DOCSLIB.ORG

31295015501306.Pdf (1.378Mb)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
31295015501306.Pdf (1.378Mb) A STUDY OF TK3 MGN3TIC PROPERTIES OF FERROCYAKTDij^S AND FERRICYANIDES by JACK ED7ARD RANDORFF, B. S. A THESIS IN PHYSICS Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Technological College in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCISIICE Approved Accented June, 1967 f^(A^fjin Cop. a ACKNO/JLEDGS-IENTS I am deeply appreciative of Dr. Billy J. I4arshall for his direction of this thesis; to the Robert A. Welch Foundation of Texas for financial support given to this project; to Dr. V/, 0, Milligan, research director of the forementioned Foundatior^ for the helpful and stimulating discussion with regard to this work and to his research group at Baylor University for the preparation of samples; and to the U. S. Department of Health, Education and V'elfrro for tho presentation of an N,D,E,A. Title IV Fellowship as financial support to pursue this study. ii TABLE OF COirrSxNTS ACKNO'WLEDG&IEOTS ii TABLE OF CONTENTS iii LIST OF TABLES iv LIST OF FIGURES v I, INTRODUCnON 1 II. EXPERIMEOTAL TECHMIQUE 3 Sample Preparation 3 Apparatus 3 Temperature Control and Detection 5 Calibrations and Corrections 6 Set-up Procedure 8 III, RESULTS Aim Discussion l6 IV. FUTURE WORK 33 LIST OF REFERENCES 34 APPENDIX I 35 APPENDIX II 42 APPENDIX III 43 iii LIST OF TABLES Table 1, The values of susceptibility and temperature.,, 19 Table 2, Effective number of Bohr Diagnetons per atom or per molecule, 20 iv LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1, Apparatus Assembly. 9 Figure lA. Internal view of Cahn RM Automatic Electrobalance, 10 Figure 2. Schematic of Germanium Probe Thermometer Current Standard, 11 Figure 3, Detail of Dewar Assembly, 12 Figure 4. Sample Arrangement and Associated Apparatus, 13 Figure 5» Plot of Am/m versus Fieldial Regulator Readings for diamagnetic results, 14 Figure 6, Plot of A^/m versus Fieldial Regulator Readings for paramagnetic results, 15 Figure ?. Plot of x x 10^ vs. T for Fe3(Fe(CN)5)2. 21 Figure 8. Plot of x x 10^ vs. T for ?Qi^{FeiCi:i)^)y 22 Figure 9. Plot of x x 10^ vs, T for Cu3(Fe(CIl)^)2^ 23 Figure 10, Pl^ot of x x 10^ vs. T for Cu2Fe(CN)£. 24 Figure 11. Plot of x x 10^ vs. T for Cu2Fe(CN)5*, 25 Figure 12. Plot of x x 10^ vs. T for Cd3(Fe(CN)5)2. 26 Figure 13. Plot of l/x^ vs. T for Fe3(Fe(CN)^)2. 2? Figure 14, Plot of l/x^ vs, T for Fei^(Fe(CN)5)3. 28 Figure 15. Plot of l/x^.j vs, T for Cu3(Fe(CN)^)2. 29 Figure 16. Plot of l/x- vs, T for Cu2Fe(CN)5. 30 Figure 1?. Plot of l/x^ vs. T for Cu2Fe(C.l)5*. 31 Figure 18. Plot of l/x^., vs. T for Cd3(Fe(CN)5)2. 32 Fitnire 19. Energy levels splitting schame... 3^ •^s CHAPTER I lOTRODUCTION According to the existing theoiy, all substances in nature are diariiagnetic and a relatively few exhibit a paramagnetism which overshadows the diamagnetic properties. Those substances which exhibit a negative magnetic susceptibility are termed diamagnetic while those displaying a positive susceptibility are classified as paramagnetic. Appendix I relates the theory associated vdth each effect. In the late 1920's, questions began to arise over the fori^iation of certain iron-cyanides. The argument centered around two substances in particular, Prussian blue, Fe4(Fe(CN)^)o, and Turnbull's blue, Fe3(Fe(CN)^)2. The original thought was that ferric salts interacting with alkali ferrocyanides gave Prussian blue and the interaction of ferrous salts and alkali ferricyanides produced Turnbull's blue. The problem is actually complicated because of the oxidation-reduction reaction which occurs upon mixing iron salts and alkali iron-cyanides. Some authorities have supported the production of Prussian blue in both cases wliile others have supported Turnbull's blue. X-ray diffraction and density measurements have failed to resolve this disagreement. In an attempt to answer this question, a systematic study of the magnetic properties of ferrocyanide and ferricyanide coiTipounds has boen undertaken, Ferrocyanide is characterised by Fe(CM)^ while ferricyanide is denoted by Fe(CN)^ • As a further study and to attempt a clearer understanding of the nature of these •t^ compounds, the magnetic properties of Cu2Fe(CN)^, Cuo(Fe(CK)^)2 and Cd3(Fe(CN)^)2 will be discussed. The study was conducted by observing the behavior of the magnetic susceptibilities as a function of the temperature over a range of approximately 2 to 300° Kelvin, CHAPTER II EXPERIMENTAL TECHNIQUE SAMPLE PREPARATION The sample crystals were obtained from Dr. W. 0, Milligan's research group at Baylor University, (The methods for crystal 2 "^ growth are given by I'^-lligan and Davidson-^, For instance, Fe^(Fe(CN)^)^ is formed by combination of ferric and ferrocyanide ions and Fe3(Fe(CN)^)2 is formed id.th ferrous and ferricyanide ions.) The sample material was in the form of a fine poxder, hence it had to be placed in a container before measurements could be made. The container consisted of a spiall glass bubble irdth the approximate dimensions: 1,5 millimeters in diameter; stem, 1,5 centimeters in length; mass, 50 milligrams. The container was blo;>ni from a one millimeter diameter, low melting point, capillary tube. After being cleaned, the container's mass was measured and recorded. The sample material was placed in the bubble through the open stem and the total mass was recorded. The end of the stem was sealed and a glass hook attached. Mass measurements were made on a Mettler model B-6 Semi-Micro balance which gave an accuracy of 1 0.01 milligrarns. The masses of the samples studied varied from 0.31 to 2.7? milligrams, APPARATUS The susceptibilities were measured using the Faraday method , which consists of measuring the force exerted on a hypothetical point source of the magnetic material placed in a gradient magnetic field, H(3H/9Z). The equipment used in this research is shown in Figure 1. The gradient field, H(9H/9Z), was produced by a Varian model 3600-12 inch electromagnet, a Varian model V-FR2501 Fieldial Regulated 7 Kilowatt Power Supply and set of constant H(9H/9Z) pole faces. The sample \jas held, via the container, in the gradient field ty a thin glass fiber vrhich, as shoi-m in Figure 1 and Figure lA, was suspended from the lever arm of a Cahn RM Automatic Electrobalance. When the sample experienced a vertical force, it was transmitted immediately through the fiber to the lever arm which was momentarily displaced from equilibri\im. A servo signal was then relayed to an electromagnet in the balance which created a restoring torque equal to tho torque exerted by the sample. Thus the sample essentially remained in the same position. The servo signal vras directly proportional to the force change on the sample, hence this voltage was displayed on a Hewlett-Packard model 3440A digital voltmeter. We were thus able to obtain a continuous, visual readout. For our studies a signal of 1.0 millivolts corresponded to a mass change of 0.1 milligrams. The digital voltmeter was adjusted to read to the nearest 0.01 millivolt. As shown in Figure 1 and Figure 3> the sample was suspended inside a 3/4 inch pyrox glass tube which was connected to the Cahn balance ty a ball joint vacuum seal. The tube and balance were then evacuated to a pressure of 5 x 10"^ torr. The low temperature cryostat, as pictured in Figure 3» >^s designed such that the region above the cryogenic liquid in the inner De;«rar could be evacuated by a moans of a 120 cfm. Stokes pump. This was necessary to produce two more temperatures of investigation and allow cryogenic transfer in a closed atmosphere. The liquid helium and liquid nitrogen Devrars ijere purchased from the Scientific Glass Blowing Co, TEi^SRATU'RE COIITROL PJJD DETECTION Temperatures were measured using a copper-eonstantan thermocouple at room temperatures and a gennaniuin resistance thermometer at cryogenic temperatures. The thermocouple was obtained from the Leeds and Northi'up Co, while the germanium probe was purchased from Cryocal Inc, Calibrations for both sensors were obtained from the manufacturers. The potentials across the tvjo sensors were determined x-dth the aid of a Leeds and Northrup Guarded Potentiometer model 755^ and a D,C, Null Indicator model 983^1 • The germanium probe was adjusted to optimum current conditions as suggested by the manufacturer "vdth the use of a current calibration circuit as pictured in Figure 2, The ranges were 1°-2°K, 1,0 microamperes; 2°-15°K, 10 microamperes; 15°-40°K, 0,1 milliamperes. These ranges were the approximate temperatures of investigation. Determination of room temperature (300°K) gave no particular problem. The temperature was monitored by a copper-constantan thermocouple referenced to a second thermocouple in an ice bath and assumed to be at 273*^K. The approximate temperatures of 77°, ^^^^ 4,2° and 2°K were obtained vdth liquid nitrogen, pumped nitrogen, liqiiid helium and pumped helium, respectively, {By the term "pumped" it is meant that the equilibriuii vapor pressure of the liquid is reduced, hence lowering the temperature. This is maintained using a vacuum pur^p.) The position of the geiTJianium probe relative to the sample as indicated in Figure 4 i.^s about one centimeter. The temperature of the sample was assumed to be that of the germanium probe ty using a few microns pressure of helium exchange gas.
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]
  • Lecture #4, Matter/Energy Interactions, Emissions Spectra, Quantum Numbers
    Welcome to 3.091 Lecture 4 September 16, 2009 Matter/Energy Interactions: Atomic Spectra 3.091 Periodic Table Quiz 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 Name Grade /10 Image by MIT OpenCourseWare. Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden experiment Image by MIT OpenCourseWare. Bohr Postulates for the Hydrogen Atom 1. Rutherford atom is correct 2. Classical EM theory not applicable to orbiting e- 3. Newtonian mechanics applicable to orbiting e- 4. Eelectron = Ekinetic + Epotential 5. e- energy quantized through its angular momentum: L = mvr = nh/2π, n = 1, 2, 3,… 6. Planck-Einstein relation applies to e- transitions: ΔE = Ef - Ei = hν = hc/λ c = νλ _ _ 24 1 18 Bohr magneton µΒ = eh/2me 9.274 015 4(31) X 10 J T 0.34 _ _ 27 1 19 Nuclear magneton µΝ = eh/2mp 5.050 786 6(17) X 10 J T 0.34 _ 2 3 20 Fine structure constant α = µ0ce /2h 7.297 353 08(33) X 10 0.045 21 Inverse fine structure constant 1/α 137.035 989 5(61) 0.045 _ 2 1 22 Rydberg constant R¥ = mecα /2h 10 973 731.534(13) m 0.0012 23 Rydberg constant in eV R¥ hc/{e} 13.605 698 1(40) eV 0.30 _ 10 24 Bohr radius a0 = a/4πR¥ 0.529 177 249(24) X 10 m 0.045 _ _ 4 2 1 25 Quantum of circulation h/2me 3.636 948 07(33) X 10 m s 0.089 _ 11 1 26 Electron specific charge -e/me -1.758 819 62(53) X 10 C kg 0.30 _ 12 27 Electron Compton wavelength λC = h/mec 2.426 310 58(22) X 10 m 0.089 _ 2 15 28 Electron classical radius re = α a0 2.817 940 92(38) X 10 m 0.13 _ _ 26 1 29 Electron magnetic moment` µe 928.477 01(31) X 10 J T 0.34 _ _ 3 30 Electron mag.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Physical Constants 1 1
    1. Physical constants 1 1. PHYSICAL CONSTANTS Table 1.1. Reviewed 1998 by B.N. Taylor (NIST). Based mainly on the “1986 Adjustment of the Fundamental Physical Constants” by E.R. Cohen and B.N. Taylor, Rev. Mod. Phys. 59, 1121 (1987). The last group of constants (beginning with the Fermi coupling constant) comes from the Particle Data Group. The figures in parentheses after the values give the 1-standard- deviation uncertainties in the last digits; the corresponding uncertainties in parts per million (ppm) are given in the last column. This set of constants (aside from the last group) is recommended for international use by CODATA (the Committee on Data for Science and Technology). Since the 1986 adjustment, new experiments have yielded improved values for a number of constants, including the Rydberg constant R∞, the Planck constant h, the fine- structure constant α, and the molar gas constant R,and hence also for constants directly derived from these, such as the Boltzmann constant k and Stefan-Boltzmann constant σ. The new results and their impact on the 1986 recommended values are discussed extensively in “Recommended Values of the Fundamental Physical Constants: A Status Report,” B.N. Taylor and E.R. Cohen, J. Res. Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. 95, 497 (1990); see also E.R. Cohen and B.N. Taylor, “The Fundamental Physical Constants,” Phys. Today, August 1997 Part 2, BG7. In general, the new results give uncertainties for the affected constants that are 5 to 7 times smaller than the 1986 uncertainties, but the changes in the values themselves are smaller than twice the 1986 uncertainties.
    [Show full text]
  • Magnetism in Transition Metal Complexes
    Magnetism for Chemists I. Introduction to Magnetism II. Survey of Magnetic Behavior III. Van Vleck’s Equation III. Applications A. Complexed ions and SOC B. Inter-Atomic Magnetic “Exchange” Interactions © 2012, K.S. Suslick Magnetism Intro 1. Magnetic properties depend on # of unpaired e- and how they interact with one another. 2. Magnetic susceptibility measures ease of alignment of electron spins in an external magnetic field . 3. Magnetic response of e- to an external magnetic field ~ 1000 times that of even the most magnetic nuclei. 4. Best definition of a magnet: a solid in which more electrons point in one direction than in any other direction © 2012, K.S. Suslick 1 Uses of Magnetic Susceptibility 1. Determine # of unpaired e- 2. Magnitude of Spin-Orbit Coupling. 3. Thermal populations of low lying excited states (e.g., spin-crossover complexes). 4. Intra- and Inter- Molecular magnetic exchange interactions. © 2012, K.S. Suslick Response to a Magnetic Field • For a given Hexternal, the magnetic field in the material is B B = Magnetic Induction (tesla) inside the material current I • Magnetic susceptibility, (dimensionless) B > 0 measures the vacuum = 0 material response < 0 relative to a vacuum. H © 2012, K.S. Suslick 2 Magnetic field definitions B – magnetic induction Two quantities H – magnetic intensity describing a magnetic field (Système Internationale, SI) In vacuum: B = µ0H -7 -2 µ0 = 4π · 10 N A - the permeability of free space (the permeability constant) B = H (cgs: centimeter, gram, second) © 2012, K.S. Suslick Magnetism: Definitions The magnetic field inside a substance differs from the free- space value of the applied field: → → → H = H0 + ∆H inside sample applied field shielding/deshielding due to induced internal field Usually, this equation is rewritten as (physicists use B for H): → → → B = H0 + 4 π M magnetic induction magnetization (mag.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture 41 (Spatial Quantization & Electron Spin)
    Lecture 41 (Spatial Quantization & Electron Spin) Physics 2310-01 Spring 2020 Douglas Fields Quantum States • Breaking Symmetry • Remember that degeneracies were the reflection of symmetries. What if we break some of the symmetry by introducing something that distinguishes one direction from another? • One way to do that is to introduce a magnetic field. • To investigate what happens when we do this, we will briefly use the Bohr model in order to calculate the effect of a magnetic field on an orbiting electron. • In the Bohr model, we can think of an electron causing a current loop. • This current loop causes a magnetic moment: • We can calculate the current and the area from a classical picture of the electron in a circular orbit: • Where the minus sign just reflects the fact that it is negatively charged, so that the current is in the opposite direction of the electron’s motion. Bohr Magneton • Now, we use the classical definition of angular momentum to put the magnetic moment in terms of the orbital angular momentum: • And now use the Bohr quantization for orbital angular momentum: • Which is called the Bohr magneton, the magnetic moment of a n=1 electron in Bohr’s model. Back to Breaking Symmetry • It turns out that the magnetic moment of an electron in the Schrödinger model has the same form as Bohr’s model: • Now, what happens again when we break a symmetry, say by adding an external magnetic field? Back to Breaking Symmetry • Thanks, yes, we should lose degeneracies. • But how and why? • Well, a magnetic moment in a magnetic field feels a torque: • And thus, it can have a potential energy: • Or, in our case: Zeeman Effect • This potential energy breaks the degeneracy and splits the degenerate energy levels into distinct energies.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 MAGNETIC NEUTRON SCATTERING
    Chapter 1 MAGNETIC NEUTRON SCATTERING. And Recent Developments in the Triple Axis Spectroscopy Igor A . Zaliznyak'" and Seung-Hun Lee(2) (')Department of Physics. Brookhaven National Laboratory. Upton. New York 11973-5000 (')National Institute of Standards and Technology. Gaithersburg. Maryland 20899 1. Introduction..................................................................................... 2 2 . Neutron interaction with matter and scattering cross-section ......... 6 2.1 Basic scattering theory and differential cross-section................. 7 2.2 Neutron interactions and scattering lengths ................................ 9 2.2.1 Nuclear scattering length .................................................. 10 2.2.2 Magnetic scattering length ................................................ 11 2.3 Factorization of the magnetic scattering length and the magnetic form factors ............................................................................................... 16 2.3.1 Magnetic form factors for Hund's ions: vector formalism19 2.3.2 Evaluating the form factors and dipole approximation..... 22 2.3.3 One-electron spin form factor beyond dipole approximation; anisotropic form factors for 3d electrons..................... 27 3 . Magnetic scattering by a crystal ................................................... 31 3.1 Elastic and quasi-elastic magnetic scattering............................ 34 3.2 Dynamical correlation function and dynamical magnetic susceptibility ............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • I Magnetism in Nature
    We begin by answering the first question: the I magnetic moment creates magnetic field lines (to which B is parallel) which resemble in shape of an Magnetism in apple’s core: Nature Lecture notes by Assaf Tal 1. Basic Spin Physics 1.1 Magnetism Before talking about magnetic resonance, we need to recount a few basic facts about magnetism. Mathematically, if we have a point magnetic Electromagnetism (EM) is the field of study moment m at the origin, and if r is a vector that deals with magnetic (B) and electric (E) fields, pointing from the origin to the point of and their interactions with matter. The basic entity observation, then: that creates electric fields is the electric charge. For example, the electron has a charge, q, and it creates 0 3m rˆ rˆ m q 1 B r 3 an electric field about it, E 2 rˆ , where r 40 r 4 r is a vector extending from the electron to the point of observation. The electric field, in turn, can act The magnitude of the generated magnetic field B on another electron or charged particle by applying is proportional to the size of the magnetic charge. a force F=qE. The direction of the magnetic moment determines the direction of the field lines. For example, if we tilt the moment, we tilt the lines with it: E E q q F Left: a (stationary) electric charge q will create a radial electric field about it. Right: a charge q in a constant electric field will experience a force F=qE.
    [Show full text]
  • Magnetic Susceptibility Measurements of Transition Metal Containing Compounds
    Magnetic susceptibility measurements of transition metal containing compounds Introduction: Measurements of magnetic properties have been used to characterize a wide range of systems from oxygen, metallic alloys, solid state materials, and coordination complexes containing metals. Most organic and main group element compounds have all the electrons paired and these are diamagnetic molecules with very small magnetic moments. All of the transition metals have at least one oxidation state with an incomplete d subshell. Magnetic measurements, particularly for the first row transition elements, give information about the number of unpaired electrons. The number of unpaired electrons provides information about the oxidation state and electron configuration. The determination of the magnetic properties of the second and third row transition elements is more complex. The magnetic moment is calculated from the magnetic susceptibility, since the magnetic moment is not measured directly. There are several ways to express the degree to which a material acquires a magnetic moment in a field. The magnetic susceptibility per unit volume is defined by: I H where I is the intensity of the magnetization induced in the sample by the external magnetic field, H. The extent of the magnetic induction (I) depends on the sample. The induction may be visualized as an alignment of dipoles and/or by the formation of charge polarization in the sample. H is the strength of the external magnetic field in units of oersteds (Oe). The κ is unitless. Generally, it is more convenient to use mass units, therefore the mass or gram susceptibility is defined as: g d where d is the density of the solid.
    [Show full text]
  • Magnetochemistry
    Magnetochemistry (12.7.06) H.J. Deiseroth, SS 2006 Magnetochemistry The magnetic moment of a single atom (µ) (µ is a vector !) μ µ μ = i F [Am2], circular current i, aerea F F -27 2 μB = eh/4πme = 0,9274 10 Am (h: Planck constant, me: electron mass) μB: „Bohr magneton“ (smallest quantity of a magnetic moment) → for one unpaired electron in an atom („spin only“): s μ = 1,73 μB Magnetochemistry → The magnetic moment of an atom has two components a spin component („spin moment“) and an orbital component („orbital moment“). →Frequently the orbital moment is supressed („spin-only- magnetism“, e.g. coordination compounds of 3d elements) Magnetisation M and susceptibility χ M = (∑ μ)/V ∑ μ: sum of all magnetic moments μ in a given volume V, dimension: [Am2/m3 = A/m] The actual magnetization of a given sample is composed of the „intrinsic“ magnetization (susceptibility χ) and an external field H: M = H χ (χ: suszeptibility) Magnetochemistry There are three types of susceptibilities: χV: dimensionless (volume susceptibility) 3 χg:[cm/g] (gramm susceptibility) 3 χm: [cm /mol] (molar susceptibility) !!!!! χm is used normally in chemistry !!!! Frequently: χ = f(H) → complications !! Magnetochemistry Diamagnetism - external field is weakened - atoms/ions/molecules with closed shells -4 -2 3 -10 < χm < -10 cm /mol (negative sign) Paramagnetism (van Vleck) - external field is strengthened - atoms/ions/molecules with open shells/unpaired electrons -4 -1 3 +10 < χm < 10 cm /mol → diamagnetism (core electrons) + paramagnetism (valence electrons) Magnetism
    [Show full text]
  • The Orbital Magnetic Moment in Terms of Bohr Magneton in the Vector Form Is
    Lecture 20 Title: Effect of Static Magnetic field on the spectral lines. Page-0 In this lecture we will discuss the effect of static magnetic field on the spectral lines. The effect is known as Zeeman effect and the pattern seen after applying the magnetic field is known as Zeeman pattern. We will also discuss the Normal and Anomalous Zeeman effect. We will see also the change of the Zeeman pattern when the magnetic field is increased. Page-1 When a source of light emitting line spectra is placed under a static magnetic field, it is observed that the spectral lines split into several components. Zeeman in 1896 first observed the phenomenon. Applying the magnetic field his observations were made in two directions with respect to the magnetic field directions. 1. Observations perpendicular to the magnetic field: (a) Spectral lines split into three components (b) Central line has the same frequency as the original line before applying the magnetic field. (c) Central line is linearly polarized and parallel to the magnetic field. (d) The two other components are equally separated on both sides of the central frequency. (e) Both of them are also linearly polarized and polarization is perpendicular to the magnetic field. 2. Observations along the magnetic field direction: (a) Central line is absent (b) The other two components are circularly polarized This effect is known as Normal Zeeman effect. It was also later observed that in some cases there were more than three lines. To differentiate, it was named as Anomalous Zeemen effect. In the following, we will discuss this in details.
    [Show full text]
  • A Supplementary Discussion on Bohr Magneton Magnetic Fields Arise from Moving Electric Charges. a Charge Q with Velocity V Gives
    A Supplementary Discussion on Bohr Magneton Magnetic fields arise from moving electric charges. A charge q with velocity v gives rise to a magnetic field B, following SI convention in units of Tesla, µ qv × r B = 0 , 4π r3 −7 −2 2 where µ0 is the vacuum permeability and is defined as 4π × 10 NC s . Now consider a magnetic dipole moment as a charge q moving in a circle with radius r with speed v. The current is the charge flow per unit time. Since the circumference of the circle is 2πr, and the time for one revolution is 2πr/v, one has the current as I = qv/2πr. The magnitude of the dipole moment is |µ| = I · (area) = (qv/2πr)πr2 = qrp/2m, where p is the linear momentum. Since the radial vector r is perpendicular to p, we have qr × p q µ = = L, 2m 2m where L is the angular momentum. The magnitude of the orbital magnetic momentum of an electron with orbital-angular- momentum quantum l is e¯h 1/2 1/2 µ = [l(l + 1)] = µB[l(l + 1)] . 2me Here, µB is a constant called Bohr magneton, and is equal to −19 −34 e¯h (1.6 × 10 C) × (6.626 × 10 J · s/2π) −24 µB = = −31 = 9.274 × 10 J/T, 2me 2 × 9.11 × 10 kg where T is magnetic field, Tesla. Now consider applying an external magnetic field B along the z-axis. The energy of interaction between this magnetic field and the magnetic dipole moment is e µB EB = −µ · B = Lz · B = BLz.
    [Show full text]
  • Magnetic Moment
    Magnetic moment Bohr magneton Magnetic moment gyromagnetic ratio (g factor) determined by details of charge distribution (elementary particle e.g. electron) (QED corrections for electron) 7-31. Assuming the electron to be a classical particle, a sphere of radius 10-15 m and a uniform mass density, use the magnitude of the spin angular momentum | S | = [s (s+1)]1/2 ħ=(3/4)1/2 ħ to compute the speed of rotation at the electron’s equator. How does your result compare with the speed of light? Magnetic moment Stern-Gerlach experiment Inhomogeneous magnetic field Stern-Gerlach experiment Inhomogeneous magnetic field Stern-Gerlach experiment Inhomogeneous magnetic field Classical picture – continuum of possible orientations Quantum mechanics– 2l +1 deflections ? Stern-Gerlach experiment Total Angular Momentum total angular momentum or If J1 is one angular momentum (orbital, spin, or a combination) and J2 is another, the resulting total angular momentum J = J1 + J2 has the value [ j ( j + 1)]1/2 ħ for its magnitude, where j can be any of the values j1 + j2, j1 + j2 - 1, . , | j1 - j2 | 7-34. (a) The angular momentum of the yttrium atom in the ground state is characterized by the quantum number j = 3/2. How many lines would you expect to see if you could do a Stern-Gerlach experiment with yttrium atoms? (b) How many lines would you expect to see if the beam consisted of atoms with zero spin, but l= 1? a) b) 7-37. A hydrogen atom is in the 3d state (n = 3, l = 2). (a) What are the possible values of j? (b) What are the possible values of the magnitude of the total angular momentum? (c) What are the possible z components of the total angular momentum? a) b) c) Spectroscopic Notation Single electron s p d f g h l 0 1 2 3 4 5 K L M N O n 1 2 3 4 5 Atomic state total spin total orbital angular momentum n total angular momentum Hydrogen ground state Identical Particles in Quantum Mechanics Non-interacting particles e.g.
    [Show full text]