|
Abstract
|
In a recent paper, Bonitz, Pehlke, and Schoof [Phys. Rev. E 87, 033105 (2013)], hereafter referred to as BPS,
have raised some points against the Shukla-Eliasson attractive potential [P. K. Shukla and B. Eliasson, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 108, 165007 (2012); 108, 219902(E) (2012); 109, 019901(E) (2012)], hereafter referred to as SEAP,
around a stationary test charge in a quantum plasma. Our objective here is to discuss the insufficiency of the
BPS reasoning concerning the applicability of the linearized quantum hydrodynamic theory, as well as to point
out the shortcomings in BPS’s arguments and to suggest how to salvage BPS’s density functional theory and
simulations, which have failed to produce results that correctly match with that of Shukla and Eliasson.
|