
==== Front
Nature
Nature
Nature
0028-0836
1476-4687
Nature Publishing Group UK London

39143212
7795
10.1038/s41586-024-07795-1
Article
Precision spectroscopy on 9Be overcomes limitations from nuclear structure
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9121-8707
Dickopf Stefan stefan.dickopf@mpi-hd.mpg.de

1
Sikora Bastian 1
http://orcid.org/0009-0000-5704-9049
Kaiser Annabelle 1
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7281-9002
Müller Marius 1
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4185-4147
Ulmer Stefan 23
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2328-8444
Yerokhin Vladimir A. 1
Harman Zoltán 1
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1984-1470
Keitel Christoph H. 1
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0292-5723
Mooser Andreas 1
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4468-9316
Blaum Klaus 1
1 https://ror.org/052d0h423 grid.419604.e 0000 0001 2288 6103 Max Planck Institute for Nuclear Physics, Heidelberg, Germany
2 https://ror.org/024z2rq82 grid.411327.2 0000 0001 2176 9917 Institute for Experimental Physics, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
3 https://ror.org/01sjwvz98 grid.7597.c 0000 0000 9446 5255 Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, RIKEN, Saitama, Japan
14 8 2024
14 8 2024
2024
632 8026 757761
4 4 2024
5 7 2024
© The Author(s) 2024, corrected publication 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Many powerful tests of the standard model of particle physics and searches for new physics with precision atomic spectroscopy are hindered by our lack of knowledge of nuclear properties. Ideally, these properties may be derived from precise measurements of the most sensitive and theoretically best-understood observables, often found in hydrogen-like systems. Although these measurements are abundant for the electric properties of nuclei, they are scarce for the magnetic properties, and precise experimental results are limited to the lightest of nuclei1–4. Here we focus on 9Be, which offers the unique possibility to use comparisons between different charge states available for high-precision spectroscopy in Penning traps to test theoretical calculations typically obscured by nuclear structure. In particular, we perform high-precision spectroscopy of the 1s hyperfine and Zeeman structure in hydrogen-like 9Be3+. We determine the effective Zemach radius with an uncertainty of 500 ppm, and the bare nuclear magnetic moment with an uncertainty of 0.6 parts per billion— uncertainties unmatched beyond hydrogen. Moreover, we compare our measurements with the measurements conducted on the three-electron charge state 9Be+ (ref. 5), which enables testing the calculation of multi-electron diamagnetic shielding effects of the nuclear magnetic moment at the parts per billion level. Furthermore, we test the quantum electrodynamics methods used for the calculation of the hyperfine splitting. Our results serve as a crucial benchmark for transferring high-precision results of nuclear magnetic properties across different electronic configurations.

A high-precision measurement of the shielding effects of multiple electrons on the nuclear magnetic moment is made possible by spectroscopy of hydrogen-like 9Be3+, which overcomes limitations from the nuclear structure.

Subject terms

Atomic and molecular physics
Quantum physics
issue-copyright-statement© Springer Nature Limited 2024
==== Body
pmcMain

Historically, advances in precision atomic spectroscopy have progressed alongside the development of the quantum theories of nature to successfully explain even the smallest of contributions to atomic transition frequencies. Meanwhile, precise tests and searches for new physics require that the established theories provide sufficiently accurate predictions for the observed system. Nowadays, in atomic systems, this frequently necessitates the knowledge of nuclear properties. However, these properties are often not known accurately enough from theoretical models describing the nuclear structure and are instead determined experimentally from independent measurements with high sensitivity to nuclear structure. For example, measurements of the Lamb shift in atomic6 or muonic hydrogen7 and deuterium8 are combined with other transitions to independently determine the proton charge radius and the Rydberg constant9. However, discrepancies between competing results remain unsolved10. Likewise, the magnetic dipole–dipole interaction of the nucleus with the bound electrons, which results in the hyperfine splitting (HFS), depends on the magnetic moment of the nucleus and is markedly influenced by the Zemach radius—a measure of electric and magnetic form factors of the nucleus. Here measurements of the 1s-HFS interval in hydrogen-like systems are the most sensitive to the Zemach radius and serve as ideal references to evaluate the nuclear structure effects in other HFS intervals and test the quantum electrodynamics (QED)11. However, for low nuclear charge Z, these measurements exist only for the hydrogen isotopes11 and 3He (refs. 4,12), whereas for high Z, tests of the HFS lack accurate experimental values of the nuclear magnetic moments13–15.

Recently, the high-precision Penning-trap measurement of the Zeeman and hyperfine splitting of 3He+ allowed us to directly measure its Zemach radius and nuclear magnetic moment4, simultaneously providing both parameters needed for precise predictions of other HFS intervals12. Moreover, the accurate value of the magnetic moment of the atom enables absolute magnetometry with hyperpolarized 3He (ref. 16). However, this requires transferring the measured nuclear magnetic moment from the hydrogen-like system to the neutral system, which involves the theoretical calculation of diamagnetic shielding parameters. In the past, inadequate calculations of these parameters have led to several discrepancies in precision physics13,17–19, including the recent 7σ deviation of the HFS specific difference in 209Bi82+,80+. In these studies, the required nuclear magnetic moments were obtained from measurements using systems with complex electronic structures and calculations of shielding parameters relying on quantum chemistry codes that frequently provide no, or underestimated, uncertainties15. By contrast, for systems such as hydrogen-like and neutral 3He, these issues are remedied by the simple electronic structure, which enables diamagnetic shielding calculations using highly accurate non-relativistic quantum electrodynamics methods. Here the diamagnetic shielding parameters are calculated in a perturbative approach, and the estimated uncertainties are more than one order of magnitude better than the experimental value of the 3He nuclear magnetic moment20. However, adjustments to the non-relativistic quantum electrodynamics theory value at the same level as the experimental uncertainty were performed recently21, further motivating an experimental verification and benchmark for diamagnetic shielding calculations.

An ideal candidate to both test the diamagnetic shielding calculations and introduce a highly accurate reference for nuclear structure contributions in the hyperfine interaction is 9Be. Here the low nuclear charge of Z = 4 permits calculations of the highest available accuracy in the hydrogen-like system, while, simultaneously, the Zeeman and hyperfine splitting can be probed using high-precision spectroscopy in Penning traps for both the lithium-like 9Be+ and hydrogen-like 9Be3+ charge states. In this work, we present the first measurements, to our knowledge, on 9Be3+. Compared with extractions using 9Be+ (refs. 5,22), the higher accuracy of theoretical calculations possible in hydrogen-like 9Be3+ allows for markedly improved determinations of the Zemach radius as well as the magnetic moment of the bare nucleus. Furthermore, we perform a unique comparison between the experimental hyperfine and Zeeman splitting of 9Be+ and 9Be3+, which we use to eliminate the nuclear structure-dependent terms. Compared with the measurements of the hyperfine splittings of 209Bi82+,80+ (ref. 13), this allows not only testing the QED theory using the HFS specific difference but also testing calculations of multi-electron diamagnetic shielding parameters at the parts per billion (ppb) level. The latter constitutes the first precision test of the corrections to nuclear magnetic moments across different charge states.

The combined hyperfine and Zeeman interaction in 9Be3+ is described by the Hamiltonian1 H=−12πe2megsBSz−12πe2mpgI′BIz+νHFSS⋅I,

where e is the elementary charge; me and mp are the electron and proton masses, respectively; and νHFS is the hyperfine splitting. The external magnetic field B is chosen to define the z-direction as the quantization axis for the spin angular momenta of the electron S and nucleus I. In this formula, the magnetic moments of the bound electron and shielded nucleus are given in units of the Bohr and nuclear magneton using the gyromagnetic ratios (g-factors), gs and g′I (the prime indicates the shielding), respectively. Using the spin magnetic quantum numbers of the electron, ms, and the nucleus, mI, the level structure of 9Be3+ is shown in Fig. 1. The 12 magnetic dipole transitions can be split into six low-frequency, 5.7 GHz < ν < 7.2 GHz, nuclear spin transitions with (Δms, ΔmI) = (0, 1); four high-frequency, 141 GHz < ν < 181 GHz, electron spin transitions with (Δms, ΔmI) = (1, 0); and two high-frequency combined transitions with (Δms, ΔmI) = (1, 2). The highest sensitivity for the extraction of g′I and νHFS is reached with the measurement of the two nuclear transitions ν1 ≈ 6.622 GHz and ν2 ≈ 6.553 GHz (compare Fig. 1). Our determination of the magnetic field B requires the precise knowledge of the mass mBe3+9 of the 9Be3+ ion. As the uncertainty δm9Be/m9Be=9×10−9 of the current accepted mass value23 would limit the extraction of g′I, the measurement of a third nuclear transition ν3 ≈ 6.124 GHz was included, allowing us to independently determine the mass.Fig. 1 Hyperfine and Zeeman splitting of 9Be3+.

On the left, the energies of the spin states are shown as a function of the external magnetic field B. The level structure at our magnetic field (dashed box) of around 5.7 T is shown on the right. Spectroscopy is performed on the three nuclear spin transitions (blue) labelled ν1, ν2 and ν3. The three electron spin transitions (green) are used for detecting the nuclear spin state.

The measurements are performed with a single ion in the Penning-trap setup shown in Fig. 2. The setup is placed in a sealed-off vacuum chamber inside the liquid-helium-cooled bore of a 5.7-T superconducting magnet. Inside this chamber, the vacuum conditions allow for trapping lifetimes exceeding the multiple months needed for the full measurement campaign. The magnetic field confines the ion on a circular orbit with revolution frequency νc=(qB)/(2πmBe3+9), where νc is the cyclotron frequency and q = 3e is the charge of 9Be3+. The cylindrical electrodes of the trap are biased by an ultrastable voltage source to create a quadrupolar electrostatic potential, forcing the ion into a harmonic oscillation along the z-axis with frequency νz. This further splits the radial motion into two eigenmotions characterized by the modified cyclotron frequency ν+ and the magnetron frequency ν−. Here νc ≈ ν+ ≈ 29 MHz ≫ νz ≈ 480 kHz ≫ ν− ≈ 4 kHz. By measuring the three eigenfrequencies and combining them using the so-called invariance theorem, νc2=ν+2+ν−2+νz2, the cyclotron frequency is reproduced while cancelling certain systematic effects24. A superconducting tank circuit is connected to one of the trap electrodes to provide resistive cooling of the axial mode to the ambient 4.2 K as well as detection of the axial oscillation25 (Fig. 2). Sideband coupling to the axial mode enables thermalization and frequency measurement of the radial modes26.Fig. 2 Schematic of the Penning-trap setup.

The Penning trap is built up of gold-plated copper electrodes separated by isolating sapphire spacers (blue). Microwaves for driving the electron spin transitions are irradiated on-axis by a waveguide, and a coil with a few windings connected to coaxial cables is used to drive the low-frequency nuclear transitions in the precision trap. 9Be3+ ions are produced using laser ablation from a solid beryllium target and subsequent electron impact ionization. a, While alternating the irradiation of the two electron spin detection transitions (indicated by the two background colours) in the analysis trap, axial frequency jumps are observed only for one of them. b, The motional frequencies of 9Be3+ are measured by dip signals in the Fourier spectrum of the detection signal. a.u., arbitrary units.

For the spectroscopy of the spin transitions, we count spin-state changes of the ion following an excitation with a frequency close to the transition centre. Changes in the spin state are detected by using the continuous Stern–Gerlach effect27. To this end, a ferromagnetic ring electrode introduces a quadratic magnetic field ΔB = B2z2, where B2 ≈ 282 kT m−2. This couples the magnetic moment of the ion to its axial motion, slightly altering νz depending on the spin state. Changes in the spin state induced by a transition (ms, mI) → (m′s, m′I) lead to a shift Δνz proportional to the change of the magnetic moment27. For an electron spin transition, (Δms, ΔmI) = (1, 0), the axial frequency jump Δνz ≈ 10 Hz can be easily detected. By contrast, the change of the magnetic moment of the ion for a nuclear spin transition, (Δms, ΔmI) = (0, 1), is greatly reduced, making its detection challenging. For instance, in the case of ν1, the axial frequency jump is only Δνz ≈ 6 mHz, which cannot be discerned from the background fluctuations of νz. Instead, for the spectroscopy of nuclear transitions (ms, mI) → (ms, m′I), the two detection transitions (ms, mI) → (m′s, mI) and (ms, m′I) → (m′s, m′I) are used, compare Fig. 1. While cycling these two transitions, only one of them produces detectable electron spin-state changes (Fig. 2a), which unambiguously identifies the nuclear spin state.

As the large B2 required for spin-state detection would limit the experimental precision, we use spatially separated traps for spin-state detection and the precision measurement, called analysis trap (AT) and precision trap (PT) (ref. 28) (Fig. 2). In the PT, the residual magnetic field inhomogeneity is greatly reduced, B2,PT ≈ 1 T m−2. A measurement cycle starts by determining the spin state in the AT. Following an adiabatic transport to the PT, an initial cyclotron frequency measurement νc,1 determines the expected spin transition frequency. During a second measurement of the cyclotron frequency νc,2, the spin transition is driven with a frequency νMW, which is randomly offset from the previously calculated value. After a third measurement, νc,3, the ion is transported back to the AT to again detect the spin state and determine whether it changed from the previously detected one. We measured νc to a precision of one part in a billion with typical averaging times of a few minutes and performed a single measurement cycle in 20 min. For each of the three transitions, a few hundred measurement cycles were performed.

We use maximum likelihood estimation to fit the centre values of νMW − νi(νc∣Γe, ΓI, νHFS) from the three recorded resonances shown in Fig. 3 to extract Γe, ΓI and νHFS, where2 Γe=gs2eqmme,ΓI=gI′gsmemp,

compare equation (1) and Supplementary Information for details. The statistical uncertainties are 17 mHz, 26 mHz and 86 mHz for ν1, ν2 and ν3, respectively. Experimental systematic shifts and uncertainties are because of special relativity effects, electrostatic and magnetostatic field imperfections, induced image charges, the axial frequency determination and the accuracy of the GPS-locked rubidium clock. Moreover, we include a second-order effect arising from the electric quadrupole moment of the nucleus29, slightly shifting the transition frequencies. A discussion of systematic effects and the error budget is provided in the Supplementary Information. The corrected results are Γe = −5479.8633435(11)(19), ΓI = 2.1354753854(11)(3) × 10−4 and νHFS = − 12796971342.630(50)(15) Hz, where the first number in parentheses is the statistical error and the second is the systematic uncertainty.Fig. 3 Recorded resonance curves.

The difference of the probe excitation at frequency νMW to the nuclear spin transition frequency νi(νc) is calculated from the simultaneously measured νc. The data points are the binned number of successful spin-flip tries divided by the total number of tries in that bin, and the error bars correspond to the 68% binomial confidences. The line and confidence band (68%) are taken from a Voigt profile fit by maximum likelihood analysis of the unbinned data.

Both the g-factor of the free electron and of the bare nucleus need to be corrected for the influence of the binding potential in the composite system30. Our calculations of the bound-electron g-factor include corrections due to special relativity, QED, nuclear recoil and structure effects (Supplementary Information). We evaluate gs(9Be3+) = −2.0017515747, where uncertainties due to uncalculated higher-order QED corrections as well as nuclear corrections are smaller than 1 in the last given digit. The binding corrections to the bare nuclear g-factor gI are expressed as g′I = (1 − σ)gI, where σ is the diamagnetic shielding parameter. The theoretical calculations of diamagnetic shielding parameters include corrections due to nuclear recoil, relativistic effects, one-loop QED and finite nuclear size effects. We evaluate σ(9Be3+) = 71.15397(14) × 10−6 (Supplementary Information).

From ΓI, we calculate the bare nuclear g-factor using the proton-to-electron mass ratio31, our values of the bound-electron g-factor gs(9Be3+) and the shielding σ(9Be3+). Our result, gI = −0.78495442296(42)exp(11)theo, improves the accuracy by a factor of 45 compared with the result in ref. 22, the latter being limited by the shielding parameter of 9Be+. With a fractional uncertainty of 0.6 ppb, our result establishes the nuclear magnetic moment of 9Be as the second most precise, to our knowledge, surpassed only by that of the proton32. By comparisons with 9Be+, we evaluate the shielding factor of the lithium-like system,3 1−σ(B9e+)=(1−σ(B9e3+))ΓI(B9e+)ΓI(B9e3+)gs(B9e+)gs(B9e3+).

This requires the experimental result of ΓI(9Be+) from ref. 5 and the bound-electron g-factor gs(9Be+) = −2.0022621287(24). For the latter, we use the calculations performed in ref. 22 and the updated nuclear recoil correction33,34. We evaluate σ(9Be+) = 141.8821(11)exp(12)theo × 10−6, where the second uncertainty is limited by gs(9Be+). The theoretical value, σ(9Be+) = 141.85(3) × 10−6 (ref. 22), is in good agreement with our experimental result. To our knowledge, this constitutes the first high-precision test of the calculation of a multi-electron diamagnetic shielding parameter. The shielding calculations for the three-electron systems 9Be+ and 6,7Li are performed identically and use explicit values of the leading- and lowest-order recoil terms and an estimate of the relativistic correction22,33. At the current state of theoretical calculations of the lithium-like shielding parameters, we confirm the leading-order calculation and the estimate of the relativistic correction, solidifying its use for 6,7Li. In the future, the advanced calculations performed for 3He can be extended to 9Be+ (ref. 35), and our experimental value of σ(9Be+) will serve as an ideal benchmark at the ppb precision level.

Calculations of the zero-field hyperfine splitting can be expressed as36–384 νHFS=EF2h(1+δpt−2Zr~Z/a0),

where EF is the non-relativistic value of the hyperfine splitting39, a0 is the Bohr radius, δpt summarizes all corrections with a point-like treatment of the nucleus (Supplementary Information), and all nuclear structure contributions are absorbed in −2Zr~Z/a0≈6×10−4 by the effective Zemach radius r~Z. In comparison, the relative nuclear structure contributions to the electron g-factor gs and the shielding σ(9Be3+) are below 10−10, which highlights the sensitivity of the HFS to effects from the nuclear structure. From our experimental result, νHFS(9Be3+) = −12796.971342630(52) MHz, we calculate the effective Zemach radius r~Z=4.048(2)fm. This value is consistent with that extracted from 9Be+, r~Z=4.03(5)fm (ref. 36) (value corrected with our more accurate magnetic moment) and improves its accuracy by a factor of 25, which is possible because of the more accurate calculation of δpt(9Be3+) compared with δpt(9Be+).

Following investigations on 209Bi (ref. 19), we form a specific difference between the hydrogen- and lithium-like systems, ΔνHFS = νHFS(9Be+) − ξνHFS(9Be3+) to cancel the large theoretical uncertainties due to nuclear structure with the calculated weighting factor ξ = 0.04881891046 (Supplementary Information). This complements the high-Z case of 209Bi because of the different theoretical approaches used to calculate the lithium-like HFS. For high Z, the large relativistic effects are included directly in the leading order by the use of a relativistic wave function basis set, whereas electron–electron correlations are treated perturbatively40. By contrast, for low Z, the electron–electron correlations lead to considerably larger contributions that require using wave functions constructed from an explicitly correlated, non-relativistic basis set, and the relativistic corrections are instead treated perturbatively41,42. Therefore, in the case of 209Bi, higher-order QED terms are tested by ΔνHFS, whereas in our study at low Z, higher-order electron correlation effects are benchmarked. The experimental result, using νHFS(9Be+) = −625.008837044(12) MHz from ref. 43 is ΔνHFS,exp = −274.638909(12) kHz, where the uncertainty is dominated by νHFS(9Be+). We calculate the theoretical value, ΔνHFS,theo = −271.4(3.6) kHz, which is in good agreement with the experimental value but has a much larger uncertainty. Equivalently, this constitutes a test of νHFS(9Be+) with 6-ppm precision. Similar to calculations for 6,7Li, estimates of the QED contributions to the lithium-like system limit the accuracy of the theoretical result38.

In Fig. 4, we compare the nuclear structure resolution of several measurements. Our determination of the nuclear structure contribution to the HFS of 9Be by 9Be3+ shows leading experimental resolution and substantial improvements of the theory compared with 9Be+. This progress now enables testing other HFS systems in 9Be with higher accuracy using our precise values of the Zemach radius and the nuclear magnetic moment, as demonstrated by our evaluation of the specific difference. Furthermore, future tests of the theory of the HFS in the helium-like system 9Be2+ will benefit from our results44, and direct measurements of the 2s HFS in 9Be3+ would provide an opportunity for highly stringent tests of bound-state QED because of the more accurate theory in single-electron systems.Fig. 4 Theoretical and experimental nuclear structure resolution of various measurements1–4,7,8,14,19,36–38,43,49,50.

The y-axis is the fraction of the theoretical uncertainty of the point-nucleus calculations to the nuclear structure contribution. The x-axis is the fraction of experimental uncertainty to the nuclear structure contribution. The dashed diagonal line indicates equal experimental and theoretical resolution. For H, D and T, HFS calculations from ref. 38 were used, which, as opposed to our value for νHFS(9Be3+), do not include contributions and uncertainties from hadronic and muonic vacuum polarization as well as certain nuclear recoil terms. For comparison, the blue dashed line and point indicate the reduced theoretical uncertainty of νHFS(9Be3+) using the same calculations that do not include the aforementioned contributions. For details, see Supplementary Table 7.

Finally, we calculate the atomic mass of 9Be from Γe, using the electron mass31, the required binding energies45–47 and our theoretical value of gs(9Be3+). The result, mBe9=9.0121830344(35)u, is in perfect agreement with the accepted value23 and improves the uncertainty by a factor of 20.

The results are summarized in Table 1. In conclusion, our precision measurement of the bare nuclear magnetic moment and the effective Zemach radius of 9Be with hydrogen-like 9Be3+ enables tests of QED methods accessible only with accurate knowledge of these properties. At present, by comparison with measurements on 9Be+, we provide the, to our knowledge, first high-precision test of multi-electron diamagnetic shielding calculations and a 6-ppm test of the QED calculations of the lithium-like 2s HFS. High-precision Penning-trap measurements of hyperfine and Zeeman splittings, which we previously demonstrated for 3He+, are now possible for a multitude of other hydrogen-like or lithium-like ions, enabling the suppression of nuclear effects, mandatory for further applications such as spectroscopic searches for physics beyond the standard model48. Furthermore, measurements on 6,7Li2+ would enable direct comparisons with the recent measurements on the helium-like charge states21,37,49.Table 1 Summary of results

Value	References	
gI=−0.78495442296(42)exp(11)theo	TW	
gI = −0.78495439(2)theo	Ref. 22	
σ(B9e+)=141.8821(11)exp(12)theo×10−6	TW, refs. 5,22,34	
σ(9Be+) = 141.85(3)theo × 10−6	Ref. 22	
r~Z=4.048(2)fm	TW	
r~Z=4.03(5)fm	Ref. 36	
ΔνHFS,exp=−274.638909(12)kHz	TW, ref. 43	
ΔνHFS,theo = −271.4(3.6) kHz	TW, ref. 36	
mBe9=9.0121830344(35)u	TW	
mBe9=9.01218306(8)u	Ref. 23	
TW refers to results derived in this work.

Online content

Any methods, additional references, Nature Portfolio reporting summaries, source data, extended data, supplementary information, acknowledgements, peer review information; details of author contributions and competing interests; and statements of data and code availability are available at 10.1038/s41586-024-07795-1.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41586-024-07795-1.

Acknowledgements

This work is part of and funded by the Max Planck Society and RIKEN. Furthermore, this project has received funding from the European Research Council under the Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme of the European Union under grant agreement no. 832848-FunI. We acknowledge the funding and support of the International Max Planck Research School for Precision Tests of Fundamental Symmetries and the Max Planck-RIKEN-PTB Center for Time, Constants and Fundamental Symmetries. This work comprises parts of the PhD thesis work of S.D. to be submitted to Heidelberg University, Germany.

Author contributions

S.D., A.K., M.M. and A.M. performed the measurements. B.S., V.A.Y. and Z.H. carried out the QED calculations. The paper was written by S.D., B.S., S.U., V.A.Y., Z.H., C.H.K., A.M. and K.B. and discussed among and approved by all co-authors.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature thanks the anonymous reviewers for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Funding

Open access funding provided by Max Planck Society.

Data availability

The datasets generated and analysed during this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Code availability

The code used during this study is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. Hellwig H Measurement of the unperturbed hydrogen hyperfine transition frequency IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 1970 19 200 209 10.1109/TIM.1970.4313902
Hellwig, H. et al. Measurement of the unperturbed hydrogen hyperfine transition frequency. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 19, 200–209 (1970).10.1109/TIM.1970.4313902
2. Wineland DJ Ramsey NF Atomic deuterium maser Phys. Rev. A 1972 5 821 837 10.1103/PhysRevA.5.821
Wineland, D. J. & Ramsey, N. F. Atomic deuterium maser. Phys. Rev. A 5, 821–837 (1972).10.1103/PhysRevA.5.821
3. Mathur BS Crampton SB Kleppner D Ramsey NF Hyperfine separation of tritium Phys. Rev. 1967 158 14 17 10.1103/PhysRev.158.14
Mathur, B. S., Crampton, S. B., Kleppner, D. & Ramsey, N. F. Hyperfine separation of tritium. Phys. Rev. 158, 14–17 (1967).10.1103/PhysRev.158.14
4. Schneider A Direct measurement of the 3He+ magnetic moments Nature 2022 606 878 883 10.1038/s41586-022-04761-7 35676477
Schneider, A. et al. Direct measurement of the 3He+ magnetic moments. Nature 606, 878–883 (2022).35676477 10.1038/s41586-022-04761-7
5. Wineland DJ Bollinger JJ Itano WM Laser-fluorescence mass spectroscopy Phys. Rev. Lett. 1983 50 628 631 10.1103/PhysRevLett.50.628
Wineland, D. J., Bollinger, J. J. & Itano, W. M. Laser-fluorescence mass spectroscopy. Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 628–631 (1983).10.1103/PhysRevLett.50.628
6. Bezginov N A measurement of the atomic hydrogen lamb shift and the proton charge radius Science 2019 365 1007 1012 10.1126/science.aau7807 31488684
Bezginov, N. et al. A measurement of the atomic hydrogen lamb shift and the proton charge radius. Science 365, 1007–1012 (2019).31488684 10.1126/science.aau7807
7. Antognini A Proton structure from the measurement of 2S-2P transition frequencies of muonic hydrogen Science 2013 339 417 420 10.1126/science.1230016 23349284
Antognini, A. et al. Proton structure from the measurement of 2S-2P transition frequencies of muonic hydrogen. Science 339, 417–420 (2013).23349284 10.1126/science.1230016
8. Pohl R Laser spectroscopy of muonic deuterium Science 2016 353 669 673 10.1126/science.aaf2468 27516595
Pohl, R. et al. Laser spectroscopy of muonic deuterium. Science 353, 669–673 (2016).27516595 10.1126/science.aaf2468
9. Beyer A The Rydberg constant and proton size from atomic hydrogen Science 2017 358 79 85 10.1126/science.aah6677 28983046
Beyer, A. et al. The Rydberg constant and proton size from atomic hydrogen. Science 358, 79–85 (2017).28983046 10.1126/science.aah6677
10. Gao H Vanderhaeghen M The proton charge radius Rev. Mod. Phys. 2022 94 015002 10.1103/RevModPhys.94.015002
Gao, H. & Vanderhaeghen, M. The proton charge radius. Rev. Mod. Phys. 94, 015002 (2022).10.1103/RevModPhys.94.015002
11. Karshenboim SG Precision physics of simple atoms: QED tests, nuclear structure and fundamental constants Phys. Rep. 2005 422 1 63 10.1016/j.physrep.2005.08.008
Karshenboim, S. G. Precision physics of simple atoms: QED tests, nuclear structure and fundamental constants. Phys. Rep. 422, 1–63 (2005).10.1016/j.physrep.2005.08.008
12. Patkóš V Yerokhin VA Pachucki K Higher-order QED corrections to the hyperfine splitting in 3He Phys. Rev. Lett. 2023 131 183001 10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.183001 37977610
Patkóš, V., Yerokhin, V. A. & Pachucki, K. Higher-order QED corrections to the hyperfine splitting in 3He. Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 183001 (2023).37977610 10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.183001
13. Skripnikov LV New nuclear magnetic moment of 209Bi: resolving the bismuth hyperfine puzzle Phys. Rev. Lett. 2018 120 093001 10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.093001 29547322
Skripnikov, L. V. et al. New nuclear magnetic moment of 209Bi: resolving the bismuth hyperfine puzzle. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 093001 (2018).29547322 10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.093001
14. Shabaev VM Calculation of the hyperfine structure of heavy H and Li like ions Hyperfine Interact. 2000 127 279 286 10.1023/A:1012616322709
Shabaev, V. M. et al. Calculation of the hyperfine structure of heavy H and Li like ions. Hyperfine Interact. 127, 279–286 (2000).10.1023/A:1012616322709
15. Stone, N. Table of Recommended Nuclear Magnetic Dipole Moments. Report No. INDC(NDS)-0794 (International Atomic Energy Agency, 2019).
16. Farooq M Absolute magnetometry with 3He Phys. Rev. Lett. 2020 124 223001 10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.223001 32567926
Farooq, M. et al. Absolute magnetometry with 3He. Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 223001 (2020).32567926 10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.223001
17. Crespo López-Urrutia JR Beiersdorfer P Savin DW Widmann K Direct observation of the spontaneous emission of the hyperfine transition F = 4 to F = 3 in ground state hydrogenlike 165Ho66+ in an electron beam ion trap Phys. Rev. Lett. 1996 77 826 829 10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.826 10062916
Crespo López-Urrutia, J. R., Beiersdorfer, P., Savin, D. W. & Widmann, K. Direct observation of the spontaneous emission of the hyperfine transition F = 4 to F = 3 in ground state hydrogenlike 165Ho66+ in an electron beam ion trap. Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 826–829 (1996).10062916 10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.826
18. Fella V Magnetic moment of 207Pb and the hyperfine splitting of 207Pb81+ Phys. Rev. Res. 2020 2 013368 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.2.013368
Fella, V. et al. Magnetic moment of 207Pb and the hyperfine splitting of 207Pb81+. Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 013368 (2020).10.1103/PhysRevResearch.2.013368
19. Ullmann J High precision hyperfine measurements in Bismuth challenge bound-state strong-field QED Nat. Commun. 2017 8 15484 10.1038/ncomms15484 28508892
Ullmann, J. et al. High precision hyperfine measurements in Bismuth challenge bound-state strong-field QED. Nat. Commun. 8, 15484 (2017).28508892 10.1038/ncomms15484
20. Wehrli D Spyszkiewicz-Kaczmarek A Puchalski M Pachucki K QED effect on the nuclear magnetic shielding of 3He Phys. Rev. Lett. 2021 127 263001 10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.263001 35029494
Wehrli, D., Spyszkiewicz-Kaczmarek, A., Puchalski, M. & Pachucki, K. QED effect on the nuclear magnetic shielding of 3He. Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 263001 (2021).35029494 10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.263001
21. Pachucki K Nuclear mass and size corrections to the magnetic shielding Phys. Rev. A 2023 108 062806 10.1103/PhysRevA.108.062806
Pachucki, K. Nuclear mass and size corrections to the magnetic shielding. Phys. Rev. A 108, 062806 (2023).10.1103/PhysRevA.108.062806
22. Pachucki K Puchalski M Accurate determination of Be magnetic moment Opt. Commun. 2010 283 641 643 10.1016/j.optcom.2009.10.058
Pachucki, K. & Puchalski, M. Accurate determination of Be magnetic moment. Opt. Commun. 283, 641–643 (2010).10.1016/j.optcom.2009.10.058
23. Wang M Huang W Kondev F Audi G Naimi S The AME 2020 atomic mass evaluation (II). Tables, graphs and references Chin. Phys. C 2021 45 030003 10.1088/1674-1137/abddaf
Wang, M., Huang, W., Kondev, F., Audi, G. & Naimi, S. The AME 2020 atomic mass evaluation (II). Tables, graphs and references. Chin. Phys. C 45, 030003 (2021).10.1088/1674-1137/abddaf
24. Gabrielse G Why is sideband mass spectrometry possible with ions in a Penning trap? Phys. Rev. Lett. 2009 102 172501 10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.172501 19518777
Gabrielse, G. Why is sideband mass spectrometry possible with ions in a Penning trap? Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 172501 (2009).19518777 10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.172501
25. Wineland DJ Dehmelt HG Principles of the stored ion calorimeter J. Appl. Phys. 1975 46 919 930 10.1063/1.321602
Wineland, D. J. & Dehmelt, H. G. Principles of the stored ion calorimeter. J. Appl. Phys. 46, 919–930 (1975).10.1063/1.321602
26. Cornell EA Weisskoff RM Boyce KR Pritchard DE Mode coupling in a Penning trap: π pulses and a classical avoided crossing Phys. Rev. A 1990 41 312 315 10.1103/PhysRevA.41.312 9902871
Cornell, E. A., Weisskoff, R. M., Boyce, K. R. & Pritchard, D. E. Mode coupling in a Penning trap: π pulses and a classical avoided crossing. Phys. Rev. A 41, 312–315 (1990).9902871 10.1103/PhysRevA.41.312
27. Dehmelt H Continuous Stern–Gerlach effect: principle and idealized apparatus Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 1986 83 2291 2294 10.1073/pnas.83.8.2291 16593681
Dehmelt, H. Continuous Stern–Gerlach effect: principle and idealized apparatus. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 83, 2291–2294 (1986).16593681 10.1073/pnas.83.8.2291
28. Häffner H High-accuracy measurement of the magnetic moment anomaly of the electron bound in hydrogenlike carbon Phys. Rev. Lett. 2000 85 5308 5311 10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.5308 11135983
Häffner, H. et al. High-accuracy measurement of the magnetic moment anomaly of the electron bound in hydrogenlike carbon. Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 5308–5311 (2000).11135983 10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.5308
29. Moskovkin DL Shabaev VM Zeeman effect of the hyperfine-structure levels in hydrogenlike ions Phys. Rev. A 2006 73 052506 10.1103/PhysRevA.73.052506
Moskovkin, D. L. & Shabaev, V. M. Zeeman effect of the hyperfine-structure levels in hydrogenlike ions. Phys. Rev. A 73, 052506 (2006).10.1103/PhysRevA.73.052506
30. Faustov R Magnetic moment of the hydrogen atom Phys. Lett. B 1970 33 422 424 10.1016/0370-2693(70)90621-0
Faustov, R. Magnetic moment of the hydrogen atom. Phys. Lett. B 33, 422–424 (1970).10.1016/0370-2693(70)90621-0
31. Tiesinga E Mohr PJ Newell DB Taylor BN Codata recommended values of the fundamental physical constants: 2018 Rev. Mod. Phys. 2021 93 025010 10.1103/RevModPhys.93.025010 36733295
Tiesinga, E., Mohr, P. J., Newell, D. B. & Taylor, B. N. Codata recommended values of the fundamental physical constants: 2018. Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 025010 (2021).36733295 10.1103/RevModPhys.93.025010
32. Schneider G Double-trap measurement of the proton magnetic moment at 0.3 parts per billion precision Science 2017 358 1081 1084 10.1126/science.aan0207 29170238
Schneider, G. et al. Double-trap measurement of the proton magnetic moment at 0.3 parts per billion precision. Science 358, 1081–1084 (2017).29170238 10.1126/science.aan0207
33. Pachucki K Patkóš V Yerokhin VA Accurate determination of 6,7Li nuclear magnetic moments Phys. Lett. B 2023 846 138189 10.1016/j.physletb.2023.138189
Pachucki, K., Patkóš, V. & Yerokhin, V. A. Accurate determination of 6,7Li nuclear magnetic moments. Phys. Lett. B 846, 138189 (2023).10.1016/j.physletb.2023.138189
34. Shabaev VM Glazov DA Malyshev AV Tupitsyn II Recoil effect on the g factor of Li-like ions Phys. Rev. Lett. 2017 119 263001 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.263001 29328712
Shabaev, V. M., Glazov, D. A., Malyshev, A. V. & Tupitsyn, I. I. Recoil effect on the g factor of Li-like ions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 263001 (2017).29328712 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.263001
35. Wehrli D Puchalski M Pachucki K QED theory of the nuclear magnetic shielding in H and 3He Phys. Rev. A 2022 105 032808 10.1103/PhysRevA.105.032808
Wehrli, D., Puchalski, M. & Pachucki, K. QED theory of the nuclear magnetic shielding in H and 3He. Phys. Rev. A 105, 032808 (2022).10.1103/PhysRevA.105.032808
36. Puchalski M Pachucki K Ground-state hyperfine splitting in the Be+ ion Phys. Rev. A 2014 89 032510 10.1103/PhysRevA.89.032510
Puchalski, M. & Pachucki, K. Ground-state hyperfine splitting in the Be+ ion. Phys. Rev. A 89, 032510 (2014).10.1103/PhysRevA.89.032510
37. Sun W Measurement of hyperfine structure and the Zemach radius in 6Li+ using optical Ramsey technique Phys. Rev. Lett. 2023 131 103002 10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.103002 37739370
Sun, W. et al. Measurement of hyperfine structure and the Zemach radius in 6Li+ using optical Ramsey technique. Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 103002 (2023).37739370 10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.103002
38. Pachucki K Patkóš Vcv Yerokhin VA Hyperfine splitting in 6,7Li+ Phys. Rev. A 2023 108 052802 10.1103/PhysRevA.108.052802
Pachucki, K., Patkóš, Vcv & Yerokhin, V. A. Hyperfine splitting in 6,7Li+. Phys. Rev. A 108, 052802 (2023).10.1103/PhysRevA.108.052802
39. Fermi E Über die magnetischen momente der atomkerne Z. Phys. 1930 60 320 333 10.1007/BF01339933
Fermi, E. Über die magnetischen momente der atomkerne. Z. Phys. 60, 320–333 (1930).10.1007/BF01339933
40. Volotka AV Test of many-electron QED effects in the hyperfine splitting of heavy high-Z ions Phys. Rev. Lett. 2012 108 073001 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.073001 22401198
Volotka, A. V. et al. Test of many-electron QED effects in the hyperfine splitting of heavy high-Z ions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 073001 (2012).22401198 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.073001
41. Yerokhin VA Hyperfine structure of Li and Be+ Phys. Rev. A 2008 78 012513 10.1103/PhysRevA.78.012513
Yerokhin, V. A. Hyperfine structure of Li and Be+. Phys. Rev. A 78, 012513 (2008).10.1103/PhysRevA.78.012513
42. Puchalski M Pachucki K Ground state hyperfine splitting in 6,7Li atoms and the nuclear structure Phys. Rev. Lett. 2013 111 243001 10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.243001 24483650
Puchalski, M. & Pachucki, K. Ground state hyperfine splitting in 6,7Li atoms and the nuclear structure. Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 243001 (2013).24483650 10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.243001
43. Shiga N Itano WM Bollinger JJ Diamagnetic correction to the 9Be+ ground-state hyperfine constant Phys. Rev. A 2011 84 012510 10.1103/PhysRevA.84.012510
Shiga, N., Itano, W. M. & Bollinger, J. J. Diamagnetic correction to the 9Be+ ground-state hyperfine constant. Phys. Rev. A 84, 012510 (2011).10.1103/PhysRevA.84.012510
44. Qi X-Q Theoretical hyperfine splittings of 7,9Be2+ ions for future studies of nuclear properties Phys. Rev. A 2023 107 L010802 10.1103/PhysRevA.107.L010802
Qi, X.-Q. et al. Theoretical hyperfine splittings of 7,9Be2+ ions for future studies of nuclear properties. Phys. Rev. A 107, L010802 (2023).10.1103/PhysRevA.107.L010802
45. Kramida AE Critical compilation of wavelengths and energy levels of singly ionized beryllium (Be II) Phys. Scr. 2005 72 309 319 10.1238/Physica.Regular.072a00309
Kramida, A. E. Critical compilation of wavelengths and energy levels of singly ionized beryllium (Be II). Phys. Scr. 72, 309–319 (2005).10.1238/Physica.Regular.072a00309
46. Drake GWF Theoretical energies for the n = 1 and 2 states of the helium isoelectronic sequence up to Z = 100 Can. J. Phys. 1988 66 586 611 10.1139/p88-100
Drake, G. W. F. Theoretical energies for the n = 1 and 2 states of the helium isoelectronic sequence up to Z = 100. Can. J. Phys. 66, 586–611 (1988).10.1139/p88-100
47. Beigang R Schmidt D West P Laserspectroscopy of high Rydberg states of light alkaline-earth elements: Be and Mg J. Phys. Colloq. 1983 44 C7-229–C7-237 10.1051/jphyscol:1983719
Beigang, R., Schmidt, D. & West, P. Laserspectroscopy of high Rydberg states of light alkaline-earth elements: Be and Mg. J. Phys. Colloq. 44, C7-229–C7-237 (1983).10.1051/jphyscol:1983719
48. Debierre V Keitel CH Harman Z Fifth-force search with the bound-electron g factor Phys. Lett. B 2020 807 135527 10.1016/j.physletb.2020.135527
Debierre, V., Keitel, C. H. & Harman, Z. Fifth-force search with the bound-electron g factor. Phys. Lett. B 807, 135527 (2020).10.1016/j.physletb.2020.135527
49. Guan H Probing atomic and nuclear properties with precision spectroscopy of fine and hyperfine structures in the 7Li+ ion Phys. Rev. A 2020 102 030801 10.1103/PhysRevA.102.030801
Guan, H. et al. Probing atomic and nuclear properties with precision spectroscopy of fine and hyperfine structures in the 7Li+ ion. Phys. Rev. A 102, 030801 (2020).10.1103/PhysRevA.102.030801
50. Morgner J Stringent test of QED with hydrogen-like tin Nature 2023 622 53 57 10.1038/s41586-023-06453-2 37794267
Morgner, J. et al. Stringent test of QED with hydrogen-like tin. Nature 622, 53–57 (2023).37794267 10.1038/s41586-023-06453-2
