Comment on "Nernst effect in poor conductors and in the cuprate superconductors"

TL;DR

This paper critiques a recent model explaining the anomalous Nernst effect in cuprates, emphasizing that a key assumption about experimental data used in the model is incorrect.

Contribution

It challenges the validity of a specific assumption in the proposed model, highlighting the importance of accurate experimental data interpretation.

Findings

The main assumption about experimental data is false.

The critique questions the model's explanation of the Nernst effect.

Emphasizes the need for correct data interpretation in theoretical models.

Abstract

In a recent letter, Alexandrov and Zavaritsky propose a model to explain the anomalous Nernst signal observed in the normal state of hole-doped cuprates. The aim of this comment is to recall that one of the main assumptions of the authors regarding the experimental data is false.