Comment on “Tip-to-surface distance variations vs voltage in scanning tunneling microscopy”

E. Ley-Koo
Phys. Rev. B 65, 077401 – Published 22 January 2002
PDFExport Citation

Abstract

Notational, geometrical, and electrical inconsistencies in the electrostatic potential described in a recent paper [G. Seine et al., Phys. Rev. B 60, 11 045 (1999)] are pointed out and removed where possible. The prolate spheroidal harmonic expansion of the image potential for confocal hyperboloidal electrodes is also given.

  • Received 15 November 2000

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.65.077401

©2002 American Physical Society

Authors & Affiliations

E. Ley-Koo*

  • Instituto de Física, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Apartado Postal 20-364, 01000 México, D. F. México

  • *Electronic address: eleykoo@fenix.ifisicacu.unam.mx

Comments & Replies

Reply to “Comment on ‘Tip-to-surface distance variations vs voltage in scanning tunneling microscopy’ ”

G. Seine, R. Coratger, A. Carladous, F. Ajustron, R. Pechou, and J. Beauvillain
Phys. Rev. B 65, 077402 (2002)

Original Article

Tip-to-surface distance variations vs voltage in scanning tunneling microscopy

G. Seine, R. Coratger, A. Carladous, F. Ajustron, R. Pechou, and J. Beauvillain
Phys. Rev. B 60, 11045 (1999)

References (Subscription Required)

Click to Expand
Issue

Vol. 65, Iss. 7 — 15 February 2002

Reuse & Permissions
Access Options
Author publication services for translation and copyediting assistance advertisement

Authorization Required


×
×

Images

×

Sign up to receive regular email alerts from Physical Review B

Log In

Cancel
×

Search


Article Lookup

Paste a citation or DOI

Enter a citation
×