NEWO said:
my understanding came from a couple of papers.
1. Vortex matter in the charged Bose liquid at absolute zero by V.V.Kabanov and A.S. Alexandrov
2.Giant Proximity effect-Physical review letters 2004 volume 93 number 15.
as stated in my references, thanks for you constructive criticism any way .
Maybe if you won't listen to me, you will listen to what your advisor has done. I happen to know quite well his work, especially his polaron/bipolaron scenario of HTS.
If you look at these two papers, for example:
1. A. S. Alexandrov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 147003 (2006)
2. A. S. Alexandrov and A. M. Bratkovsky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 141 (1999)
You'll notice that your advisor puts SEVERAL citations of
experimental results (not simply papers that cited other papers of the results) right at the very beginning! This is because at this stage, you can no longer rely on 2nd or 3rd hand news. You have to go right at the source! In fact, throughout the paper, especially the first one, he even had the experimental data from some source to compare it with the theoretical model.
While it is a common practice in string theory, in condensed matter, a paper theory paper devoid of any explicit reference to experimental evidence to back up its claim will often evaporate into oblivion, if it gets published in the first place.
There is also one other point that I forgot to make. If you give this to someone who has a background in physics, but has never heard of what a "proximity effect" is, do you think that person would have been able to understand what it is after reading your paper? Forget about the unconventional proximity effect in HTS. Do you think you have sufficiently described the conventional proximity effect, including Andreev reflection, in your paper?
Zz.