Julien Barrier
@julienbarrier.eu
Condensed matter physicist. curr. @ICFO. f
Future research group leader @mpifkf.bsky.social. Studying electronic transport and photo transport in #graphene and moiré quantum materials
en/fr
Future research group leader @mpifkf.bsky.social. Studying electronic transport and photo transport in #graphene and moiré quantum materials
en/fr
a THz laser, made from a methanol cavity pumped using a CO2 laser
November 17, 2025 at 8:20 AM
a THz laser, made from a methanol cavity pumped using a CO2 laser
I agree it’s important; in general, I find this information suitable for supplemental materials
January 13, 2025 at 11:18 AM
I agree it’s important; in general, I find this information suitable for supplemental materials
The earlier your paper is online, the earlier people can think about it and build on the science.
As early career researcher, you may want to be able to prove that the paper you list on your CV is not only "in preparation" but you deem it good enough to be shared, and others can make their own mind
As early career researcher, you may want to be able to prove that the paper you list on your CV is not only "in preparation" but you deem it good enough to be shared, and others can make their own mind
January 13, 2025 at 10:28 AM
The earlier your paper is online, the earlier people can think about it and build on the science.
As early career researcher, you may want to be able to prove that the paper you list on your CV is not only "in preparation" but you deem it good enough to be shared, and others can make their own mind
As early career researcher, you may want to be able to prove that the paper you list on your CV is not only "in preparation" but you deem it good enough to be shared, and others can make their own mind
In my opinion, the best is right after submission, when sent to review. Some do it a week before to gather advice (e.g. ppl might contact you about missing references). Others do it after the first referee reply, so that they don’t post something "wrong" online. Others only after it’s accepted
January 13, 2025 at 10:28 AM
In my opinion, the best is right after submission, when sent to review. Some do it a week before to gather advice (e.g. ppl might contact you about missing references). Others do it after the first referee reply, so that they don’t post something "wrong" online. Others only after it’s accepted
It’s important to remember that papers are written for other scientists, not for the general public. In that sense, everyone knows (or should know) how it’s done. That being said, you can talk about the development in blog posts, or when delivering a talk, and even post it on Youtube
January 13, 2025 at 10:16 AM
It’s important to remember that papers are written for other scientists, not for the general public. In that sense, everyone knows (or should know) how it’s done. That being said, you can talk about the development in blog posts, or when delivering a talk, and even post it on Youtube
When someone writes "we tried to do X, we did it that way", you should read "if I want to reproduce X, I can do it that way". In the interest of brevity it is usually not possible to write down the "historic" development, but we usually get some of it by reading theses.
January 13, 2025 at 10:14 AM
When someone writes "we tried to do X, we did it that way", you should read "if I want to reproduce X, I can do it that way". In the interest of brevity it is usually not possible to write down the "historic" development, but we usually get some of it by reading theses.
avec Arkema oui mais au CEA Liten à Technolac, dans le laboratoire de photovoltaïque organique/perovskite
December 29, 2024 at 11:58 AM
avec Arkema oui mais au CEA Liten à Technolac, dans le laboratoire de photovoltaïque organique/perovskite
Reposted by Julien Barrier
There are already many articles for which there is more attention on Bluesky than on other comparable micro-blogging sites, meaning the academic community and the general public have clearly adopted Bluesky as one of its core places to disseminate and discuss new research.
A Place of Joy.
A Place of Joy.
December 3, 2024 at 2:00 PM
There are already many articles for which there is more attention on Bluesky than on other comparable micro-blogging sites, meaning the academic community and the general public have clearly adopted Bluesky as one of its core places to disseminate and discuss new research.
A Place of Joy.
A Place of Joy.
Interestingly, this conclusion is shared Xueshi Gao and co-workers who used a different strategy (using strontium titanate with ultra high permittivity) to induce strong screening. Their paper is also online this morning: arxiv.org/abs/2412.01578
Double-edged Role of Interactions in Superconducting Twisted Bilayer Graphene
For the unconventional superconducting phases in moire materials, a critical question is the role played by electronic interactions in the formation of Cooper pairs. In twisted bilayer graphene (tBLG)...
arxiv.org
December 3, 2024 at 6:22 AM
Interestingly, this conclusion is shared Xueshi Gao and co-workers who used a different strategy (using strontium titanate with ultra high permittivity) to induce strong screening. Their paper is also online this morning: arxiv.org/abs/2412.01578
We found that, by increasing screening, superconductivity was suppressed, which points towards an unconventional pairing mechanism for the superconductivity in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene
December 3, 2024 at 6:22 AM
We found that, by increasing screening, superconductivity was suppressed, which points towards an unconventional pairing mechanism for the superconductivity in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene