Source author record

Jacob Madsen

Jacob Madsen appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.mtrl-sci physics.flu-dyn physics.ins-det

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works

4topics

4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Open graph Browse works

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

preprint2022arXiv

Indirect measurement of the carbon adatom migration barrier on graphene

Although surface diffusion is critical for many physical and chemical processes, including the epitaxial growth of crystals and heterogeneous catalysis, it is particularly challenging to directly study. Here, we estimate the carbon adatom migration barrier on freestanding monolayer graphene by quantifying its temperature-dependent electron knock-on damage. Due to the fast healing of vacancies by diffusing adatoms, the damage rate decreases with increasing temperature. By analyzing the observed damage rates at 300-1073 K using a model describing our finite scanning probe, we find a barrier of (0.33 \pm 0.03) eV.

preprint2014arXiv

Comment on Y. Couder and E. Fort: "Single-Particle Diffraction and Interference at a Macroscopic Scale", Phys. Rev. Lett. (2006)

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 determine 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.