Good discussion of experimental data/techniques?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Physics Monkey
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Discussion Experimental
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the search for resources that provide clear and pedagogically effective explanations of various experimental techniques in condensed matter physics, including ARPES, STM, NMR, and muSR. Participants share recommendations for books and papers that balance pedagogical clarity with technical detail, aiming to help future students understand experimental data and its complexities.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks comprehensive resources for teaching experimental techniques in condensed matter physics, emphasizing the need for clarity and practical understanding.
  • Another participant suggests specific books, including "Nuclear Magnetic Resonance" by PJ Hore for NMR and "Nanophysics and Nanotechnology" by E. Wolf for STM, noting that the latter includes diagrams and data graphs.
  • A participant expresses concern that Hore's book may be more chemistry-oriented and questions its applicability for physics students.
  • Further recommendations include "Principles of Electron Tunneling Spectroscopy" by E. Wolf for tunneling spectroscopy and links to review papers on ARPES, highlighting their universal applicability despite focusing on high-Tc superconductors.
  • One participant inquires about the relative obscurity of inverse photoemission as a technique, suggesting that noise and resolution issues may limit its use compared to photoemission spectroscopy and tunneling spectroscopy.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the value of specific texts for understanding experimental techniques, but there is no consensus on the best resources or the appropriateness of certain books for a physics audience. The discussion regarding inverse photoemission remains unresolved, with differing views on its commonality and effectiveness.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note limitations in the resources discussed, such as the potential chemistry focus of certain texts and the challenges in connecting mathematical theory with observational descriptions in NMR literature.

Physics Monkey
Homework Helper
Messages
1,363
Reaction score
34
Hi all,

I'm looking for books or papers that give a pedagogically clear and reasonably up-to-date discussion of various experimental techniques in condensed matter physics. For example, ARPES, STM, NMR, muSR, ... As I suspect may be true for many theorists, I learned what I know of experimental techniques in piecemeal fashion, but I would like to do better by my own future students.

I realize this is very broad, but any suggestions would be appreciated.

I'm open to any anything, but what I have in mind would provide a nice balance of pedagogy and details. The audience I have in mind will not generally be building any apparatus, but I would like them to know how to roughly decode experimental data in papers, have some sense of what physics might obscure or complicate the result, and very importantly, have some idea of what the data would look like in a "conventional" or "paradigmatic" material.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm afraid there isn't anyone book that I know of that satisfactorily describes all of these phenomena. But there are good ones I have come across for example NMR is described pretty thoroughly in "Nuclear Magnetic Resonance" by PJ Hore. For STM, "Nanophysics and Nanotechnology" by E. Wolf has a very complete description with diagrams and data graphs. For Spectroscopy, I find "Handbook Of Spectroscopy" by G. Gauglitz , T. Vo-Dinh, to be pretty complete, I just have to know what I am looking for to get the relevant information. its very easy to get lost when looking in that book.
 
Thanks very much for the reply. The Wolf book looks very good. The book by Hore looks more chemistry oriented, do you think this is true? Haha, that spectroscopy book is a monster!
 
Wolf also has another book that has become a standard for tunneling spectroscospy - Principles of Electron Tunneling spectroscopy. I used this text quite a bit for my graduate work.

As for ARPES, I can recommend several texts, but there are also review papers you can find that can be useful if you don't want to delve into the painful details:

http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0209476
http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0208504

Although these focused on ARPES on high-Tc superconductors, the technique they described are quite universal.

Zz.
 
Physics Monkey said:
Thanks very much for the reply. The Wolf book looks very good. The book by Hore looks more chemistry oriented, do you think this is true? Haha, that spectroscopy book is a monster!

Glad I could help. I think you are quite right that the magnetic resonance book by Hore is more chemistry oriented. It sort of avoids making mathematical representations. Nonetheless it is quite strong in its description. Most books on NMR I find do not make the crucial connection between mathematical theory (image formation) and the description of observations.
 
ZapperZ said:
Wolf also has another book that has become a standard for tunneling spectroscospy - Principles of Electron Tunneling spectroscopy. I used this text quite a bit for my graduate work.

As for ARPES, I can recommend several texts, but there are also review papers you can find that can be useful if you don't want to delve into the painful details:

http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0209476
http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0208504

Although these focused on ARPES on high-Tc superconductors, the technique they described are quite universal.

Zz.

Thanks, Zz. Do you know why inverse photoemission is not a more common probe (it seems like I almost never hear about it), or am I simply poorly informed?
 
Physics Monkey said:
Thanks, Zz. Do you know why inverse photoemission is not a more common probe (it seems like I almost never hear about it), or am I simply poorly informed?

My understanding of the issues surrounding inverse photoemission (and it is at least 5 years old) is that the noise and resolution of the technique have not caught on with photoemission spectroscopy. Certainly, if one wants to probe the empty states, one can do a lot better with tunneling spectroscopy.

Zz.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
8K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K