Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Journal of Physics B Atomic Molecular and Optical Physics

Comment on ‘Time-resolved resonant photoionization of He using a time-dependent Feshbach method with ultrashort laser pulses’

Cleanthis A. Nicolaides, Yannis Komninos, Th. Mercouris

Published Jun 26, 2014• 1 citation
Publisher

Abstract

We compare the contents of the recent paper by Granados-Castro and Sanz-Vicario (2013 J.Phys. B 46 055601) to our previously published work on the same problem (Mercouris, Komninos and Nicolaides 2007 Phys. Rev. A 75 013407; 2013 Phys. Rev. A 87 069905(E)).
DOI
10.1088/0953-4075/47/13/138001

Related papers

Reply to comment on ‘Time-resolved resonant photoionization of He using a time-dependent Feshbach method with ultrashort laser pulses’

Carlos Mario Granados–Castro, José Luis Sanz‐Vicario

In this reply we amend the effect of misusing an analytical formula derived in 2007 Phys. Rev. A 75 013407, but containing a misprint subsequently corrected in a recently published erratum, 2013 Phys. Rev. A 87 069905(E). Two new corrected figures are included in this reply with the gradual formation of the resonance Fano profile for the lowest and third-lowest He 1P o resonant states. The comparison between our ab initio time-dependent Feshbach method and the analytical perturbative formula is rather good in the temporal domain for the time sequence shown during and after the laser pulse up to 50 fs, although still far from reaching the final asymptotic form. Other comments are also replied to. Finally, we emphasize that in the LabTalk published on 4 June 2013, we do not mention the inadequacy of any analytical formula whatsoever and the figure caption clearly refers to the asymptotic form of the Fano profile.

Journal of Physics B Atomic Molecular and Optical Physics•Jun 26, 2014•0 citations

Comment on ‘‘Generalized saddle-point method for Feshbach resonances’’

Kwong T. Chung

In the recent article by M. Bylicki [Phys. Rev. A 39, 3316 (1989)], many remarks were made concerning the saddle-point technique developed by this author. These remarks appear to have been based on a misunderstanding of both the spirit as well as the actual application of this method. In this Comment, I shall try to clarify some of these misunderstandings, and one hopes, put the problem in its proper perspective.

Physical Review A•Apr 1, 1990•19 citations

Comment on ‘Time delays in molecular photoionization’

Denitsa Baykusheva, Hans Jakob Wörner

Abstract In a recent article by Hockett et al (2016 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 49 095602), time delays arising in the context of molecular single-photon ionization are investigated from a theoretical point of view. We argue that one of the central equations given in this article is incorrect and present a reformulation that is consistent with the established treatment of angle-dependent scattering delays (Eisenbud 1948 PhD Thesis Princeton University; Wigner 1955 Phys. Rev. 98 145–7; Smith 1960 Phys. Rev. 118 349–6; Nussenzveig 1972 Phys. Rev. D 6 1534–42).

arXiv:1611.09352•Journal of Physics B Atomic Molecular and Optical Physics•Mar 15, 2017•6 citations

Comment on “Photoionization of helium atoms irradiated with intense vacuum ultraviolet free-electron laser light. Part I. Experimental study of multiphoton and single-photon processes”

Dimitrios Charalambidis, P. Tzallas, Nektarios A. Papadogiannis +3 more

The reported observation of two-photon ionization of He by $13\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\mathrm{eV}$ photons of the TESLA Facility in T. Laarmann, A. R. B. de Castro, P. G\"urtler, W. Laasch, J. Schulz, H. Wabnitz, and T. M\"oller, Phys. Rev. A72, 023409 (2005) is ambiguous, as it is not supported by the experimental data presented. We discuss the lack of evidence for the claimed two-photon ionization.

Physical Review A•Sep 6, 2006•8 citations

Comment on “Scheme for multistep photoionization of atoms”

Alexander A. Makarov, Vladilen S Letokhov

In a recent paper, Bo Liu and Xi-Jing Ning [Phys. Rev. A 64, 013401 (2001)] compared a multistep photoionization scheme where the resonant laser pulses act in consecutive order with one where the same laser pulses act simultaneously. Their conclusion is that the ``consecutive'' scheme is much more (several orders of magnitude) efficient than the ``simultaneous'' one, which they call traditional. We show, however, that optimum conditions for efficient photoionization with the simultaneous (or traditional) scheme are very different from those assumed by the authors. So the difference between two schemes, in terms of efficiency, is of much lower importance, if any, than that believed by the authors.

Physical Review A•Oct 24, 2002•1 citation

Further comment on ‘‘Optimization of approximate solutions to the time-dependent Schrödinger equation’’

José M. Maidagan, Rubén Darío Piacentini

We show that the Reply of Weglein [Phys. Rev. A 31, 4025 (1985)] to our previous Comment [Phys. Rev. A 31, 4023 (1985)] is not valid.Received 18 September 1985DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.35.933©1987 American Physical Society

Physical Review A•Jan 1, 1987•0 citations
In this reply we amend the effect of misusing an analytical formula derived in 2007 Phys. Rev. A 75 013407, but containing a misprint subsequently corrected in a recently published erratum, 2013 Phys. Rev. A 87 069905(E). Two new corrected figures are included in this reply with the gradual formation of the resonance Fano profile for the lowest and third-lowest He 1P o resonant states. The comparison between our ab initio time-dependent Feshbach method and the analytical perturbative formula is rather good in the temporal domain for the time sequence shown during and after the laser pulse up to 50 fs, although still far from reaching the final asymptotic form. Other comments are also replied to. Finally, we emphasize that in the LabTalk published on 4 June 2013, we do not mention the inadequacy of any analytical formula whatsoever and the figure caption clearly refers to the asymptotic form of the Fano profile.
Abstract In a recent article by Hockett et al (2016 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 49 095602), time delays arising in the context of molecular single-photon ionization are investigated from a theoretical point of view. We argue that one of the central equations given in this article is incorrect and present a reformulation that is consistent with the established treatment of angle-dependent scattering delays (Eisenbud 1948 PhD Thesis Princeton University; Wigner 1955 Phys. Rev. 98 145–7; Smith 1960 Phys. Rev. 118 349–6; Nussenzveig 1972 Phys. Rev. D 6 1534–42).
The reported observation of two-photon ionization of He by 13eV13\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\mathrm{eV}13eV photons of the TESLA Facility in T. Laarmann, A. R. B. de Castro, P. G\"urtler, W. Laasch, J. Schulz, H. Wabnitz, and T. M\"oller, Phys. Rev. A72, 023409 (2005) is ambiguous, as it is not supported by the experimental data presented. We discuss the lack of evidence for the claimed two-photon ionization.
In a recent paper, Bo Liu and Xi-Jing Ning [Phys. Rev. A 64, 013401 (2001)] compared a multistep photoionization scheme where the resonant laser pulses act in consecutive order with one where the same laser pulses act simultaneously. Their conclusion is that the ``consecutive'' scheme is much more (several orders of magnitude) efficient than the ``simultaneous'' one, which they call traditional. We show, however, that optimum conditions for efficient photoionization with the simultaneous (or traditional) scheme are very different from those assumed by the authors. So the difference between two schemes, in terms of efficiency, is of much lower importance, if any, than that believed by the authors.