deletions | additions       diff --git a/Fig_ref_fig_stopping_power_shows__.tex b/Fig_ref_fig_stopping_power_shows__.tex  index afa5a8b..e933ccd 100644  --- a/Fig_ref_fig_stopping_power_shows__.tex  +++ b/Fig_ref_fig_stopping_power_shows__.tex 
...
Fig. \ref{fig:stopping_power} shows a comparison of our calculated $S_\text{e}$ with \textsc{Srim} experimental data and model.   In the channeling case, when the incident velocity $v$ increases after the maximum stopping is reached, the rate of decrease of our $S_\text{e}$ results becomes rather faster than those obtained by either the experimental or the \text{Srim} \textsc{Srim}  database. For the off-channeling case, there is a better agreement between our $S_\text{e}$ results with the \textsc{Srim} data in most of the range.   In experiments, where trajectories are not necessarily finely controlled, the projectile does indeed explore core regions of the host atoms, and that is presumably why off-channeling simulation are a better representation for the most common experiments \cite{Dorado_1993}.   At higher velocities ($v > 4 ~\mathrm{a.u.}$) further disagreement stems from combined effect of the lack of explicit deeper  core electrons in the simulation and also size effects, as excitations of long wavelength plasma oscillation is are artificially  constrained by the simulation supercell \cite{Schleife_2015}. It is clear that a larger cell and eventually the inclusion of more core electrons would be necessary to obtain better agreement in this region.  %The existence of plasma oscillations is detected in our simulations by persistent charge motion above a certain threshold velocity of $v \simeq 1.0~\mathrm{a.u.}$. This plasma oscillations have a dramatic effects in the components forces over individual $\mathrm{Cu}$ atoms near the track of the passing hydrogen (Fig.~\ref{fig:force_on_neighbor}). This forces persist (and oscillate) even after the proton has passed.