DOCSLIB.ORG

Paolasini Magnetism Lecture1.Ppsx

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Paolasini Magnetism Lecture1.Ppsx Luigi Paolasini [email protected] Lecture 1 14 JANUARY 2014: “Why spins spin?” Lecture 2 28 JANUARY 2014: “Lonely atoms” Lecture 3 11 FEBRUARY 2014: “Local perturbations” Lecture 4 25 FEBRUARY 2014: “Magnetic interactions” Lecture 5 11 MARCH 2014: “Magnetic structures” Lecture 6 25 MARCH 2014: “Magnetic excitations” Lecture 7 8 APRIL 2014: “The dark side of magnetism: magnetic metals” Lecture 8 22 APRIL 2014: “Neutron magnetic scattering” Lecture 9 6 MAY 2014: “X-ray magnetic scattering” Lecture 10 27 MAY 2014: “Other x-ray techniques for magnetism L. Paolasini - LECTURES ON MAGNETISM- LECT.1 LECTURE 1: “WHY SPINS SPIN?” Historical view. Classical and quantum mechanics. Self-rotating electron model. Spin algebra and coupling of two spins. Reference books: - Stephen Blundell: “Magnetism in Condensed Matter”, Oxford Master series in Condensed Matter Physics. - Sin-itiro Tomonaga: “The story of spin”, University of Chicago press. L. Paolasini - LECTURES ON MAGNETISM- LECT.1 Magnetism from the beginning L. Paolasini - LECTURES ON MAGNETISM- LECT.1 The magnetic moment The fundamental object in Magnetism is the elementary magnetic moment dμ (or magnetic dipole), which can be defined in classical electromagnetism as: “ an electric current I circulating in a vanishingly small and oriented loop dS” dS The magnetic moment μassociated to a finite loop size is obtained by integrating the infinitesimal current loops. NOTICE: the currents in the infinitesimal adiacent loops cancel each other, leaving only the periferical current I. L. Paolasini - LECTURES ON MAGNETISM- LECT.1 The angular momentum The magnetic moments are generated by rotating charged particles (such as the atomic electrons). The angular momentum L is due to the rotation of these massive particles, and is always connected with the magnetic moment: ! γ = gyromagnetic ratio EINSTEIN-de HAAS-Effect (1915) Ampère's conjecture in 1820: ”Magnetism is caused by circulation of electric charges” A suspended ferromagnetic rod rotates when a magnetic field is applied. This is due to the conservation of angular momentum and the rotation is opposite to the magnetization direction. L. Paolasini - LECTURES ON MAGNETISM- LECT.1 Definition of Bohr Magneton μB Hydrogen atom: - electron charge -e - mass me - circular orbit at distance r Electron current: I = −e/ τ Orbital period: τ = 2π r/v Angular momentum of electron: L = mevr = ! (= ) Angular momentum is oppositely direct with respect to the magnetic dipole moment because the negative electron charge. Because µ=γ L =γ ! => γ = -e/2me and ωL= eB/2me L. Paolasini - LECTURES ON MAGNETISM- LECT.1 Magnetic moment precession The energy of a magnetic dipole in a static magnetic field is A torque act perpendicularly to µ and B and is equal to the rate of change of L, G = dL/dt Equation of motion: The moment µ precess around the magnetic field with constant modulus |µ| at Larmor’s precession frequency … like a spinning top or a gyroscope! L. Paolasini - LECTURES ON MAGNETISM- LECT.1 Magnetization and magnetic field “Macroscopic” magnetization M= µ/v: magnetic moment per unit volume Magnetic vector fields B or H (B is called also magnetic induction) B is measured in Tesla, H in A/m In the free space (vacuum): M=0 B= µ0 H -7 -1 where µ0= 4π 10 Hm is the vacuum permeability In the solids: M≠0 B= µ0 (H + M) B could different from H in direction and magnitude. In the linear materials: M= χ H where χ is the magnetic susceptibility B= µ0 (1+χ)H = µ0µr H where µr= (1+χ) is the relative permeability L. Paolasini - LECTURES ON MAGNETISM- LECT.1 Magnetization of a system of electrons Magnetization of a system of electrons: magnetic moment per unit volume that is induced by a magnetic field B is proportional to the rate of change of energy of the system. Bohr-van Leeuwen theorem: “In a classical system there is no thermal equilibrium magnetization” Lorentz force F=-e v x B: The magnetic field produces forces perpendicular to the particle velocity. No work is done! As a consequence, the energy of the system does not depends on the applied magnetic field B The magnetization must be zero in a classical system! The classical mechanics cannot explain the existence of magnetic materials!! . L. Paolasini - LECTURES ON MAGNETISM- LECT.1 Quantum mechanics and quantum numbers L. Paolasini - LECTURES ON MAGNETISM- LECT.1 Hydrogen spectrum 1913 Niels Bohr: “Theory for the spectrum of hydrogen atom, based on quantum theory that energy is transferred only in certain well defined quantities” n = principal quantum number (integral positive) size of electron orbit k = subordinate quantum number (integral positive) N. Bohr shape of the orbit (S, P, D … for k=1,2,3 …) denotes also the orbital angular momentum (unit ħ) m = magnetic quantum number (integral) components of the angular momentum vector k along the magnetic field (Zeeman split) Rules: “space quantization of angular momentum” n ≥ k m+1 ! k+1 ! k m # m -k ≤ m ≤k (2k+1 values) " k-1 " m-1 PS: k and m introduced by Sommerfield in 1916 L. Paolasini - LECTURES ON MAGNETISM- LECT.1 Inner quantum numbers “Find the origin of the spectral multiplicity in the Zeeman effect” A. Sommerfeld A. Landé W. Pauli To classify the variety of the levels in a multiplet term Sommerfeld introduced in 1920 the inner quantum number j. Now m specify the sublevels which are split for a level defined by n,k,j by a magnetic field, and -j ≤ m ≤j j+1 m+1 ! k+1 ! ! k j # j m # m " k-1 " j-1 " m-1 Because experimentally transitions occur only between the terms with the same multiplicity of differing by 2, Landé introduced a supplementary quantum number R: R=1/2 singlets R=multiplicity/2 R=1 doublets R=3/2 triplets L. Paolasini - LECTURES ON MAGNETISM- LECT.1 Spectral terms of alkali atoms Na Sodium have two closely spaced levels Doublets: multiplicity=2 E (cm-1) Inner quantum numbers for alkali doublet terms L. Paolasini - LECTURES ON MAGNETISM- LECT.1 Spectral terms of alkaline earths Singlets: multiplicity=1 Mg Triplets: multiplicity=3 L. Paolasini - LECTURES ON MAGNETISM- LECT.1 Lande, Sommerfeld and Pauli Ersatzmodell “A radiant electron moves in an electric field created by the core electrons and the atomic nucleus. In general, the core electrons are not spherical symmetric but have an angular momentum, which originates an internal Zeeman splitting. ” Landé Ersatzmodell: The core is have an orbital momentum R and then a magnetic moment µR=-g0R. The total angular momentum of the system is J=K+R, where K=-µK is the angular momentum of radiant electron associated to it : K=k-1/2 |R-K|+1/2 ≤ J≤ |R+K|-1/2 -J+1/2 ≤ m ≤ J-1/2 Sommerfeld Ersatzmodell: The core angular momentum is j0=(multiplicity-1)/2 and the total angular momentum j=ja+j0, where ja=k-1: ja=k-1 (=l) |j0-ja|≤ j≤ |j0+ja| -j ≤ m ≤ j Pauli Ersatzmodell: The core angular momentum is r=(multiplicity+1)/2 and the total angular momentum JP=r+k, where ja=k-1: k=k |k-r|+1≤JP≤ |k+r|-1 -JP+1 ≤ m ≤ JP-1 L. Paolasini - LECTURES ON MAGNETISM- LECT.1 Model limitations. The Landé model succeeded in deriving the rule for the multiplet splitting, confirming a large amounth of experimental results … apart for very light atoms like He and Li!! Splitting ratio in triplet terms . ΔWmag= cost. (J-1/2) Another inconsistency was found in the calculation of the values of ΔWmag in alkali doublets using the core-electron magnetic forces. The idea that the origin of the multiplicity is not due to the electron core but the electron itself became to appears in 1924. Pauli says: “The very fact that the two electrons in He have to play entirely different roles – one for electron core and the other the radiant electron- is the failure of the model”. “The doublet structure of alkalis spectra and the breakdown of Larmor theorem is caused by the strange two-valuedness of quantum-theoretical properties of the radiant electron which cannot be described classically.” L. Paolasini - LECTURES ON MAGNETISM- LECT.1 Self rotating electron model Proposed originally by R. Kronig in 1925 but never published! “An electron rotating about its own axis and with an angular momentum of self-rotation of ½ and a g-factor g0=2” R. Kronig Uhnlenbeck and Goudsmith The interaction between the magnetic moments generated by the self-rotation and the orbital motion could be derived through relativity … … and then calculate the interval between the multiplet terms. Landé empirical expression Kronig model and relativistic calculation Because g0=2, these demonstration fail completely by a factor 2 and Pauli strongly reject this theory! Problems arise also for the necessity to have a fast rotation of the electron to have an orbital moment of ½ (surface speed 10 time c!). … 6 months later Uhnlenbeck and Goudsmith publish in Naturwissenschaften this “wrong” theory. L. Paolasini - LECTURES ON MAGNETISM- LECT.1 The Thomas ½ factor 1926: Thomas introduce a correction to the spin-orbit interaction which take into account the relativistic “time dilatation” between electron and nucleus of an atom. The electron rest frame is not inertial, but is accelerated, and it rotates with respect to the laboratory system. As a result, the Larmor precession of µe of the electron in the magnetic field generate by its relativistic motion is not the same Llewellyn H. Thomas as seem in the laboratory system. When this correction is taken into account, the calculation of level intervals became in accord with experiment and given by: … this expression is half of that calculated by the Kronig and Uhnlenbeck/Goudsmith L.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Magnetism, Magnetic Properties, Magnetochemistry
    Magnetism, Magnetic Properties, Magnetochemistry 1 Magnetism All matter is electronic Positive/negative charges - bound by Coulombic forces Result of electric field E between charges, electric dipole Electric and magnetic fields = the electromagnetic interaction (Oersted, Maxwell) Electric field = electric +/ charges, electric dipole Magnetic field ??No source?? No magnetic charges, N-S No magnetic monopole Magnetic field = motion of electric charges (electric current, atomic motions) Magnetic dipole – magnetic moment = i A [A m2] 2 Electromagnetic Fields 3 Magnetism Magnetic field = motion of electric charges • Macro - electric current • Micro - spin + orbital momentum Ampère 1822 Poisson model Magnetic dipole – magnetic (dipole) moment [A m2] i A 4 Ampere model Magnetism Microscopic explanation of source of magnetism = Fundamental quantum magnets Unpaired electrons = spins (Bohr 1913) Atomic building blocks (protons, neutrons and electrons = fermions) possess an intrinsic magnetic moment Relativistic quantum theory (P. Dirac 1928) SPIN (quantum property ~ rotation of charged particles) Spin (½ for all fermions) gives rise to a magnetic moment 5 Atomic Motions of Electric Charges The origins for the magnetic moment of a free atom Motions of Electric Charges: 1) The spins of the electrons S. Unpaired spins give a paramagnetic contribution. Paired spins give a diamagnetic contribution. 2) The orbital angular momentum L of the electrons about the nucleus, degenerate orbitals, paramagnetic contribution. The change in the orbital moment
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Spectropolarimetry and the Sun's Hidden
    QUANTUM SPECTROPOLARIMETRY AND THE SUN’S HIDDEN MAGNETISM Javier Trujillo Bueno∗ Instituto de Astrof´ısica de Canarias; 38205 La Laguna; Tenerife; Spain ABSTRACT The dynamic jets that we call spicules. • The magnetic fields that confine the plasma of solar • Solar physicists can now proclaim with confidence that prominences. with the Zeeman effect and the available telescopes we The magnetism of the solar transition region and can see only 1% of the complex magnetism of the Sun. • corona. This is indeed∼regrettable because many of the key prob- lems of solar and stellar physics, such as the magnetic coupling to the outer atmosphere and the coronal heat- Unfortunately, our empirical knowledge of the Sun’s hid- ing, will only be solved after deciphering how signifi- den magnetism is still very primitive, especially concern- cant is the small-scale magnetic activity of the remain- ing the outer solar atmosphere (chromosphere, transition ing 99%. The first part of this paper1 presents a gentle ∼ region and corona). This is very regrettable because many introduction to Quantum Spectropolarimetry, emphasiz- of the physical challenges of solar and stellar physics ing the importance of developing reliable diagnostic tools arise precisely from magnetic processes taking place in that take proper account of the Paschen-Back effect, scat- such outer regions. tering polarization and the Hanle effect. The second part of the article highlights how the application of quantum One option to improve the situation is to work hard to spectropolarimetry to solar physics has the potential to achieve a powerful (European?) ground-based solar fa- revolutionize our empirical understanding of the Sun’s cility optimized for high-resolution spectropolarimetric hidden magnetism.
    [Show full text]
  • Dirac Notation Frank Rioux
    Elements of Dirac Notation Frank Rioux In the early days of quantum theory, P. A. M. (Paul Adrian Maurice) Dirac created a powerful and concise formalism for it which is now referred to as Dirac notation or bra-ket (bracket ) notation. Two major mathematical traditions emerged in quantum mechanics: Heisenberg’s matrix mechanics and Schrödinger’s wave mechanics. These distinctly different computational approaches to quantum theory are formally equivalent, each with its particular strengths in certain applications. Heisenberg’s variation, as its name suggests, is based matrix and vector algebra, while Schrödinger’s approach requires integral and differential calculus. Dirac’s notation can be used in a first step in which the quantum mechanical calculation is described or set up. After this is done, one chooses either matrix or wave mechanics to complete the calculation, depending on which method is computationally the most expedient. Kets, Bras, and Bra-Ket Pairs In Dirac’s notation what is known is put in a ket, . So, for example, p expresses the fact that a particle has momentum p. It could also be more explicit: p = 2 , the particle has momentum equal to 2; x = 1.23 , the particle has position 1.23. Ψ represents a system in the state Q and is therefore called the state vector. The ket can also be interpreted as the initial state in some transition or event. The bra represents the final state or the language in which you wish to express the content of the ket . For example,x =Ψ.25 is the probability amplitude that a particle in state Q will be found at position x = .25.
    [Show full text]
  • Dirac Equation - Wikipedia
    Dirac equation - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_equation Dirac equation From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia In particle physics, the Dirac equation is a relativistic wave equation derived by British physicist Paul Dirac in 1928. In its free form, or including electromagnetic interactions, it 1 describes all spin-2 massive particles such as electrons and quarks for which parity is a symmetry. It is consistent with both the principles of quantum mechanics and the theory of special relativity,[1] and was the first theory to account fully for special relativity in the context of quantum mechanics. It was validated by accounting for the fine details of the hydrogen spectrum in a completely rigorous way. The equation also implied the existence of a new form of matter, antimatter, previously unsuspected and unobserved and which was experimentally confirmed several years later. It also provided a theoretical justification for the introduction of several component wave functions in Pauli's phenomenological theory of spin; the wave functions in the Dirac theory are vectors of four complex numbers (known as bispinors), two of which resemble the Pauli wavefunction in the non-relativistic limit, in contrast to the Schrödinger equation which described wave functions of only one complex value. Moreover, in the limit of zero mass, the Dirac equation reduces to the Weyl equation. Although Dirac did not at first fully appreciate the importance of his results, the entailed explanation of spin as a consequence of the union of quantum mechanics and relativity—and the eventual discovery of the positron—represents one of the great triumphs of theoretical physics.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Trajectories: Real Or Surreal?
    entropy Article Quantum Trajectories: Real or Surreal? Basil J. Hiley * and Peter Van Reeth * Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK * Correspondence: [email protected] (B.J.H.); [email protected] (P.V.R.) Received: 8 April 2018; Accepted: 2 May 2018; Published: 8 May 2018 Abstract: The claim of Kocsis et al. to have experimentally determined “photon trajectories” calls for a re-examination of the meaning of “quantum trajectories”. We will review the arguments that have been assumed to have established that a trajectory has no meaning in the context of quantum mechanics. We show that the conclusion that the Bohm trajectories should be called “surreal” because they are at “variance with the actual observed track” of a particle is wrong as it is based on a false argument. We also present the results of a numerical investigation of a double Stern-Gerlach experiment which shows clearly the role of the spin within the Bohm formalism and discuss situations where the appearance of the quantum potential is open to direct experimental exploration. Keywords: Stern-Gerlach; trajectories; spin 1. Introduction The recent claims to have observed “photon trajectories” [1–3] calls for a re-examination of what we precisely mean by a “particle trajectory” in the quantum domain. Mahler et al. [2] applied the Bohm approach [4] based on the non-relativistic Schrödinger equation to interpret their results, claiming their empirical evidence supported this approach producing “trajectories” remarkably similar to those presented in Philippidis, Dewdney and Hiley [5]. However, the Schrödinger equation cannot be applied to photons because photons have zero rest mass and are relativistic “particles” which must be treated differently.
    [Show full text]
  • 4 Nuclear Magnetic Resonance
    Chapter 4, page 1 4 Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Pieter Zeeman observed in 1896 the splitting of optical spectral lines in the field of an electromagnet. Since then, the splitting of energy levels proportional to an external magnetic field has been called the "Zeeman effect". The "Zeeman resonance effect" causes magnetic resonances which are classified under radio frequency spectroscopy (rf spectroscopy). In these resonances, the transitions between two branches of a single energy level split in an external magnetic field are measured in the megahertz and gigahertz range. In 1944, Jevgeni Konstantinovitch Savoiski discovered electron paramagnetic resonance. Shortly thereafter in 1945, nuclear magnetic resonance was demonstrated almost simultaneously in Boston by Edward Mills Purcell and in Stanford by Felix Bloch. Nuclear magnetic resonance was sometimes called nuclear induction or paramagnetic nuclear resonance. It is generally abbreviated to NMR. So as not to scare prospective patients in medicine, reference to the "nuclear" character of NMR is dropped and the magnetic resonance based imaging systems (scanner) found in hospitals are simply referred to as "magnetic resonance imaging" (MRI). 4.1 The Nuclear Resonance Effect Many atomic nuclei have spin, characterized by the nuclear spin quantum number I. The absolute value of the spin angular momentum is L =+h II(1). (4.01) The component in the direction of an applied field is Lz = Iz h ≡ m h. (4.02) The external field is usually defined along the z-direction. The magnetic quantum number is symbolized by Iz or m and can have 2I +1 values: Iz ≡ m = −I, −I+1, ..., I−1, I.
    [Show full text]
  • Perturbation Theory and Exact Solutions
    PERTURBATION THEORY AND EXACT SOLUTIONS by J J. LODDER R|nhtdnn Report 76~96 DISSIPATIVE MOTION PERTURBATION THEORY AND EXACT SOLUTIONS J J. LODOER ASSOCIATIE EURATOM-FOM Jun»»76 FOM-INST1TUUT VOOR PLASMAFYSICA RUNHUIZEN - JUTPHAAS - NEDERLAND DISSIPATIVE MOTION PERTURBATION THEORY AND EXACT SOLUTIONS by JJ LODDER R^nhuizen Report 76-95 Thisworkwat performed at part of th«r«Mvchprogmmncof thcHMCiattofiafrccmentof EnratoniOTd th« Stichting voor FundtmenteelOiutereoek der Matctk" (FOM) wtihnnmcWMppoft from the Nederhmdie Organiutic voor Zuiver Wetemchap- pcigk Onderzoek (ZWO) and Evntom It it abo pabHtfMd w a the* of Ac Univenrty of Utrecht CONTENTS page SUMMARY iii I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. GENERALIZED FUNCTIONS DEFINED ON DISCONTINUOUS TEST FUNC­ TIONS AND THEIR FOURIER, LAPLACE, AND HILBERT TRANSFORMS 1. Introduction 4 2. Discontinuous test functions 5 3. Differentiation 7 4. Powers of x. The partie finie 10 5. Fourier transforms 16 6. Laplace transforms 20 7. Hubert transforms 20 8. Dispersion relations 21 III. PERTURBATION THEORY 1. Introduction 24 2. Arbitrary potential, momentum coupling 24 3. Dissipative equation of motion 31 4. Expectation values 32 5. Matrix elements, transition probabilities 33 6. Harmonic oscillator 36 7. Classical mechanics and quantum corrections 36 8. Discussion of the Pu strength function 38 IV. EXACTLY SOLVABLE MODELS FOR DISSIPATIVE MOTION 1. Introduction 40 2. General quadratic Kami1tonians 41 3. Differential equations 46 4. Classical mechanics and quantum corrections 49 5. Equation of motion for observables 51 V. SPECIAL QUADRATIC HAMILTONIANS 1. Introduction 53 2. Hamiltcnians with coordinate coupling 53 3. Double coordinate coupled Hamiltonians 62 4. Symmetric Hamiltonians 63 i page VI. DISCUSSION 1. Introduction 66 ?.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 Angular Momentum and Spin
    Chapter 5 Angular Momentum and Spin I think you and Uhlenbeck have been very lucky to get your spinning electron published and talked about before Pauli heard of it. It appears that more than a year ago Kronig believed in the spinning electron and worked out something; the first person he showed it to was Pauli. Pauli rediculed the whole thing so much that the first person became also the last ... – Thompson (in a letter to Goudsmit) The first experiment that is often mentioned in the context of the electron’s spin and magnetic moment is the Einstein–de Haas experiment. It was designed to test Amp`ere’s idea that magnetism is caused by “molecular currents”. Such circular currents, while generating a magnetic field, would also contribute to the angular momentum of a ferromagnet. Therefore a change in the direction of the magnetization induced by an external field has to lead to a small rotation of the material in order to preserve the total angular momentum. For a quantitative understanding of the effect we consider a charged particle of mass m and charge q rotating with velocity v on a circle of radius r. Since the particle passes through its orbit v/(2πr) times per second the resulting current I = qv/(2πr), which encircles an area A = r2π, generates a magnetic dipole moment µ = IA/c, qv IA qv r2π qvr q q I = µ = = = = L = γL, γ = , (5.1) 2πr ⇒ c 2πr c 2c 2mc 2mc where L~ = m~r ~v is the angular momentum. Now the essential observation is that the × gyromagnetic ratio γ = µ/L is independent of the radius of the motion.
    [Show full text]
  • The Zeeman Effect
    THE ZEEMAN EFFECT OBJECT: To measure how an applied magnetic field affects the optical emission spectra of mercury vapor and neon. The results are compared with the expectations derived from the vector model for the addition of atomic angular momenta. A value of the electron charge to mass ratio, e/m, is derived from the data. Background: Electrons in atoms can be characterized by a unique set of discrete energy states. When excited through heating or electron bombardment in a discharge tube, the atom is excited to a level above the ground state. When returning to a lower energy state, it emits the extra energy as a photon whose energy corresponds to the difference in energy between the two states. The emitted light forms a discrete spectrum, reflecting the quantized nature of the energy levels. In the presence of a magnetic field, these energy levels can shift. This effect is known as the Zeeman effect. Zeeman discovered the effect in 1896 and obtained the charge to mass ratio e/m of the electron (one year before Thompson’s measurement) by measuring the spectral line broadening of a sodium discharge tube in a magnetic field. At the time neither the existence of the electron nor nucleus were known. Quantum mechanics was not to be invented for another decade. Zeeman’s colleague, Lorentz, was able to explain the observation by postulating the existence of a moving “corpuscular charge” that radiates electromagnetic waves. (See supplementary reading on the discovery) Qualitatively the Zeeman effect can be understood as follows. In an atomic energy state, an electron orbits around the nucleus of the atom and has a magnetic dipole moment associated with its angular momentum.
    [Show full text]
  • Type of Presentation: Poster IT-16-P-3287 Electron Vortex Beam
    Type of presentation: Poster IT-16-P-3287 Electron vortex beam diffraction via multislice solutions of the Pauli equation Edström A.1, Rusz J.1 1Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University Email of the presenting author: [email protected] Electron magnetic circular dichroism (EMCD) has gained plenty of attention as a possible route to high resolution measurements of, for example, magnetic properties of matter via electron microscopy. However, certain issues, such as low signal-to-noise ratio, have been problematic to the applicability. In recent years, electron vortex beams\cite{Uchida2010,Verbeeck2010}, i.e. electron beams which carry orbital angular momentum and are described by wavefunctions with a phase winding, have attracted interest as potential alternative way of measuring EMCD signals. Recent work has shown that vortex beams can be produced with a large orbital moment in the order of l = 100 [6, 7]. Huge orbital moments might introduce new effects from magnetic interactions such as spin-orbit coupling. The multislice method[2] provides a powerful computational tool for theoretical studies of electron microscopy. However, the method traditionally relies on the conventional Schrödinger equation which neglects relativistic effects such as spin-orbit coupling. Traditional multislice methods could therefore be inadequate in studying the diffraction of vortex beams with large orbital angular momentum. Relativistic multislice simulations have previously been done with a negligible difference to non-relativistic simulations[4], but vortex beams have not been considered in such work. In this work, we derive a new multislice approach based on the Pauli equation, Eq. 1, where q = −e is the electron charge, m = γm0 is the relativistically corrected mass, p = −i ∇ is the momentum operator, B = ∇ × A is the magnetic flux density while A is the vector potential and σ = (σx , σy , σz ) contains the Pauli matrices.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 the Dirac Formalism and Hilbert Spaces
    Chapter 5 The Dirac Formalism and Hilbert Spaces In the last chapter we introduced quantum mechanics using wave functions defined in position space. We identified the Fourier transform of the wave function in position space as a wave function in the wave vector or momen­ tum space. Expectation values of operators that represent observables of the system can be computed using either representation of the wavefunc­ tion. Obviously, the physics must be independent whether represented in position or wave number space. P.A.M. Dirac was the first to introduce a representation-free notation for the quantum mechanical state of the system and operators representing physical observables. He realized that quantum mechanical expectation values could be rewritten. For example the expected value of the Hamiltonian can be expressed as ψ∗ (x) Hop ψ (x) dx = ψ Hop ψ , (5.1) h | | i Z = ψ ϕ , (5.2) h | i with ϕ = Hop ψ . (5.3) | i | i Here, ψ and ϕ are vectors in a Hilbert-Space, which is yet to be defined. For exampl| i e, c|omi plex functions of one variable, ψ(x), that are square inte­ 241 242 CHAPTER 5. THE DIRAC FORMALISM AND HILBERT SPACES grable, i.e. ψ∗ (x) ψ (x) dx < , (5.4) ∞ Z 2 formt heHilbert-Spaceofsquareintegrablefunctionsdenoteda s L. In Dirac notation this is ψ∗ (x) ψ (x) dx = ψ ψ . (5.5) h | i Z Orthogonality relations can be rewritten as ψ∗ (x) ψ (x) dx = ψ ψ = δmn. (5.6) m n h m| ni Z As see aboveexpressions look likeabrackethecalledthe vector ψn aket­ vector and ψ a bra-vector.
    [Show full text]
  • Relativistic Quantum Mechanics 1
    Relativistic Quantum Mechanics 1 The aim of this chapter is to introduce a relativistic formalism which can be used to describe particles and their interactions. The emphasis 1.1 SpecialRelativity 1 is given to those elements of the formalism which can be carried on 1.2 One-particle states 7 to Relativistic Quantum Fields (RQF), which underpins the theoretical 1.3 The Klein–Gordon equation 9 framework of high energy particle physics. We begin with a brief summary of special relativity, concentrating on 1.4 The Diracequation 14 4-vectors and spinors. One-particle states and their Lorentz transforma- 1.5 Gaugesymmetry 30 tions follow, leading to the Klein–Gordon and the Dirac equations for Chaptersummary 36 probability amplitudes; i.e. Relativistic Quantum Mechanics (RQM). Readers who want to get to RQM quickly, without studying its foun- dation in special relativity can skip the first sections and start reading from the section 1.3. Intrinsic problems of RQM are discussed and a region of applicability of RQM is defined. Free particle wave functions are constructed and particle interactions are described using their probability currents. A gauge symmetry is introduced to derive a particle interaction with a classical gauge field. 1.1 Special Relativity Einstein’s special relativity is a necessary and fundamental part of any Albert Einstein 1879 - 1955 formalism of particle physics. We begin with its brief summary. For a full account, refer to specialized books, for example (1) or (2). The- ory oriented students with good mathematical background might want to consult books on groups and their representations, for example (3), followed by introductory books on RQM/RQF, for example (4).
    [Show full text]