Reply to Comment on
Year: 2018
Authors: Zhang X., Xu W., Wang Y., Jiang S., Gorelli F., Greenberg E., Prakapenka VB., Goncharov AF.
Autors Affiliation: [Zhang, Xiao; Xu, Wan; Wang, Yu; Jiang, Shuqing; Gorelli, Federico A.; Goncharov, Alexander F.] Chinese Acad Sci, Inst Solid State Phys, Key Lab Mat Phys, Hefei 230031, Anhui, Peoples R China.
[Zhang, Xiao; Xu, Wan; Wang, Yu; Goncharov, Alexander F.] Univ Sci & Technol China, Hefei 230026, Anhui, Peoples R China.
[Gorelli, Federico A.] CNR, INO, I-50019 Sesto Fiorentino, Italy and European Lab Non Linear Spect LENS, I-50019 Sesto Fiorentino, Italy.
[Greenberg, Eran; Prakapenka, Vitali B.] Univ Chicago, Ctr Adv Radiat Sources, Chicago, IL 60637 USA.
[Goncharov, Alexander F.] Carnegie Inst Sci, Geophys Lab, Washington, DC 20015 USA.
Abstract: The Comment of Pace et al. [Phys. Rev. B 98, 106101 (2018)] claims that structural analysis and nomenclature of Zhang et al. [Zhang, Xu, Wang, Jiang, Gorelli, Greenberg, Prakapenka, and Goncharov, Phys. Rev. B 97, 064107 (2018)] are incorrect, that this compound is not metallic at high pressures and 200 K, and that the compound instead decomposes. In this Reply we argue that there are no experimental data that can discriminate between theoretically predicted Cccm H3Se and I4/mcm (H2Se)(2)H-2 advocated by Pace et al. The difference in nomenclature is due to different naming conventions. We find the name “H3Se” more convenient to apply in the limit of high pressure. We also substantiate the initial claims of the stability up to 40 GPa at 170 K of the H3Se compound after synthesis at 4.6 GPa and argue that the pressure induced metallization above 23 GPa is a plausible explanation of the reported visual observations and Raman spectroscopy results.
Journal/Review: PHYSICAL REVIEW B
Volume: 98 (10) Pages from: 106102-1 to: 106102-2
KeyWords: pressureDOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.98.106102ImpactFactor: 3.736Connecting to view paper tab on IsiWeb: Click here
