Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userReply to comment by Mayers et al. on High energy neutron scattering from hydrogen using a direct geometry spectrometer
179
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
In this reply, we point out several criticisms of the analysis in arXiv:0909.2633 and show that the comment does not change the underlying conclusion presented by ourselves that there is no measurable deficit in the scattering cross section of hydrogen. We therefore consider that our original conclusions are correct namely that the previous anomalies in the cross section are due to experimental effects related to the use of indirect geometry spectrometers.
rate research
Read More
Deep inelastic neutron scattering experiments using indirect time-of-flight spectrometers have reported a smaller cross section for the hydrogen atom than expected from conventional scattering theory. Typically, at large momentum transfers, a deficit of 20-40% in the neutron scattering intensity has been measured and several theories have been developed to explain these results. We present a different approach to this problem by investigating the hydrogen cross section in polyethylene using the direct geometry time-of-flight spectrometer MARI with the incident energy fixed at a series of values ranging from Ei=0.5 eV to 100 eV. These measurements span a much broader range in momentum than previous studies and with varying energy resolutions. We observe no momentum dependence to the cross section with an error of 4% and through a comparison with the scattering from metal foil standards measure the absolute bound cross section of the hydrogen atom to be sigma(H)= 80 +/- 4 barns. These results are in agreement with conventional scattering theory but contrast with theories invoking quantum entanglement and neutron experiments supporting them. Our results also illustrate a unique use of direct geometry chopper instruments at high incident energies and demonstrate their capability for conducting high-energy spectroscopy.
In a comment on arXiv:1006.5070v1, Drechsler et al. present new band-structure calculations suggesting that the frustrated ferromagnetic spin-1/2 chain LiCuVO4 should be described by a strong rather than weak ferromagnetic nearest-neighbor interaction, in contradiction with their previous calculations. In our reply, we show that their new results are at odds with the observed magnetic structure, that their analysis of the static susceptibility neglects important contributions, and that their criticism of the spin-wave analysis of the bound-state dispersion is unfounded. We further show that their new exact diagonalization results reinforce our conclusion on the existence of a four-spinon continuum in LiCuVO4, see Enderle et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 (2010) 237207.
In a comment on arXiv:1006.5070v2, Drechsler et al. claim that the frustrated ferromagnetic spin-1/2 chain LiCuVO4 should be described by a strong rather than weak ferromagnetic nearest-neighbor interaction, in contradiction with their previous work. Their comment is based on DMRG and ED calculations of the magnetization curve and the magnetic excitations. We show that their parameters are at odds with the magnetic susceptibility and the magnetic excitation spectrum, once intensities are taken into account, and that the magnetization curve cannot discriminate between largely different parameter sets within experimental uncertainties. We further show that their new exact diagonalization results support the validity of the RPA-approach, and strongly reinforce our conclusion on the existence of a four-spinon continuum in LiCuVO4, see Enderle et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 (2010) 237207.
In their comment, Poole et al. (2009) aim to show it is highly improbable that the observations described in Chepfer and Noel (2009), and described as NAT-like therein, are produced by Nitric Acid Trihydrate (NAT) particles. In this reply, we attempt to show why there is, in our opinion, too little evidence to reject this interpretation right away.
In their Comment [arXiv:2102.03842], Haas et al. advance two hypotheses on the nature of the shape transformations observed in surfactant-stabilized emulsion droplets, as the theoretical models that us [Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 038001 (2021)] and others [P. A. Haas et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 088001 (2017), Phys. Rev. Research 1, 023017 (2019)] have introduced to account for these observations. (1) Because of the different surfactants used in experimental studies, the physical mechanisms underpinning the shape transformations may, in fact, differ in spite of the extraordinary resemblance in the output. (2) The theoretical models are mathematically equivalent by virtue of the small magnitude of the stretching and gravitational energies. In this Reply, we argue that neither of these hypotheses is well justified.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
