SciPost logo

SciPost Submission Page

A testable theory for high-Tc superconductivity in cuprates

by E. C. Marino

This is not the latest submitted version.

This Submission thread is now published as

Submission summary

Authors (as registered SciPost users): Eduardo Marino
Submission information
Preprint Link: scipost_202208_00041v1  (pdf)
Date submitted: 2022-08-16 04:37
Submitted by: Marino, Eduardo
Submitted to: SciPost Physics Proceedings
Proceedings issue: International Conference on Strongly Correlated Electron Systems (SCES2022)
Ontological classification
Academic field: Physics
  • Condensed Matter Physics - Theory
Approach: Theoretical


We describe the foundations and main applications of our proposed theory for describing High-Tc Superconductivity in cuprates.

Current status:
Has been resubmitted

Reports on this Submission

Report 1 by Ryszard Radwanski on 2022-9-30 (Invited Report)

  • Cite as: Ryszard Radwanski, Report on arXiv:scipost_202208_00041v1, delivered 2022-09-30, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.5801


Referee A Report Av1 on: 26-IX 2022
A testable theory for High-Tc Superconductivity in Cuprates
by E. C. Marino,
The referee has a good general impression about the paper, formulation of the problem and a proposal for author's theory for the superconductivity (it does not mean that the referee is fully convinced on its real validity). It is very likely that the paper should get the accepted opinion.
1) The paper should be returned to the author with suggestion to read carefully the text and repair some obvious misprints. The paper should follow the SCES template.
2) On p. 5, right column, line 2 b, suddenly appears ref. 30. Likely it is related to a misprint
on p. 1, r c, ln 9b, with ?? [] lack of citation numbers. There are only Refs 13 and 21 on p. 2.
3) On p. 3 r c, ln 6b appears the right parenthesis with the left one
4) On p. 9, r c, under fig. appears an unknown thing (??)
5) Please make some cosmetics of references:
a) better Phys. Rev.B 58, not Phys. Rev B58
b) always comma after authors,
c) Ref 14 - not full given names .
d) Ref. 45 - the same style, i.e. not et al.
e) the required style of the section - not 1) or not 2.1) only point or nothing
f) !!!!!!!! required Contents
6) Author is asked to be more specific in a short presentation of their solution on p. 1:
a) e.g. on p. 1 r c, ln 9b "In our case, however, differently from the RVB state the resonating dimers are themselves Cooper pairs formed by two holes with opposite spins and belonging to different nearest neighbor sub-lattices."
b) "In our case, however, differently from the RVB state the resonating dimers [of what] are themselves Cooper pairs formed by two holes [WHERE, of what] with opposite spins and belonging to different nearest neighbour sub-lattices [of what]."
c) Be more specific also in Conclusion:
"The pairing mechanism in our theory derives from the ferromagnetic fluctuations of the Kondo-like interaction between doped [where, of what] holes and localized Cu ions, the Pseudogap stems from the Coulomb repulsion among [where, of what] holes or, equivalently, the Coulomb attraction between electrons [which] and holes [where], while the main resistivity mechanism consists of hole-exciton scattering. The PG T∗(x) line is a 2nd.[remove] order transition, whose order parameter is the ground-state expectation value of the exciton creation operator."

d) please, extend - Abstract

  • validity: -
  • significance: -
  • originality: -
  • clarity: -
  • formatting: -
  • grammar: -

Author:  Eduardo Marino  on 2022-10-17  [id 2930]

(in reply to Report 1 by Ryszard Radwanski on 2022-09-30)

I would like to thank the Referee for reporting on my paper.
I will carefully go through the whole article, doing all the reparations suggested by the Referee, as well as any other ones that may prove to be necessary.

Login to report or comment