Response to “Comment on ‘Ultrafast electron optics: Propagation dynamics of femtosecond electron packets’ ” [J. Appl. Phys. 94 , 803 (2003)]

In this reply, we address the main issues raised by Qian et al. regarding our recent article [J. Appl. Phys. 92, 1643 (2002)]. In particular, we reiterate the approximations used in the development of the mean-field model and demonstrate how the form used for the on-axis potential is applicable to t...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of applied physics 2003-07, Vol.94 (1), p.807-808
Hauptverfasser: Siwick, Bradley J., Dwyer, Jason R., Jordan, Robert E., Miller, R. J. Dwayne
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:In this reply, we address the main issues raised by Qian et al. regarding our recent article [J. Appl. Phys. 92, 1643 (2002)]. In particular, we reiterate the approximations used in the development of the mean-field model and demonstrate how the form used for the on-axis potential is applicable to the study of femtosecond electron packet propagation and is not in need of correction. We also repeat our assertion that the one-dimensional (1-D) fluid model developed by Qian et al. [J. Appl. Phys. 91, 462 (2002)] overestimates space-charge-induced pulse broadening and is in qualitative disagreement with femtosecond electron packet propagation dynamics. The key differences between the mean-field and 1-D fluid model are discussed and their range of applicability is clarified.
ISSN:0021-8979
1089-7550
DOI:10.1063/1.1567817