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 Tools annual

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 monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In Phys. Rev. E, $99$, 047201 (2019) Witte {\it et al.} have commented on ourconductivity calculations [Phys. Rev. E $96$, 053206 (2017)] for warm densematter (WDM). (i) They criticize our use of the spherically-averaged structurefactor $S(k)$ for calculations of the static conductivity $\sigma$ of FCCaluminum - a common approximation for polycrystalline materials. Theythemselves give no calculations as their method using density-functional theory(DFT) and molecular dynamics (MD) based Kubo-Greenwood (KG) calculationsbecomes impractical for cold ions. (ii) We are satisfied that Witte et al. nolonger claim a factor of $\sim$ 1.5 change in $\sigma$ on changing theexchange-correlation (XC) functional used. (iii) They have providedcomputer-intensive calculations of $\sigma$ for aluminum using DFT-MD-KGsimulations, for temperatures $T$ up to 15 eV but using only $N$=64 atoms inthe simulation, where as a mixture of ionic species needs a far larger $N$ tobe credible. We present multi-species conductivity calculations via aparameter-free DFT theory [Phys. Rev. E. $52$, 5352 (1995)] for 5 eV to 50 eV.(iv) The conductivities obtained from well-converged DFT-MD-KG methods show asignificant underestimate of $\sigma$; this is especially evident for theisochoric conductivity $\sigma_{\rm ic}$ extrapolating to $\sim3.5\times 10^6$S/m, i.e, {\it even below} the experimental {\it isobaric} value of 4.1$\times10^6$ S/m at the melting point, when a value of $\sim 5\times 10^6$ S/m isanticipated.

Reply to comment by Witte et al. on "Isochoric, isobaric, and ultrafast  conductivities of aluminum, lithium,and carbon in the warm dense matter  regime", Phys. Rev. E $96$, 053206 (2017)