This paper presents a search for dark matter,
Microscale inorganic particles (d > 1 µm) have reduced surface area and higher density, making them negatively buoyant in most dipcoating mixtures. Their controlled delivery in hardtoreach places through entrainment is possible but challenging due to the density mismatch between them and the liquid matrix called liquid carrier system (LCS). In this work, the particle transfer mechanism from the complex density mismatching mixture was investigated. The LCS solution was prepared and optimized using a polymer binder and an evaporating solvent. The inorganic particles were dispersed in the LCS by stirring at the just suspending speed to maintain the pseudo suspension characteristics for the heterogeneous mixture. The effect of solid loading and the binder volume fraction on solid transfer has been reported at room temperature. Two coating regimes are observed (i) heterogeneous coating where particle clusters are formed at a low capillary number and (ii) effective viscous regime, where full coverage can be observed on the substrate. ‘Zero’ particle entrainment was not observed even at a low capillary number of the mixture, which can be attributed to the presence of the binder and hydrodynamic flow of the particles due to the stirring of the mixture. The critical film thickness for particle entrainment is
 Award ID(s):
 2101745
 NSFPAR ID:
 10380035
 Publisher / Repository:
 Nature Publishing Group
 Date Published:
 Journal Name:
 Scientific Reports
 Volume:
 12
 Issue:
 1
 ISSN:
 20452322
 Format(s):
 Medium: X
 Sponsoring Org:
 National Science Foundation
More Like this

Abstract , using events with a single top quark and an energetic$$\chi $$ $\chi $W boson. The analysis is based on proton–proton collision data collected with the ATLAS experiment at 13 TeV during LHC Run 2 (2015–2018), corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$$\sqrt{s}=$$ $\sqrt{s}=$ . The search considers final states with zero or one charged lepton (electron or muon), at least one$$^{1}$$ ${}^{1}$b jet and large missing transverse momentum. In addition, a result from a previous search considering twochargedlepton final states is included in the interpretation of the results. The data are found to be in good agreement with the Standard Model predictions and the results are interpreted in terms of 95% confidencelevel exclusion limits in the context of a class of dark matter models involving an extended twoHiggsdoublet sector together with a pseudoscalar mediator particle. The search is particularly sensitive to onshell production of the charged Higgs boson state, , arising from the twoHiggsdoublet mixing, and its semiinvisible decays via the mediator particle,$$H^{\pm }$$ ${H}^{\pm}$a : . Signal models with$$H^{\pm } \rightarrow W^\pm a (\rightarrow \chi \chi )$$ ${H}^{\pm}\to {W}^{\pm}a(\to \chi \chi )$ masses up to 1.5 TeV and$$H^{\pm }$$ ${H}^{\pm}$a masses up to 350 GeV are excluded assuming a value of 1. For masses of$$\tan \beta $$ $tan\beta $a of 150 (250) GeV, values up to 2 are excluded for$$\tan \beta $$ $tan\beta $ masses between 200 (400) GeV and 1.5 TeV. Signals with$$H^{\pm }$$ ${H}^{\pm}$ values between 20 and 30 are excluded for$$\tan \beta $$ $tan\beta $ masses between 500 and 800 GeV.$$H^{\pm }$$ ${H}^{\pm}$ 
Abstract A search for decays to invisible particles of Higgs bosons produced in association with a topantitop quark pair or a vector boson, which both decay to a fully hadronic final state, has been performed using protonproton collision data collected at
by the CMS experiment at the LHC, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 138$${\sqrt{s}=13\,\text {Te}\hspace{.08em}\text {V}}$$ $\sqrt{s}=13\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}\text{Te}\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}\text{V}$ . The 95% confidence level upper limit set on the branching fraction of the 125$$\,\text {fb}^{1}$$ $\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}{\text{fb}}^{1}$ Higgs boson to invisible particles,$$\,\text {Ge}\hspace{.08em}\text {V}$$ $\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}\text{Ge}\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}\text{V}$ , is 0.54 (0.39 expected), assuming standard model production cross sections. The results of this analysis are combined with previous$${\mathcal {B}({\textrm{H}} \rightarrow \text {inv})}$$ $B(\text{H}\to \text{inv})$ searches carried out at$${\mathcal {B}({\textrm{H}} \rightarrow \text {inv})}$$ $B(\text{H}\to \text{inv})$ , 8, and 13$${\sqrt{s}=7}$$ $\sqrt{s}=7$ in complementary production modes. The combined upper limit at 95% confidence level on$$\,\text {Te}\hspace{.08em}\text {V}$$ $\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}\text{Te}\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}\text{V}$ is 0.15 (0.08 expected).$${\mathcal {B}({\textrm{H}} \rightarrow \text {inv})}$$ $B(\text{H}\to \text{inv})$ 
Abstract We perform pathintegral molecular dynamics (PIMD), ringpolymer MD (RPMD), and classical MD simulations of H
O and D$$_2$$ ${}_{2}$ O using the qTIP4P/F water model over a wide range of temperatures and pressures. The density$$_2$$ ${}_{2}$ , isothermal compressibility$$\rho (T)$$ $\rho \left(T\right)$ , and selfdiffusion coefficients$$\kappa _T(T)$$ ${\kappa}_{T}\left(T\right)$D (T ) of H O and D$$_2$$ ${}_{2}$ O are in excellent agreement with available experimental data; the isobaric heat capacity$$_2$$ ${}_{2}$ obtained from PIMD and MD simulations agree qualitatively well with the experiments. Some of these thermodynamic properties exhibit anomalous maxima upon isobaric cooling, consistent with recent experiments and with the possibility that H$$C_P(T)$$ ${C}_{P}\left(T\right)$ O and D$$_2$$ ${}_{2}$ O exhibit a liquidliquid critical point (LLCP) at low temperatures and positive pressures. The data from PIMD/MD for H$$_2$$ ${}_{2}$ O and D$$_2$$ ${}_{2}$ O can be fitted remarkably well using the TwoStateEquationofState (TSEOS). Using the TSEOS, we estimate that the LLCP for qTIP4P/F H$$_2$$ ${}_{2}$ O, from PIMD simulations, is located at$$_2$$ ${}_{2}$ MPa,$$P_c = 167 \pm 9$$ ${P}_{c}=167\pm 9$ K, and$$T_c = 159 \pm 6$$ ${T}_{c}=159\pm 6$ g/cm$$\rho _c = 1.02 \pm 0.01$$ ${\rho}_{c}=1.02\pm 0.01$ . Isotope substitution effects are important; the LLCP location in qTIP4P/F D$$^3$$ ${}^{3}$ O is estimated to be$$_2$$ ${}_{2}$ MPa,$$P_c = 176 \pm 4$$ ${P}_{c}=176\pm 4$ K, and$$T_c = 177 \pm 2$$ ${T}_{c}=177\pm 2$ g/cm$$\rho _c = 1.13 \pm 0.01$$ ${\rho}_{c}=1.13\pm 0.01$ . Interestingly, for the water model studied, differences in the LLCP location from PIMD and MD simulations suggest that nuclear quantum effects (i.e., atoms delocalization) play an important role in the thermodynamics of water around the LLCP (from the MD simulations of qTIP4P/F water,$$^3$$ ${}^{3}$ MPa,$$P_c = 203 \pm 4$$ ${P}_{c}=203\pm 4$ K, and$$T_c = 175 \pm 2$$ ${T}_{c}=175\pm 2$ g/cm$$\rho _c = 1.03 \pm 0.01$$ ${\rho}_{c}=1.03\pm 0.01$ ). Overall, our results strongly support the LLPT scenario to explain water anomalous behavior, independently of the fundamental differences between classical MD and PIMD techniques. The reported values of$$^3$$ ${}^{3}$ for D$$T_c$$ ${T}_{c}$ O and, particularly, H$$_2$$ ${}_{2}$ O suggest that improved water models are needed for the study of supercooled water.$$_2$$ ${}_{2}$ 
Abstract Thin film evaporation is a widelyused thermal management solution for micro/nanodevices with high energy densities. Local measurements of the evaporation rate at a liquidvapor interface, however, are limited. We present a continuous profile of the evaporation heat transfer coefficient (
) in the submicron thin film region of a water meniscus obtained through local measurements interpreted by a machine learned surrogate of the physical system. Frequency domain thermoreflectance (FDTR), a noncontact laserbased method with micrometer lateral resolution, is used to induce and measure the meniscus evaporation. A neural network is then trained using finite element simulations to extract the$$h_{\text {evap}}$$ ${h}_{\text{evap}}$ profile from the FDTR data. For a substrate superheat of 20 K, the maximum$$h_{\text {evap}}$$ ${h}_{\text{evap}}$ is$$h_{\text {evap}}$$ ${h}_{\text{evap}}$ MW/$$1.0_{0.3}^{+0.5}$$ $1.{0}_{0.3}^{+0.5}$ K at a film thickness of$$\text {m}^2$$ ${\text{m}}^{2}$ nm. This ultrahigh$$15_{3}^{+29}$$ ${15}_{3}^{+29}$ value is two orders of magnitude larger than the heat transfer coefficient for singlephase forced convection or evaporation from a bulk liquid. Under the assumption of constant wall temperature, our profiles of$$h_{\text {evap}}$$ ${h}_{\text{evap}}$ and meniscus thickness suggest that 62% of the heat transfer comes from the region lying 0.1–1 μm from the meniscus edge, whereas just 29% comes from the next 100 μm.$$h_{\text {evap}}$$ ${h}_{\text{evap}}$ 
Abstract Hemiwicking is the phenomena where a liquid wets a textured surface beyond its intrinsic wetting length due to capillary action and imbibition. In this work, we derive a simple analytical model for hemiwicking in micropillar arrays. The model is based on the combined effects of capillary action dictated by interfacial and intermolecular pressures gradients within the curved liquid meniscus and fluid drag from the pillars at ultralow Reynolds numbers
. Fluid drag is conceptualized via a critical Reynolds number:$${\boldsymbol{(}}{{\bf{10}}}^{{\boldsymbol{}}{\bf{7}}}{\boldsymbol{\lesssim }}{\bf{Re}}{\boldsymbol{\lesssim }}{{\bf{10}}}^{{\boldsymbol{}}{\bf{3}}}{\boldsymbol{)}}$$ $\left({10}^{7}\lesssim \mathrm{Re}\lesssim {10}^{3}\right)$ , where$${\bf{Re}}{\boldsymbol{=}}\frac{{{\bf{v}}}_{{\bf{0}}}{{\bf{x}}}_{{\bf{0}}}}{{\boldsymbol{\nu }}}$$ $\mathrm{Re}=\frac{{v}_{0}{x}_{0}}{\nu}$v _{0}corresponds to the maximum wetting speed on a flat, dry surface andx _{0}is the extension length of the liquid meniscus that drives the bulk fluid toward the adsorbed thinfilm region. The model is validated with wicking experiments on different hemiwicking surfaces in conjunction withv _{0}andx _{0}measurements using Water , viscous FC70$${\boldsymbol{(}}{{\bf{v}}}_{{\bf{0}}}{\boldsymbol{\approx }}{\bf{2}}\,{\bf{m}}{\boldsymbol{/}}{\bf{s}}{\boldsymbol{,}}\,{\bf{25}}\,{\boldsymbol{\mu }}{\bf{m}}{\boldsymbol{\lesssim }}{{\bf{x}}}_{{\bf{0}}}{\boldsymbol{\lesssim }}{\bf{28}}\,{\boldsymbol{\mu }}{\bf{m}}{\boldsymbol{)}}$$ $\left({v}_{0}\approx 2\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}m/s,\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}25\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}\mu m\lesssim {x}_{0}\lesssim 28\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}\mu m\right)$ and lower viscosity Ethanol$${\boldsymbol{(}}{{\boldsymbol{v}}}_{{\bf{0}}}{\boldsymbol{\approx }}{\bf{0.3}}\,{\bf{m}}{\boldsymbol{/}}{\bf{s}}{\boldsymbol{,}}\,{\bf{18.6}}\,{\boldsymbol{\mu }}{\bf{m}}{\boldsymbol{\lesssim }}{{\boldsymbol{x}}}_{{\bf{0}}}{\boldsymbol{\lesssim }}{\bf{38.6}}\,{\boldsymbol{\mu }}{\bf{m}}{\boldsymbol{)}}$$ $\left({v}_{0}\approx 0.3\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}m/s,\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}18.6\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}\mu m\lesssim {x}_{0}\lesssim 38.6\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}\mu m\right)$ .$${\boldsymbol{(}}{{\boldsymbol{v}}}_{{\bf{0}}}{\boldsymbol{\approx }}{\bf{1.2}}\,{\bf{m}}{\boldsymbol{/}}{\bf{s}}{\boldsymbol{,}}\,{\bf{11.8}}\,{\boldsymbol{\mu }}{\bf{m}}{\boldsymbol{\lesssim }}{{\bf{x}}}_{{\bf{0}}}{\boldsymbol{\lesssim }}{\bf{33.3}}\,{\boldsymbol{\mu }}{\bf{m}}{\boldsymbol{)}}$$ $\left({v}_{0}\approx 1.2\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}m/s,\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}11.8\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}\mu m\lesssim {x}_{0}\lesssim 33.3\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}\mu m\right)$