اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدComment on Direct Mapping of the Finite Temperature Phase Diagram of Strongly Correlated Quantum Models by Q. Zhou, Y. Kato, N. Kawashima, and N. Trivedi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 085701 (2009)
44
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
In their Letter, Zhou, Kato, Kawashima, and Trivedi claim that finite-temperature critical points of strongly correlated quantum models emulated by optical lattice experiments can generically be deduced from kinks in the derivative of the density profile of atoms in the trap with respect to the external potential, $kappa = -dn(r)/dV(r)$. In this comment we demonstrate that the authors failed to achieve their goal: to show that under realistic experimental conditions critical densities $n_c(T,U)$ can be extracted from density profiles with controllable accuracy.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
In this communication we refute a criticism concerning results of our work [3] that was presented in references [1] and [2].
Very recently Girardeau and Minguzzi [arXiv:0807.3366v2, Phys. Rev. A 79, 033610 (2009)] have studied an impurity in a one-dimensional gas of hard-core bosons. In particular they deal with the general case where the mass of the impurity is different
from the mass of the bosons and the impurity-boson interaction is not necessarily infinitely repulsive. We show that one of their initial step is erroneous, contradicting both physical intuition and known exact results. Their results in the general case apply only actually when the mass of the impurity is infinite.
In [J. T. Matta et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 082501 (2015)] a transverse wobbling band was reported in $^{135}$Pr. The critical experimental proof for this assignment is the E2 dominated linking transitions between the wobbling and normal bands, whi
ch are supported by two experiments performed with Gammasphere and INGA. However, the M1 dominated character cannot be excluded based on the reported experimental information, indicating that the wobbling assignment is still questionable.
In a paper from 2006, Couder and Fort [1] describe a version of the famous double slit experiment performed with drops bouncing on a vibrated fluid surface, where interference in the particle statistics is found even though it is possible to determin
e unambiguously which slit the walking drop passes. It is one of the first papers in an impressive series, showing that such walking drops closely resemble de Broglie waves and can reproduce typical quantum phenomena like tunneling and quantized states [2-13]. The double slit experiment is, however, a more stringent test of quantum mechanics, because it relies upon superposition and phase coherence. In the present comment we first point out that the experimental data presented in [1] are not convincing, and secondly we argue that it is not possible in general to capture quantum mechanical results in a system, where the trajectory of the particle is well-defined.
The recent paper by V. G. Kogan and J. Schmalian Phys. Rev. B 83, 054515 (2011) argues that the widely used two-component Ginzburg-Landau (GL) models are not correct, and further concludes that in the regime which is described by a GL theory there co
uld be no disparity in the coherence lengths of two superconducting components. This would in particular imply that (in contrast to $U(1)times U(1)$ superconductors), there could be no type-1.5 superconducting regime in U(1) multiband systems for any finite interband coupling strength. We point out that these claims are incorrect and based on an erroneous scheme of reduction of a two-component GL theory. We also attach a separate rejoinder on reply by Kogan and Schmalian. In their reply Phys. Rev. B 86, 016502 (2012) to our comment Phys. Rev. B 86, 016501 (2012) Kogan and Schmalian did not refute or, indeed, discuss the main points of criticism in the comment. Unfortunately they instead advance new incorrect claims regarding two-band and type-1.5 superconductivity. The main purpose of the attached rejoinder is to discuss these new incorrect claims.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
