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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Wang et al. claim [J. Appl. Phys. 125, 054504 (2019)] that a current-carryingwire interacting with a magnetic core represents a memristor. Here, wedemonstrate that this claim is false. We first show that such memristor"discovery" is based on incorrect physics, which does not even capture basicproperties of magnetic core materials, such as their magnetic hysteresis.Moreover, the predictions of Wang et al.'s model contradict the experimentalcurves presented in their paper. Additionally, the theoretical pinchedhysteresis loops presented by Wang et al. can not be reproduced if their modelis used, and there are serious flaws in their "negative memristor" emulatordesign. Finally, a simple gedanken experiment shows that the proposed$\Phi$-memristor would fail the memristor test we recently suggested in J.Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 52, 01LT01 (2019). The device "discovered" by Wang et al.is just an inductor with memory.

Comment on "$\Phi$ memristor: Real memristor found" by F. Z. Wang, L. Li, L. Shi, H. Wu, and L. O. Chua [J. Appl. Phys. 125, 054504 (2019)]