Comments on the paper: Crystal growth and comparison of vibrational and thermal properties of semi-organic nonlinear optical materials

TL;DR

This paper critically examines the crystal growth claims of UTHC and UTHS, questioning their identity and authenticity, and highlights the need for verification in the synthesis of nonlinear optical materials.

Contribution

It provides a critical assessment of previously reported crystal structures, emphasizing the importance of proper characterization in nonlinear optical material research.

Findings

UTHC and UTHS are likely not the crystals claimed

Previous reports may have misidentified the crystal structures

Highlights the necessity for rigorous verification of crystal identity

Abstract

Gunasekaran et al (Pramana J. Phys. 75 683-690 (2010)) report to have grown the nonlinear optical crystals urea thiourea mercuric chloride (UTHC) and urea thiourea mercuric sulphate (UTHS). We argue that UTHC and UTHS are dubious crystals and are not what the authors propose.