English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We show that the conductance ($G$) and transition voltage ($V_t$)spectroscopy data for standard vacuum nanogaps reported in the preceding paperby Sotthewes \emph{et al} cannot be understood within the framework of theexisting theories/models whatever realistic effects are incorporates. However,if we include an additional ("ghost") current, the trends of the dependenciesof $G$ and $V_t$ on the nanogap size $d$ can be explained. The ghost current isvery small. Therefore, effects related to the ghost current can only berevealed at larger $d$'s, where the ghost current becomes comparable to orovercomes the tunneling current. Although we are not able to unravel the originof this ghost contribution, we can and do refer to experimental $G$- and$V_t$-data reported for molecular junctions, which exhibit similarities to thepresently considered vacuum nanojunctions. Analyzing notable difficultiesrelated to the regime assigned as transport via hopping, we speculate that aghost contribution may also exist in molecular junctions.

Concurrent conductance and transition voltage spectroscopy study of scanning tunneling microscopy vacuum junctions. Does it unravel new physics?