Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 44 references

Zeptosecond Electron Pulse Train and Ultrafast Coherent Control of Quantum States via Multiphoton Inelastic Cherenkov Diffraction

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Under a slowed laser wave in a gas, a single electron acquires a coherent comb of momentum states that recombine into a train of zeptosecond matter-wave pulses, with multiphoton exchange numbers up to about 10^4.

desk verdict Clean theory of zeptosecond electron pulse trains from multiphoton Cherenkov diffraction, but the gas-decoherence budget is unquantified and that is the number that matters. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.02587 v1 pith:JI6CDFYO submitted 2025-07-03 physics.optics

H. K. Avetissian , G. F. Mkrtchian This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.optics
keywords InducedCherenkovElectroninelasticdiffractionSlowedtravelingwaveMultiphotonscatteringZeptosecondpulsesAttosecond-zeptosecondscienceCoherentcontrolofquantumstatesRelativistickinetics
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper claims that a single electron crossing a slowed laser wave in a gas can absorb or emit up to roughly $10^4$ photons coherently, so that its wavefunction becomes a comb of momentum states spaced by the photon momentum. Once the laser is gone, free-space propagation adds a quadratic phase to that comb, and at a specific compression time $t_c$ the components interfere constructively, condensing the electron probability density into a train of pulses lasting hundreds of zeptoseconds, spaced by the laser wavelength. The paper derives the effect analytically from the Heisenberg equation (a Bessel-function sideband comb $J_n[Z_B]$) and verifies it with numerical solutions of the Dirac equation for finite-duration pulses and realistic electron beams, finding pulses of about 1300 and 900 zeptoseconds for phase lattices of 10 and 20 periods. Because the compression is a single-particle quantum interference effect, it offers a route to sub-attosecond electron pulses without resonant cavities or external compressors, with applications in high-resolution electron microscopy and time-resolved quantum technologies.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Bessel-function sideband comb, the electron momentum state after inelastic diffraction on the phase lattice of the slowed wave, with amplitudes $J_n[Z_B]$. Its argument, $Z_B = eE_0 d_\perp/\hbar\omega$, is the multiphoton parameter: the work of the laser electric field over the coherent interaction length divided by the photon energy. The comb alone gives a stationary momentum distribution; what turns it into zeptosecond pulses is the free-space dispersion phase $\exp[i(n_0^2-1)\hbar\omega^2(n'^2-n^2)t/2E]$, which is quadratic in the sideband index and therefore refocuses the wavefunction at $t_c = E/[Z_B(n_0^2-1)\hbar\omega^2]$. In the numerical treatment, the equivalent machinery is the Dirac equation in the frame moving with the wave's phase velocity, where the laser appears as a quasistatic magnetic field forming a phase lattice of period $\lambda_R = 2\pi/k'$. That frame converts the problem into nonrelativistic dynamics of a wave packet scattering off a static lattice, which is what the paper solves to verify the zeptosecond pulse formation.

What would settle it

Measure the momentum distribution of electrons that cross an 800 nm slowed-wave region under Cherenkov resonance conditions with fields around $E_0 = 5\times 10^5$ V/cm and interaction length $d_\perp \approx 1.55\times 10^{-2}$ cm: the central prediction is a sideband comb with spacing $\hbar\omega$ and a Bessel-envelope peaking near $|s| \approx Z_B \approx eE_0 d_\perp/\hbar\omega$. If no such comb appears in the electron energy spectrum, or if the sideband visibility is far below the single-particle interference prediction, the mechanism is falsified, since the temporal pulse train is built entirely from this comb. A second, stronger check would be to time-resolve the electron density at the predicted compression time $t_c$ and look for the 540 zs (at $E_0 = 5\times 10^5$ V/cm) or 270 zs (at $E_0 = 10^6$ V/cm) pulses.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

At exact Cherenkov resonance, an electron with momentum $p_0$ interacting with the slowed wave for a time $t_f$ leaves the region in a superposition of momenta $p_0 - n\hbar k$ with amplitude $C_{p_0-n\hbar k} = J_n[Z_B]$, where $Z_B = eE_0 d_\perp /\hbar\omega$ is the work done by the wave's electric field on the coherent interaction length in units of photon energy. For laser fields around $E_0 = 5\times 10^5$ to $10^6$ V/cm and interaction lengths near $1.55\times 10^{-2}$ cm, this Bessel comb extends to $|n| \approx Z_B \sim 10^4$, meaning the electron has exchanged thousands of photons. The paper's key step is the observation that after the interaction, free-space propagation imprints the phase factor $\exp[i(n_0^2-1)\hbar\omega^2(n'^2-n^2)t/2E]$ on each pair of sidebands (Eq. 9); this phase is quadratic in the sideband index, so the comb rephases at $t_c = E/[Z_B(n_0^2-1)\hbar\omega^2]$, producing narrow peaks separated by the laser wavelength. Numerical solutions of the Dirac equation in the wave rest frame, for pulses with Gaussian envelopes and lattices of 10-20 periods, confirm that the Gaussian wave packet evolves into a sequence of sharp peaks with laboratory-frame durations of roughly 1300 and 900 zeptoseconds, and that beams with longitudinal momentum spread of $10^{-5}$ still retain significant compression.

Load-bearing premise

The effect depends on the electron keeping its quantum phase coherence while crossing the gas-filled interaction region; the paper invokes gases of relatively low densities to avoid multiple scattering and ionization, but does not quantify the probability of even small-angle collisions or the phase randomization they would cause over the roughly 155 micrometer interaction length, and if decoherence destroys the Bessel comb, the predicted pulse train vanishes.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single electron crossing a gas-filled laser interaction region can be transformed into a train of sub-attosecond matter-wave pulses without any external compression device, resonant cavity, or accelerator structure.
  • Because the compression time scales inversely with the multiphoton parameter, stronger laser fields directly produce shorter electron pulses, with the pulse duration set by field amplitude and interaction geometry rather than by laser pulse duration.
  • The effect is sensitive to initial longitudinal momentum spread but survives relative spreads up to one part in 100,000, and it is insensitive to the laser pulse envelope, so it can be implemented with standard 800 nm laser pulses and gas cells with refractive-index excess between 0.001 and 0.00001.
  • The coherent population of up to about 10,000 sidebands means the electron wavefunction is an actively controllable quantum superposition, providing a mechanism for coherent control of free-electron states in time-resolved electron microscopy and quantum-optics electronics.
  • Since spin-flip transitions are negligible in this regime, the pulse train formation applies to spin-polarized electron beams without depolarizing the beam.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural experimental test would be to look first at the momentum comb rather than the temporal structure: an electron energy-loss spectrum after the gas cell should show sidebands spaced by $hbar\omega$ with a Bessel-function envelope peaking near the multiphoton parameter, a direct fingerprint of the mechanism that is far easier to measure than zeptosecond timing.
  • The paper asserts, but does not quantify, that gases of low density avoid decoherence; estimating the probability of small-angle collisions and their phase randomization over the roughly 155 micrometer interaction length would set the maximum usable gas density and interaction length, and is the most direct way to test the practicality of the scheme.
  • The same quadratic-phase refocusing logic should generalize to other periodic phase modulations of free-electron wavefunctions, such as the sideband combs produced in near-field electron microscopy; if the phase structure is quadratic in the sideband index, analogous compression times should exist, connecting this gas-phase mechanism to existing electron-laser interaction setups.
  • Because the compression time depends on the dispersion factor $n_0^2 - 1$, choosing gases with different refractive indices or tuning the laser frequency should allow continuous tuning of the output pulse duration over the attosecond-to-zeptosecond range, which the paper does not explore.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper develops a quantum theory of multiphoton inelastic Cherenkov diffraction of electrons on a laser-driven phase lattice in a gas. The authors derive an analytic Bessel-function sideband comb (Eq. (5)) from a second-quantized Heisenberg-picture treatment, and show that after free-space propagation the comb develops into a train of zeptosecond electron pulses (Eqs. (9)-(10)). They support the analytic result with numerical solutions of the Dirac equation in the wave rest frame for finite laser pulses (Figs. 5-6) and study the sensitivity of the pulse train to the initial longitudinal momentum spread of an electron beam (Figs. 3-4). The central claim is that this is a single-particle quantum interference phenomenon producing pulse durations in the hundreds-of-zeptoseconds range with multiphoton numbers up to about 10^4.

Significance. If the predicted effect holds, it offers a new route to zeptosecond electron pulse trains based on coherent multiphoton Cherenkov diffraction, with potential applications in ultrafast electron microscopy and free-electron quantum optics. The analytic derivation is non-perturbative, parameter-free, and internally consistent, and it is supported by numerical Dirac simulations for finite pulses. The main open issues are quantitative: gas-induced decoherence is not assessed, and the numerical method is not described in sufficient detail for reproducibility. Both are fixable within the scope of a revision.

major comments (3)
  1. [Appendix A] The central effect is a coherent single-particle interference: the Bessel sideband comb of Eq. (5) and the pulse train of Eq. (9) require the electron's quantum phase to remain intact over the entire interaction path in the gas. The manuscript dismisses collisions with the statement in Appendix A that 'gases of relatively low densities' avoid multiple scattering and ionization loss, but it provides no quantitative estimate of the probability of an inelastic collision or of the phase randomization such a collision would cause. For the nominal parameters of Fig. 2 (γ=25, θc=1/(10γ), λ=800 nm, d⊥=155 μm), the Cherenkov condition implies n0−1≈8×10^-6, which for a typical gas corresponds to a density of order 0.03 atm; the Bethe stopping power for 12.8 MeV electrons then gives an energy loss of order 1 eV over the 155 μm path, i.e., a few percent probability of an ionizing collision, and each such collision would randomize the sideband phases by many radians. At the upper end of the stated optimal range (n0−1∼10^-4 to 10^-3) the collision probability rises to order one, which would destroy the coherence required for the pulse train. Please specify the gas species and density for each parameter set and provide a decoherence budget, including the surviving coherent fraction exp(−N_coll), for the parameters used in Figs. 2-6.
  2. [Sec. 3] The numerical solution of the Dirac equation (Eq. (11)) is used to support the finite-pulse results in Figs. 5 and 6, which are central to the claim that the pulse compression is robust to laser pulse duration. However, the manuscript does not describe the numerical method: no grid spacing, time step, spatial discretization of the spinor derivatives, boundary conditions, or convergence tests are given. Without these details the numerical results cannot be reproduced or assessed. Please add a description of the numerical scheme and a convergence study (e.g., varying grid resolution) for at least one of the presented cases.
  3. [Sec. 2, Eq. (9)] The passage from Eq. (8) to Eq. (9) relies on the condition |Δ|t_f << 1. For the beam calculations with Δp_x/p_0x = 10^-5 shown in Figs. 3 and 4, the detuning scales as Δ ≈ ω δv/c with δv/c ≈ Δp_x/(γ^2 p_0x), which for the parameters of the figures gives |Δ|t_f of order 10^-2 or larger; multiplied by sideband orders |n| ~ Z_B ~ 10^4, the neglected phase factors exp[i n Δ(p') t_f] in Eq. (7) are not small. If the Wigner-function results in Figs. 3-4 were computed from the full density matrix (Eq. (7)) or from the Dirac equation, that should be stated explicitly; if they were computed from the approximate Eq. (9), the approximation needs justification for these parameters. Please clarify which expression underlies each figure and state the range of validity of Eq. (9).
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract and Introduction] The term 'attosecond-zeptosecond electron sub-bunches' is vague; please specify the parameter ranges for which each timescale applies.
  2. [Appendix A] The polemical remark about 'a group of authors' making 'gross errors' (paragraph following Eq. (A.13)) is inappropriate in a journal article and should be removed.
  3. [Fig. 6 caption] The notation 'L frame 1.3 as' in the caption should be written as '1300 zs' to be consistent with the values given in the text.
  4. [Fig. 2 caption and Sec. 2] The paper does not state the gas species assumed for the refractive index; please specify the gas and the corresponding density for the parameters used in each figure.
  5. [Appendix C, Eq. (C.4)] The Bessel argument Z_B is used in Eq. (C.4) without definition in the appendix; define Z_B explicitly there.
  6. [Sec. 2, Fig. 2 parameters] The interaction length d⊥=155 μm with θc=0.004 implies a laboratory-frame interaction time of order 130 ps; the manuscript should state the corresponding laser pulse duration and energy required to realize the idealized monochromatic case of Fig. 2.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the zeptosecond pulse train follows from the analytic Bessel-comb solution and free-space propagation, not from fitted or self-referential inputs.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained. The Bessel-function momentum comb (Eq. 5) is obtained by solving the Heisenberg equation with the QED interaction Hamiltonian (Appendix A), using recurrence relations, and is not defined in terms of the claimed pulse-train output. The subsequent density evolution (Eq. 9) and the compression time tc (Eq. 10) follow from standard free-space phase factors; the zeptosecond durations in Figs. 2, 5, and 6 are numerical consequences of the chosen input parameters (laser wavelength, field amplitude, interaction length, refractive index), not fitted to reproduce the output. The finite-pulse results in Sec. 3 are obtained by a separate numerical solution of the Dirac equation in the wave rest frame, providing an independent check rather than a re-use of Eq. (9). Self-citations such as Ref. [15] for the diffraction result and Refs. [9,10] for the critical-field threshold are present, but the load-bearing Bessel-comb result is rederived within the paper and the critical field is only used to justify a parameter regime, so these citations are not circularly load-bearing. The limitation noted in Appendix A regarding gas density and multiple scattering is a physical feasibility concern, not a circularity: the paper does not quantify decoherence, but no claim is defined in terms of its own output. No circular step was found.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central derivation depends on a small set of chosen physical parameters (field amplitude, interaction length, refractive index, Cherenkov angle, and momentum spread) that set the multiphoton number and the resulting pulse duration. The key unstated assumption is the preservation of quantum coherence through the gas. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (6)
  • Z_B (Bessel argument / multiphoton number) = up to about 10^4 (e.g., 5000 for E0=5e5 V/cm, d_perp=1.55e-2 cm, lambda=800 nm)
    Sets the comb width and thus the compressed pulse duration (tau approximately lambda/(Z_B c)). Chosen by hand via E0 and d_perp; not fitted to experiment.
  • n0 (refractive index of the gas) = not stated explicitly; optimal range n0-1 ~ 10^-3 to 10^-5
    Enters t_c via (n0^2-1) in Eq. (10). The paper does not give the specific value used in the numerical examples.
  • theta_c (Cherenkov angle) = theta_c = 1/(10 gamma) approximately 4e-3 rad for gamma=25
    Sets the resonance condition and the effective interaction geometry.
  • d_perp (coherent interaction length) = 1.55e-2 cm
    Transverse extent over which the electron interacts; determines Z_B and the multiphoton order.
  • Delta p_x / p_0x (beam longitudinal momentum spread) = 10^-6 and 10^-5
    Controls survival of the pulse train; not fitted, but a parameter that the effect's robustness is measured against.
  • tau_w (laser pulse envelope duration) = 2.67 ps
    In the finite-pulse simulation, the Gaussian temporal envelope width is derived from the transverse beam geometry in Appendix C.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math The Dirac equation is the correct relativistic quantum description for the electron in the radiation field.
    Invoked via Eq. (11) and solved numerically in the R frame.
  • domain assumption The gas is a linear, lossless dielectric characterized by refractive index n0, and the electron's interaction with the medium is entirely captured by the modified dispersion relation omega^2 - c^2 k^2 < 0.
    Used throughout to define the slowed wave and the Cherenkov resonance; the medium's effect on the electron (scattering, ionization) is neglected except for a qualitative low-density remark.
  • domain assumption The electron-field interaction is below the critical field, so inelastic diffraction occurs rather than reflection or capture.
    Assumes xi_max < xi_cr << 1; no critical field value is given, but the chosen xi0 ~ 10^-5 is claimed to satisfy it.
  • domain assumption Spin-flip transitions and quantum recoil are negligible for optical photons (hbar omega << E).
    Justified near Eq. (2) and in Appendix A; this reduces the dynamics to spin-preserving scalar transitions.
  • ad hoc to paper The electron wave packet remains coherent over the interaction length and free-space propagation, with no decoherence from gas collisions.
    The paper only states that low gas density avoids multiple scattering; it does not quantify the decoherence probability, which is a load-bearing assumption for the interference effect.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Zeptosecond Electron Pulse Train and Ultrafast Coherent Control of Quantum States via Multiphoton Inelastic Cherenkov Diffraction." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JI6CDFYO

@misc{pith2026250702587,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Zeptosecond Electron Pulse Train and Ultrafast Coherent Control of Quantum States via Multiphoton Inelastic Cherenkov Diffraction},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JI6CDFYO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.02587}
}
abstract

We investigate the quantum dynamics of fermionic particles interacting with a laser field in a gaseous medium, in the regime of inelastic diffraction scattering on the phase lattice of a slowed travelling wave, below the critical field of induced Cherenkov process. Using a relativistic quantum kinetic framework and numerical solutions of Dirac equation in the rest frame of the slowed wave, we analyze the evolution of actual electron wave packets and beams at the inelastic scattering on the actual laser pulses of finite duration. Our results reveal coherent multiphoton exchange involving up to $10^{4}$ photons and the emergence of attosecond-zeptosecond electron sub-bunches after the free-space propagation. The pulse compression by such mechanism is robust to laser pulse duration but sensitive to the initial momentum spread of the particles/beams. We propose a mechanism to achieve electron pulses in zeptosecond time scales with potentiality for ultrafast coherent control of quantum states that opens new avenues in high-resolution temporal structuring of electron beams for time-resolved quantum technologies and attosecond-zeptosecond science, as well as, for application in high-resolution electron microscopy.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.02587 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Schematic setup. An electron with momentum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) Final momentum-space distribution of a de Broglie wave [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Generation of an ultrashort electron pulse train. Top panel: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Formation of an ultrashort electron pulse train in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The reflection of electrons from stand- ing light waves

    Kapitza PL, Dirac PAM. The reflection of electrons from stand- ing light waves. in Math Proc Camb Phil Soc, 1933;29(2):297. 9

    work page 1933

  2. [2]

    Space quantization in a gyrating magnetic field

    Rabi II. Space quantization in a gyrating magnetic field. Phys Rev 1937;51(8):652

    work page 1937

  3. [3]

    Relativistic Nonlinear Electrodynamics: Inter- action of Charged Particles with Strong and Super Strong Laser Fields; vol

    Avetissian HK. Relativistic Nonlinear Electrodynamics: Inter- action of Charged Particles with Strong and Super Strong Laser Fields; vol. 120. Springer, Berlin; 2006

    work page 2006

  4. [4]

    Di- rect observation of multiphoton processes in laser-induced free- free transitions

    Weingartshofer A, Holmes J, Caudle G, Clarke E, Kr¨uger H. Di- rect observation of multiphoton processes in laser-induced free- free transitions. Phys Rev Lett 1977;39(5):269

    work page 1977

  5. [5]

    Visible radiation produced by electrons moving in a medium with velocities exceeding that of light

    ˇCerenkov PA. Visible radiation produced by electrons moving in a medium with velocities exceeding that of light. Phys Rev 1937;52(4):378

    work page 1937

  6. [6]

    Coherent in-medium fast-electron radia- tion

    Tamm IE, Frank IM. Coherent in-medium fast-electron radia- tion. In: Dokl. Akad. Nauk USSR; vol. 14. 1937, p. 109

    work page 1937

  7. [7]

    Emission by charged particles in the field of a plane electromagnetic wave in a medium

    Arutyunyan VM, Avetisyan HK. Emission by charged particles in the field of a plane electromagnetic wave in a medium. Soviet Physics JETP 1972;35(5):854

    work page 1972

  8. [8]

    Principles of free-electron lasers

    Freund HP, Antonsen TM. Principles of free-electron lasers. Chapman and Hall; 1996

    work page 1996

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    Reflection and capture of a charged particle by a plane electromagnetic wave in a medium

    Arutyunyan VM, Avetisyan HK. Reflection and capture of a charged particle by a plane electromagnetic wave in a medium. Soviet Journal of Quantum Electronics 1972;2(1):39

    1972

  2. [10]

    Nonlinear inter- action of charged particles with strong laser pulses in a gaseous media

    Avetissian HK, Israelyan SS, Sedrakian KV. Nonlinear inter- action of charged particles with strong laser pulses in a gaseous media. Phys Rev ST-AB 2007;10(7):071301–

    2007

  3. [11]

    reflected

    Haroutunian VM, Avetissian HK. Quantum modulation of an electron beam when it is “reflected” from a plane electromag- netic wave in a medium. Phys Lett A 1973;44(4):281–2

    1973

  4. [12]

    Coherent x-ray source due to the quantum reflection of an electron beam from a laser-field phase lattice

    Avetissian HK, Mkrtchian GF. Coherent x-ray source due to the quantum reflection of an electron beam from a laser-field phase lattice. Phys Rev E 2001;65(1):016506

    2001

  5. [13]

    Quantum theory of the nonlinear stimulated cherenkov pro- cess

    Avetissian HK, Bagdasarian AK, Hatsagortsian KZ, Mkrtchian GF. Quantum theory of the nonlinear stimulated cherenkov pro- cess. Phys Lett A 1998;246(1-2):16–24

    1998

  6. [14]

    Quantum theory of induced cherenkov processes at exact resonance

    Avetissian HK, Bagdasarian AK, Hatsagortsian KZ, Mkrtchian GF. Quantum theory of induced cherenkov processes at exact resonance. Phys Lett A 1998;244(1-3):25–30

    1998

  7. [15]

    Di ffraction of electrons on the travelling elec- tromagnetic wave

    Avetissian HK. Di ffraction of electrons on the travelling elec- tromagnetic wave. Phys Lett A 1976;58(3):144–6

    1976

  8. [16]

    Cerenkov modulation of the electron beam

    Avetissian HK. Cerenkov modulation of the electron beam. Phys Lett A 1977;63(1):9–11

    1977

  9. [17]

    Relativistic Nonlinear Electrodynamics: The QED Vacuum and Matter in Super-Strong Radiation Fields; vol

    Avetissian HK. Relativistic Nonlinear Electrodynamics: The QED Vacuum and Matter in Super-Strong Radiation Fields; vol. 88. Springer, New York; 2015

    2015

  10. [18]

    Photon-induced near- field electron microscopy

    Barwick B, Flannigan DJ, Zewail AH. Photon-induced near- field electron microscopy. Nature 2009;462(7275):902–6

    2009

  11. [19]

    Photon-induced near-field elec- tron microscopy (pinem): theoretical and experimental

    Park ST, Lin M, Zewail AH. Photon-induced near-field elec- tron microscopy (pinem): theoretical and experimental. NJP 2010;12(12):123028

    2010

  12. [20]

    Multiphoton absorption and emission by interaction of swift electrons with evanescent light fields

    Garc ´ıa de Abajo FJ, Asenjo-Garcia A, Kociak M. Multiphoton absorption and emission by interaction of swift electrons with evanescent light fields. Nano Letters 2010;10(5):1859–63

    2010

  13. [21]

    Quantum coherent optical phase modulation in an ultrafast transmission electron microscope

    Feist A, Echternkamp KE, Schauss J, Yalunin SV, Sch ¨afer S, Ropers C. Quantum coherent optical phase modulation in an ultrafast transmission electron microscope. Nature 2015;521(7551):200–3

    2015

  14. [22]

    Electron energy-gain spectroscopy

    de Abajo FG, Kociak M. Electron energy-gain spectroscopy. NJP 2008;10(7):073035

    2008

  15. [23]

    Optical excitations in electron microscopy

    Garc ´ıa de Abajo FJ. Optical excitations in electron microscopy. Rev Mod Phys 2010;82(1):209–75

    2010

  16. [24]

    Attosecond electron pulse trains and quantum state recon- struction in ultrafast transmission electron microscopy

    Priebe KE, Rathje C, Yalunin SV, Hohage T, Feist A, Sch¨afer S, et al. Attosecond electron pulse trains and quantum state recon- struction in ultrafast transmission electron microscopy. Nature Photonics 2017;11(12):793–7

    2017

  17. [25]

    Di ffraction and microscopy with attosec- ond electron pulse trains

    Morimoto Y, Baum P. Di ffraction and microscopy with attosec- ond electron pulse trains. Nature Physics 2018;14(3):252–6

    2018

  18. [26]

    Free-electron qubits

    Reinhardt O, Mechel C, Lynch M, Kaminer I. Free-electron qubits. Annalen der Physik 2021;533(2):2000254

    2021

  19. [27]

    Free-electron–bound-electron resonant inter- action

    Gover A, Yariv A. Free-electron–bound-electron resonant inter- action. Phys Rev Lett 2020;124(6):064801

    2020

  20. [28]

    Quantum wave-particle duality in free-electron–bound- electron interaction

    Zhang B, Ran D, Ianconescu R, Friedman A, Scheuer J, Yariv A, et al. Quantum wave-particle duality in free-electron–bound- electron interaction. Phys Rev Lett 2021;126(24):244801

    2021

  21. [29]

    Quantum entanglement and modulation enhancement of free-electron–bound-electron interaction

    Zhao Z, Sun XQ, Fan S. Quantum entanglement and modulation enhancement of free-electron–bound-electron interaction. Phys Rev Lett 2021;126(23):233402

    2021

  22. [30]

    Quantum ˇcerenkov radiation: spectral cuto ffs and the role of spin and orbital angular momentum

    Kaminer I, Mutzafi M, Levy A, Harari G, Herzig Sheinfux H, Skirlo S, et al. Quantum ˇcerenkov radiation: spectral cuto ffs and the role of spin and orbital angular momentum. Phys Rev X 2016;6(1):011006

    2016

  23. [31]

    Quantum calculation of the vavilov-cherenkov radiation by twisted electrons

    Ivanov I, Serbo V, Zaytsev V. Quantum calculation of the vavilov-cherenkov radiation by twisted electrons. Phys Rev A 2016;93(5):053825

    2016

  24. [32]

    Nonperturbative quantum electrodynamics in the cherenkov effect

    Roques-Carmes C, Rivera N, Joannopoulos JD, Solja ˇci´c M, Kaminer I. Nonperturbative quantum electrodynamics in the cherenkov effect. Phys Rev X 2018;8(4):041013

    2018

  25. [33]

    Observation of quasi-monochromatic resonant cherenkov diffraction radiation

    Karataev P, Naumenko G, Potylitsyn A, Shevelev M, Artyomov K. Observation of quasi-monochromatic resonant cherenkov diffraction radiation. Results in Physics 2022;33:105079

    2022

  26. [34]

    Development of compact muon spectrom- eter using multiple pressurized gas cherenkov radiators

    Bae J, Chatzidakis S. Development of compact muon spectrom- eter using multiple pressurized gas cherenkov radiators. Results in Physics 2022;39:105771

    2022

  27. [35]

    Attosecond physics hidden in cherenkov radi- ation

    Karlovets D, Chaikovskaia A, Grosman D, Kargina D, Shchep- kin A, Sizykh G. Attosecond physics hidden in cherenkov radi- ation. Commun Phys 2025;8(1):192

    2025

  28. [36]

    Free- free transitions following six-photon ionization of xenon atoms

    Agostini P, Fabre F, Mainfray G, Petite G, Rahman NK. Free- free transitions following six-photon ionization of xenon atoms. Phys Rev Lett 1979;42(17):1127

    1979

  29. [37]

    Plasma perspective on strong field multiphoton ionization

    Corkum PB. Plasma perspective on strong field multiphoton ionization. Phys Rev Lett 1993;71(13):1994

    1993

  30. [38]

    Theory of high-harmonic generation by low-frequency laser fields

    Lewenstein M, Balcou P, Ivanov MY, LHuillier A, Corkum PB. Theory of high-harmonic generation by low-frequency laser fields. Phys Rev A 1994;49(3):2117

    1994

  31. [39]

    Nobel lecture: Genesis and applications of attosec- ond pulse trains

    Agostini P. Nobel lecture: Genesis and applications of attosec- ond pulse trains. Rev Mod Phys 2024;96(3):030501

    2024

  32. [40]

    Nobel lecture: Sub-atomic motions

    Krausz F. Nobel lecture: Sub-atomic motions. Rev Mod Phys 2024;96(3):030502

    2024

  33. [41]

    Nobel lecture: The route to attosecond pulses

    L’Huillier A. Nobel lecture: The route to attosecond pulses. Rev Mod Phys 2024;96(3):030503

    2024

  34. [42]

    inelastic kapitza–dirac e ffect

    Avetissian HK. Electron di ffraction on a traveling wave: “inelastic kapitza–dirac e ffect”. Laser and Particle Beams 2016;34(3):480–92

    2016

  35. [43]

    Quantum Electro- dynamics: V olume 4; vol

    Berestetskii VB, Pitaevskii LP, Lifshitz EM. Quantum Electro- dynamics: V olume 4; vol. 4. Elsevier; 2012

    2012

  36. [44]

    Axicon gaussian laser beams

    McDonald KT. Axicon gaussian laser beams. arXiv preprint physics/0003056 2000;. 10

    2000 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.