materials 37, e2415728 (2025). DOI:10.1002/adma.202415728, https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202415728