Van Vleck Orbit-Lattice Interactions In Laz (Z=P,As,Sb,Bi)

  • C. Y. Huang
  • Nai Li Huang Liu

Abstract

Electron spin relaxation in magnetic insulators has been intensively studied for many years.1–4 The primary relaxation mechanism is phonon modulation of the crystal field of the magnetic ion.1 This orbit-lattice interaction should also be present in magnetic metals.5 However, in metals the magnetic spins can also transfer energy to the lattice by means of their exchange coupling to the conduction electrons. As a consequence in the great majority of metals studied to date, this relaxation mechanism via the conduction electrons dominates the spin relaxation, resulting in a linear dependence of EPR linewidth on temperature at liquid helium temperatures.6,7 In contrast it has been recently shown that8 in some Ce alloys the orbit-lattice interaction is the dominant relaxation mechanism at high temperatures. For this reason, in this paper the Van Vleck orbit-lattice interaction1 will be employed to calculate the relaxation rates of Ce3+ in LaZ (Z = P,As,Sb, and Bi). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper attempting to calculate the phonon- induced relaxation time in a metal.

Keywords

Helium Reso Romania LaSb 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    J. H. Van Vleck, Phys. Rev. 57, 426 (1940).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. Abragam and B. Bleany, “Electron Paramagnetic Resonance of Transition Metal Ions”, Clarendon, Oxford, Chap. 10 (1970).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. Orbach and H. J. Stapleton, “Electron Paramagnetic Resonance”, edited by S. Geschwind, Plenum, New York (1972).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. C. Verstelle and D. A. Curtis, Handbuch der Physics, Vol. XVII/1, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, p. 1 (1968).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    L. L. Hirst, Phys. Rev 181, 597 (1969).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. Orbach, M. Peter and D. Shaltiel, Arch. Sci. Geneve 27, 141 (1974).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    R. H. Taylor, Adv. Phys. 24, 681 (1975).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    K. Sugawara and C. Y. Huang, J. Phys. Soc. Japan 40, 295 (1976).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. Davidov, C. Rettori, A. Dixon, K. Baberschke, E. P. Chock and R. Orbach, Phys. Rev B8, 3563 (1973).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Blume and R. Orbach, Phys. Rev 127, 1587 (1962).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. Orbach, Proc. Roy. Soc. (London) A264, 458 (1961).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    To be more rigorous, the relaxation rates listed in Table II are obtained by using the procedures of calculating the average of the strains as done by Van Vleck in reference 1. The relaxation rates so obtained are less than those computed from Eq. (7) and (8) by a factor of six for A and B and by a factor of thirty six for C. For detailed discussions, see C. Y. Huang, Phys. Rev. 139, A241 (1965).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    R. J. Birgeneau, E. Bucher, J. P. Maita, L. Passell and K. C. Tuberfield, Phys. Rev B8, 5345 (1973).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    W. Burton Lewis, in “Magnetic Resonance and Related Phenomena”, ed. by I. Ursu, Publishing House of the Academy of the Socialist Republic of Romania, Bucharest, p. 717 (1971).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    K. Sugawara and C. Y. Huang, J. Phys. Soc. Japan 41, 50 (1976).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. Y. Huang
    • 1
  • Nai Li Huang Liu
    • 2
  1. 1.Los Alamos Scientific LaboratoryLos AlamosUSA
  2. 2.Department of PhysicsUniversity of CaliforniaRiversideUSA

Personalised recommendations