This title appears in the Scientific Report :
2017
Please use the identifier:
http://hdl.handle.net/2128/15802 in citations.
Please use the identifier: http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1710583114 in citations.
No case against scattering theory
No case against scattering theory
In a series of papers, Frauenfelder et al. (1⇓–3) propose a radical reinterpretation of incoherent neutron scattering by complex systems, specifically by protein hydration water, drawing into doubt the “currently accepted model, used for >50 y” (3). Under this model they subsume not only assumpti...
Saved in:
Personal Name(s): | Wuttke, Joachim (Corresponding author) |
---|---|
Contributing Institute: |
JCNS-FRM-II; JCNS-FRM-II |
Published in: | Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114 (2017) 40, S. E8318 |
Imprint: |
Washington, DC
National Acad. of Sciences
2017
|
PubMed ID: |
28931577 |
DOI: |
10.1073/pnas.1710583114 |
Document Type: |
Journal Article |
Research Program: |
Soft Matter, Health and Life Sciences FRM II / MLZ Jülich Centre for Neutron Research (JCNS) |
Subject (ZB): | |
Link: |
OpenAccess OpenAccess OpenAccess OpenAccess |
Publikationsportal JuSER |
Please use the identifier: http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1710583114 in citations.
In a series of papers, Frauenfelder et al. (1⇓–3) propose a radical reinterpretation of incoherent neutron scattering by complex systems, specifically by protein hydration water, drawing into doubt the “currently accepted model, used for >50 y” (3). Under this model they subsume not only assumptions about the scattering target (sample) but also the theory that connects sample and scattering signal. Effectively, they attack the insight (4) that the dynamic structure factor S(q,ω) (which they incorrectly call “the scattering intensity”) abstracts from scattering kinematics and depends only on nuclear position operators acting on the sample. They claim that the established theory … |