2000
DOI: 10.1103/physrevlett.84.2116
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Electric-Octupole and Pure-Electric-Quadrupole Effects in Soft-X-Ray Photoemission

Abstract: Second-order [ O(k(2)), k = omega/c] nondipole effects in soft-x-ray photoemission are demonstrated via an experimental and a theoretical study of angular distributions of neon valence photoelectrons in the 100-1200 eV photon-energy range. A newly derived theoretical expression for nondipolar angular distributions characterizes the second-order effects using four new parameters with primary contributions from pure-quadrupole and octupole-dipole interference terms. Independent-particle calculations of these par… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

4
59
1
3

Year Published

2003
2003
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 90 publications
(67 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
4
59
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Since the dominant non-dipole contribution comes from the interference of the E1 and E2 photoionization amplitudes, we neglect the M 1 photoionization amplitudes (which strictly vanish in the nonrelativistic single-configuration approximation). Our results for the photoelectron angular distribution in single-photon ionization are in a good agreement with other calculations [34,40,41] and experiment [37] (Figure 1; we denote the non-dipole parameters in one-photon single ionization without superscript). Note that, as revealed by Derevianko et al [41], the second-order non-dipole effects start to noticeably influence the photoelectron angular distribution of the Ne 2p ionization at the photon energies near to 1 keV.…”
Section: Sequential 2pdi Of Neonsupporting
confidence: 91%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Since the dominant non-dipole contribution comes from the interference of the E1 and E2 photoionization amplitudes, we neglect the M 1 photoionization amplitudes (which strictly vanish in the nonrelativistic single-configuration approximation). Our results for the photoelectron angular distribution in single-photon ionization are in a good agreement with other calculations [34,40,41] and experiment [37] (Figure 1; we denote the non-dipole parameters in one-photon single ionization without superscript). Note that, as revealed by Derevianko et al [41], the second-order non-dipole effects start to noticeably influence the photoelectron angular distribution of the Ne 2p ionization at the photon energies near to 1 keV.…”
Section: Sequential 2pdi Of Neonsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…These experiments were performed with synchrotron radiation from storage rings, thus due to the low intensity of the photon flux the probability of the second-step ionization (23) was negligible. Nevertheless, pronounced non-dipole effects in single ionization revealed in these experiments [36,37] point to potentially strong non-dipole effects in the 2PDI at the corresponding photon energies. Using the Free-electron LASer in Hamburg (FLASH), the angular distributions of the individual electrons e 1 and e 2 in the 2PDI process (22), (23) were measured in [15,22] while the angular correlation function between the two electrons was observed in [16].…”
Section: Sequential 2pdi Of Neonmentioning
confidence: 73%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It should be noted that the present deviation from a strictly aligned (k = 2) pattern is due to multiphoton effects and not due to retardation effects beyond the dipole approximation [29]. …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In general terms, it works better in the evaluation of total cross sections than in the calculation of photoelectron angular distributions. Recent measurements in small systems show that significant deviations from the dipole approximation can be found even in systems for which it has been traditionally applied [22]. Nevertheless, let us restrict ourselves to the calculation of the photocurrent in the dipole approximation.…”
Section: Dipole Approximationmentioning
confidence: 99%