Single, double, and triple ionization of the C+ ion by a single photon have been investigated in the energy range 286 to 326 eV around the K-shell single-ionization threshold at an unprecedented level of detail. At energy resolutions as low as 12 meV, corresponding to a resolving power of 24 000, natural linewidths of the most prominent resonances could be determined. From the measurement of absolute cross sections, oscillator strengths, Einstein coefficients, multielectron Auger decay rates, and other transition parameters of the main K-shell excitation and decay processes are derived. The cross sections are compared to results of previous theoretical calculations. Mixed levels of agreement are found despite the relatively simple atomic structure of the C+ ion with only five electrons. This paper is a followup to a previous Letter [A. Müller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 013002 (2015)PRLTAO0031-900710.1103/PhysRevLett.114.013002].

In a joint experimental and theoretical endeavor, photoionization of metastable C4+(1s2sS13) ions via intermediate levels with hollow, double-K-vacancy configurations 2s2p, 2s3p, 2p3s, 2p3d, 2s4p, 2p4s, and 2p4d has been investigated. High-resolution photon-ion merged-beams measurements were carried out with the resolving power reaching up to 25 800 which is sufficient to separate the leading fine-structure components of the 2s2pP3 term. Many-body perturbation theory was employed to determine level-to-level cross sections for K-shell excitation with subsequent autoionization. The resonance energies were calculated with inclusion of electron correlation and radiative contributions. Their uncertainties are estimated to be below ±1 meV. Detailed balance confirms the present photoionization cross-section results by comparison with previous dielectronic-recombination measurements. The high accuracy of the theoretical transition energies together with the present experimental results qualify photoabsorption resonances in heliumlike ions as new, greatly improved energy-reference standards at synchrotron radiation facilities.

We investigate the photodouble ionization of H_{2} molecules with 400 eV photons. We find that the emitted electrons do not show any sign of two-center interference fringes in their angular emission distributions if considered separately. In contrast, the quasiparticle consisting of both electrons (i.e., the "dielectron") does. The work highlights the fact that nonlocal effects are embedded everywhere in nature where many-particle processes are involved.

The toolbox for imaging molecules is well-equipped today. Some techniques visualize the geometrical structure, others the electron density or electron orbitals. Molecules are many-body systems for which the correlation between the constituents is decisive and the spatial and the momentum distribution of one electron depends on those of the other electrons and the nuclei. Such correlations have escaped direct observation by imaging techniques so far. Here, we implement an imaging scheme which visualizes correlations between electrons by coincident detection of the reaction fragments after high energy photofragmentation. With this technique, we examine the H₂ two-electron wave function in which electron-electron correlation beyond the mean-field level is prominent. We visualize the dependence of the wave function on the internuclear distance. High energy photoelectrons are shown to be a powerful tool for molecular imaging. Our study paves the way for future time resolved correlation imaging at FELs and laser based X-ray sources.

The original version of this Article contained an error in the fifth sentence of the first paragraph of the 'Application on H₂' section of the Results, which incorrectly read 'The role of electron correlation is quite apparent in this presentation: Fig. 1a is empty for the uncorrelated Hartree-Fock wave function, since projection of the latter wave function onto the 2pσ_u orbital is exactly zero, while this is not the case for the fully correlated wave function (Fig. 1d); also, Fig. 1b, c for the uncorrelated description are identical, while Fig. 1e, f for the correlated case are significantly different.' The correct version replaces 'Fig. 1e, f' with 'Fig. 2e and f'.