All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Exchange Coupling and Conduction-Electron Polarization in Metals. II

R. E. Watson*

A. J. Freeman

  • Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York 11973

  • Physics Department, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60201

  • *Work performed under the auspices of the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission.
  • Supported in part by the Advanced Research Projects Agency at the Northwestern Materials Research Center.

Phys. Rev. 178, 725 – Published 10 February, 1969

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.178.725

Abstract

The effect on the isotropic spin density of the (k,k′) dependence of the exchange coupling J(k,k) between a localized magnetic moment and conduction electrons predicted by Ruderman-Kittel-Kasuya-Yosida (RKKY) theory is determined quantitatively. Spherical local moments are employed, viz., Gd(4f7) and Fe(3d5) (which are taken as representative of rare-earth and transition metal moments, respectively). The conduction bands are described by simple orthogonalized plane waves appropriate to a "free-electron" metal with k the wave vector of the incident electron and k′ that of the scattered electron. We find that a Q-dependent coupling (where Q|kk|) has some justification when dealing with a Gd local moment but has considerably less justification for Fe. Both the (k,k′) and the Q-coupling schemes yield a "main" spindensity peak which is more diffuse than that yielded by coupling approximations traditionally applied to RKKY theory. Spin-density results were obtained which are appropriate to the outer reaches of a lattice site and to the nuclear site of either the local moment or neighboring atoms (these involve inclusion of core s terms in the spin density). These results suggest that spin distributions obtained by neutron diffraction and those inferred from hyperfine field measurements may differ significantly.

References (13)

  1. M. A. Ruderman and C. Kittel, Phys. Rev. 96, 99 (1954) T. Kasuya, Progr. Theoret. Phys. (Kyoto) 16, 45 (1956) K. Yosida, Phys. Rev. 106, 893 (1957) S. Vonsovski, Zh. Eksperim. i Teor. Fiz. 16, 981 (1946) ibid.24, 419 (1953) A. H. Mitchell, Phys. Rev. 105, 1439 (1957)
  2. R. E. Watson and A. J. Freeman, Phys. Rev. 152, 566 (1966)
  3. P. A. Wolff, Phys. Rev. 120, 814 (1960) ibid.129, 84 (1963) B. Giovannini, M. Peter, and J. R. Schrieffer, Phys. Rev. Letters 12, 736 (1964)
  4. Phys. Rev. Letters 14, 499 (1965) Sec. II
  5. P. W. Anderson and A. M. Clogston, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 2, 124 (1961) J. Kondo, Progr. Theoret. Phys. (Kyoto) 28, 846 (1962) S. Koide and M. Peter, Rev. Mod. Phys. 36, 160 (1964)
  6. R. E. Watson, S. Koide, M. Peter, and A. J. Freeman, Phys. Rev. 139, A167 (1965)
  7. Omitted endnote

  8. Omitted endnote

  9. R. E. Watson, Technical Report No. 12, MIT, 1959 (unpublished) A. J. Freeman and R. E. Watson, Phys. Rev. 127, 2058 (1962)
  10. Omitted endnote

  11. Omitted endnote

  12. J. O. Dimmock and A. J. Freeman, Phys. Rev. Letters 13, 750 (1964)
  13. G. Allan, W. M. Lomer, R. D. Lowde, and C. G. Windsor, Phys. Rev. Letters 17, 933 (1968)

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation