Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Contents
1 Magnetic properties of free lanthanide ions: an overview 3
1.1 Electronic structure and Hunds rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Energetic effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Magnetic behaviour of Ln ions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3.1 Ground multiplet thermally isolated (E(J, J 1) kB T ) . . . . 4
1.3.2 Ground multiplet thermally not isolated (E(J, J 1) kB T ) . . . 5
Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1
3.3.3 4f N systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.3.4 Magnetic behaviour of Cs2 NaLnCl6 (overview) . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
3.3.5 4f 2 system (Pr3+ , 3H4 : HLFcub
) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
2 3+ 3 cub
3.3.6 4f system (Pr , H4 : HLF + Hmag ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
3.3.7 Prediction of LF splittings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
3.4 Non-cubic LF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
3.4.1 Ligand field operators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
cyl
3.4.2 4f 1 system (Ce3+ , 2F5/2 : HLF ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
1 3+ 2 cyl
3.4.3 4f system (Ce , F5/2 : HLF + Hmag ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
5 Solutions 83
6 Appendix 1 87
6.1 Magnetic quantities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
6.2 Energy equivalents and conversion factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
References 91
2
1 Magnetic properties of free lanthanide ions:
an overview
1.1 Electronic structure and Hunds rules
The 4f electrons of free Ln ions are influenced by nuclear attraction, interelectronic repul-
sion (Hee ) and spin-orbit coupling (HSO ), where Hee > HSO . To determine the free ion
ground multiplet 2S+1 LJ the following scheme is helpful (N: no. of 4f electrons):
Ln3+ Ce Pr Nd Pm Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu
N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
ms + 12 + 12 + 12 + 12 + 12 + 12 + 12 21 21 12 21 12 12 12
ml +3 +2 +1 0 1 2 3 +3 +2 +1 0 1 2 3
P
1. The term with maximum S lies lowest in energy ( i ms,i = MS S).
P
2. For a given spin multiplicity, the term with highest L lies lowest in energy ( i ml,i =
ML L).
3. For less than half-filled subshells, the level with the lowest value of J lies lowest
(J = |L S|), while the highest J lies lowest when a subshell is more than half full
(J = L + S).
Table 1 gives approximate sizes of the corresponding energy splittings, including Hex
and Hmag .
1)
Localised electrons are presupposed.
3
Table 1 Effects acting on d and f electrons.
Energy equivalent
Effect System
wavenumber/cm1 a)
3d, 4d, 5d 3d > 4d > 5d 104 b)
Electron-electron interaction Hee
4f, 5f 4f > 5f 104 b)
nd 102
Exchange interaction Hex 4f <1
nd4f < 10
Magnetic field Hmag 0.5 (1 T)
a)
Conversion to other units, see Table 34 (Appendix).
b)
Approximate value according to ref. [1].
Inspecting Table 1, two points are important for 4f ions: (i) Hex is at least two orders of
magnitude smaller than HLF (and HSO ). (ii) Hmag has to be chosen carefully on account
of comparable magnitude of Hex and Hmag . Therefore, in order to detect Hex , HLF should
be modelled most exactly and Hmag should be very weak.
applies, where J is the total angular momentum of the ground multiplet and gJ the Lande
factor
J(J + 1) + S(S + 1) L(L + 1)
gJ = 1 + . (2)
2J(J + 1)
S, L, and J correspond to the total spin angular momentum, the total orbital angular
momentum and the total angular momentum, respectively, of the ground multiplet.
2)
Note that the empirical number eff has no connexion with the permanent moment except when
Curies law is obeyed [2].
4
A graph showing the variation eff vs. T is recommended for 4f/5f systems 3 ) . Ac-
cording to Kramers rule [4], ions with an odd number of 4f electrons (half integral values
of J) have always a degenerate ground state obeying the Curie law at low temperature
(regardless the symmetry of HLF , but presupposed that (i) solely the ligand field (LF)
ground state is occupied and (ii) cooperative magnetic effects are absent). For an even
number of f electrons, degenerate as well as singlet ground states can be found depend-
ing on the symmetry of HLF . A singlet ground state produces temperature independent
paramagnetism (TIP) at low temperature.
Going to 5f electron systems, HSO and HLF increase according to the larger effective
nuclear charge and according to the fact that 5f electrons are more accessible for ligands.
No simple approximation can be made. So, the only possibility to predict the magnetic
behaviour for 5f ions are computational methods.
L+S
P LS J(J + 1)
(2J + 1)J exp
NA 2B J=LS 2 kB T
General equation: m = 0 (3)
3kB T L+S
P LS J(J + 1)
(2J + 1) exp
J=LS 2 kB T
kB T
where J = gJ2 J(J + 1) + 2(gJ 1)(gJ 2) and LS =
LS 2S
The gJ values are given by eq. (2) (exception: gJ = L + 2 for J = 0). The term spin-orbit
coupling parameter LS is positive for ions with less than half-full subshell and negative
for ions with more than half-full subshell.
NA 2B 2
m = 0 where
3kB T eff
2 1 kB T 27 kB T
eff = Z 144 + 9 exp (4)
2 6k T
B
135 kB T kB T
+ 15 exp + 189 21 exp
2 2kB T k T
B
kB T 5 1485 kB T 5
+ 405 27 exp + 33 exp
3kB T 2 2kB T
2457 kB T 7
+ 39 exp and
2 2kB T
Z = 1 + 3 exp + 5 exp + 7 exp
6kB T 2kB T kB T
5 5 7
+9 exp + 11 exp + 13 exp
3kB T 2kBT 2kB T
3)
We recommend this plot or alternatively 2eff vs. T instead of the m T vs. T plot for two reasons:
(i) The number eff has the same numerical value in the SI and CGS-emup system, (ii) eff is easily
compared with the lanthanides corresponding free-ion value eff = gJ J(J + 1) [5].
5
Eq. (4) is calculated with gJ = 3/2 for the multiplets J = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, gJ = 5 for J = 0,
and LS = /6.
Table 2: Lanthanide ions: term symbol (ground state), one-electron spin-orbit
coupling parameter 4f [cm1 ], gJ , gJ J, gJ [J(J + 1)]1/2 and exp
eff (295 K) [7]
Ln3+ 4f N 2S+1
LJ 4f a) gJ gJ J gJ [J(J + 1)]1/2 exp
eff
b)
La3+c) 4f 0 1
S0 0
Ce3+ 4f 1 2
F5/2 625 6/7 15/7 2.535 2.32.5
Pr3+ 4f 2 3
H4 758 4/5 16/5 3.578 3.43.6
Nd3+ 4f 3 4
I9/2 884 8/11 36/11 3.618 3.43.5
Pm3+ 4f 4 5
I4 1000 3/5 12/5 2.683 2.9d)
Sm3+ 4f 5 6
H5/2 1157 2/7 5/7 0.845 1.6
Eu3+ 4f 6 7
F0 1326 0 0 0 3.5
Gd3+ 4f 7 8
S7/2 1450 2 7 7.937 7.87.9
Tb3+ 4f 8 7
F6 1709 3/2 9 9.721 9.79.8
Dy3+ 4f 9 6
H15/2 1932 4/3 10 10.646 10.210.6
Ho3+ 4f 10 5
I8 2141 5/4 10 10.607 10.310.5
Er3+ 4f 11 4
I15/2 2369 6/5 9 9.581 9.49.5
Tm3+ 4f 12 3
H6 2628 7/6 7 7.561 7.5
Yb3+ 4f 13 2
F7/2 2870 8/7 4 4.536 4.5
Lu3+b) 4f 14 1
S0 0
a)
The relation between 4f and LS of the Russell-Saunders ground term is given by LS =
(4f /2S), where (+) and () sign correspond to N 2l + 1 and N 2l + 1, respectively.
b)
Definition: m = 0 NA 2B 2eff /(3 kB T ).
c)
diamagnetic
d)
observed for Nd2+ compounds.
Problems
1. Verify the Russell-Saunders ground multiplets for Nd2+ and Er3+ given in Table 2.
2. Evaluate the susceptibility equation for a free p1 system perturbed by spin-orbit
coupling. (Hint: Apply eq. (3). Note that for the single-electron system LS .
Solutions are given in section 5.)
6
2 Theory of free lanthanide ions
2.1 Functions
Schrodinger equation (spin ignored):
h 2 2
h i
eV (r) (r) = E(r) (5)
2me
For convenience the eigenfunctions (atomic orbitals) are given in spherical polar coordi-
nates:
z
x = r sin cos
y = r sin sin
P(x,y,z) z = r cos (6)
r. cos q
r
q r 2 = x2 + y 2 + z 2
y
r. sin q. cos f .
f r sin q cos = z/r
tan = y/x (7)
r. sin q. sin f
r
1 iml
(r) = n,l,ml (r, , ) = Rn,l (r) = Yml l (, ) Rn,l (r) lml() e
| {z } | {z } 2
radial f. angular f.
The functions Yml l (, ) are spherical harmonics specified by the quantum numbers l
and ml (Table 3). Real functions (Table 4) are gained by linear combinations
For a complete description of the wave function, the spin has to be taken into consid-
eration. Ignoring spin-orbit coupling, the total function (spin orbital) reads
7
Table 3: Spherical harmonics for l = 0, 1, 2, 3
8
Table 4: Real orthonormal linear combinations of the spherical harmonics Yml l (, ) for
l = 1, 2, 3.
l function designation
3 1/2 3 1/2 z
cos = pz
4 4 r
3 1/2 3 1/2 x
1 sin cos = px
4 4 r
3 1/2 3 1/2 y
sin sin = py
4 4 r
5 1/2 5 1/2 3z 2 r2
(3 cos2 1) = dz 2
16 16 r2
15 1/2 15 1/2 xz
cos sin cos = dxz
4 4 r2
15 1/2 15 1/2 yz
2 cos sin sin = dyz
4 4 r2
15 1/2 15 1/2 x2 y 2
sin2 cos 2 = dx2 y2
16 16 r2
15 1/2 15 1/2 xy
sin2 sin 2 = dxy
16 4 r2
7 1/2 7 1/2 z(5z 2 3r2)
(5 cos3 3 cos ) = fz 3
16 16 r3
21 1/2 21 1/2 x(5z 2 r2 )
sin (5 cos2 1) cos = fxz 2
32 32 r3
21 1/2 21 1/2 y(5z 2 r2 )
sin (5 cos2 1) sin = fyz 2
32 32 r3
105 1/2 105 1/2 xyz
3 cos sin2 sin 2 = fxyz
16 4 r3
105 1/2 105 1/2 z(x2 y 2 )
cos sin2 cos 2 = fz(x2 y2)
16 16 r3
35 1/2 35 1/2 x(x2 3y 2)
sin3 cos 3 = fx(x2 3y2)
32 32 r3
35 1/2 35 1/2 y(3x2 y 2 )
sin3 sin 3 = fy(3x2 y2 )
32 32 r3
9
2.2 Angular momenta
2.2.1 Orbital angular momentum
Classical definition of the angular momentum l (Fig. 2):
l = r p. (10)
r
p
l = lx i + ly j + lz k (11)
= (ypz zpy )i + (zpx xpz )j + (xpy ypx )k
[lx , ly ] = i
hlz ; [ly , lz ] = i
hlx ; [lz , lx ] = i
hly , (15)
lz = h
(16)
i
lz acts on the depending part of the atomic orbitals (Table 3):
lz l ml = lz l ml = ml h l ml Dirac notation
l ml lz l ml = ml h l ml l ml
| {z }
1
10
generally H = E , ( normalised eigenfunction of H)
Z Z
H d = E d = E
| {z }
1
Z
H d h|H|i
matrix element (Dirac notation)
Application of lz :
lz 2 2 Y22 (, )
h
= Rn,2 (r)
i
" 1/2 #
h
15
= Rn,2 (r) sin2 ei2
i 32
1/2
h
15 ei2
= Rn,2 (r) sin2
i 32
h
15 1/2
= Rn,2 (r)i2 sin2 ei2 = 2 h22
i 32
l2 l ml = l(l + 1)h2 l ml (17)
Shift operators:
l+ = lx + ily ; l = lx ily . (18)
Reverse operations:
lx = 1 (l+ + l ); ly = 1 (l+ l ). (19)
2 2i
lz l ml = ml h l ml
l2 l ml = l(l + 1) h 2 l ml (20)
p
l l ml = l(l + 1) ml (ml 1) h l ml 1 .
ml =+2
+1
11
2.2.2 Spin
Spin orbital of a one-electron system:
s2 s ms = s(s + 1) h 2 s ms with s = 21
s ms with ms = 12
sz s ms = ms h (21)
p
s s ms = s(s + 1) ms (ms 1) h s ms 1
Problems
3. Use the spherical harmonics in Table 3 and construct the real functions dx2 y2 and
dxy with the help of eqs. (8). Verify the results with the data given in Table 4.
h
d
x = x and px =
i dx
d
h
xpx = x
i dx
h
d(x) h
d
px x = = +x
i dx i dx
h
(
xpx px x) = = i h
i
12
Tab. 5: Classical and quantum-mechanical forms of Ekin and Epot
=H
H (0) + H
(1)
n = En n ;
H find En , n (24)
13
0 H (0) (0) = E (0) (0) (27)
n n n
1 (0) E (0) )(1) = (E (1) H (1) )(0)
(H n n n n (28)
2 (0) (0) (2) (2) (0)
(H En )n = En n + (En H (1) (1) )(1)
n (29)
.. ..
. .
(1)
The first-order correction to the energy En
(0)
(premultiply both sides of eq. (28) with n and integrate)
Z Z Z
(0) (0) (1) (0) (1) (0)
n H n d En (0) (1)
n n d = En (0)
(1)
n H n d
| {z }
0
(1) |n
En(1) = n|H (30)
E
Y2(0)
Y1(0)
E 1(0)
H21 (0)
Y1(0) Y2
E 2(0) E 1(0)
E 1(0) H 11
H12 H21
E 1(0) H11
E 2(0) E 1(0)
14
2. Degenerate states
Eq. (30) (32) apply also in this case; additionally: determination of the correct zeroth-
order wavefunctions (see Fig. 5)
Example: doubly degenerate pair of states
(0) (0) = E (0) (0)
H (i = 1, 2) (33)
n,i n n,i
(0) (0)
(0)
n = u1 n,1 + u2 n,2 (34)
The correct linear combinations are those which correspond to the perturbed functions
for 0.
Determination of u1 and u2 :
Substituting eq. (34) in eq. (25); eq. (28) now reads:
(0)
H (1) u1 (0)
(0) E (0) (1) = E (1) H n,1 + u2 n,2 (35)
n n n
(0) (0)
Multiply with n,1 and n,2 , respectively and integrate:
Z
u1 H11 En(1) + u2 H12 = 0 (0) (1) (0)
(1) |j
where Hij = n,i H n,j d = i|H
u1 H21 + u2 H22 En(1) = 0
To find the non-trivial solutions of this pair of equations, the determinant of the coefficients
of the constants u1 and u2 must disappear:
H E (1) H12 H11 , H22 : diagonal elements
11 n
(1) = 0; (36)
H21 H22 En H12 , H21 : off-diagonal elements
(1) p
En(1,2) = H11 + H22 /2 (H11 H22 )2 /4 + |H12 |2
Normalisation:
1
u 2(1,2) = q
x2(1,2) + 1
x2(1,2) u22(1,2) + u22(1,2) = 1 x(1,2)
u1(1,2) = x(1,2) u2(1,2) = q
x2(1,2) + 1
(1)
Correct zeroth-order wavefunctions for the energy En(1,2) :
15
E
Y2(0) Y2(0)
H21(1) H1(1)2 H21(2) H1(2)2
E 2(0) E 2(0) E 2(0) H22
E 1(0) E 2(0)
E 2(0) H22
(1)
H21(2) H1(2)2
E 1(0) E 1(0) E 1(0) E 1(2)
E 2(0) E 1(0)
(1)
E 1(0) E 1(1)
(1)
H21(1) H1(1)2
E 1(0) E 1(1)
E 2(0) E 1(0)
General
solution for 2 2 determinants:
H E H12
11
= 0. tan 2 = 2H12 /(H11 H22 )
H12 H22 E
(
H11 H12 cot ; 1 = sin 1 cos 2 (1) |j i
E= ; Hij = hi |H
H22 + H12 cot ; 2 = cos 1 + sin 2
(37)
16
2.4 Applications
2.4.1 Spin-orbit coupling (p1 , f 1 , f 13 )
Example 2.2 p1 system
SO = (r) e 1 V (r)
H l
s where (r) = . (38)
2m2e c2 r r
p1 system: l = 1, s = 12 , j1 = l s = 1
2
and j2 = l + s = 3
2
(see Figs. 6 and 7, Table 6)
E n/cm-1 2
spin-orbit coupling P3/2
16973 1
17cm
(4) 1z 16956
- 2
2 P1/2
(0)
E (6)
1 2
2
(2) S 1/ 2
-z 0
n
off on
l = 589.8nm 589.2nm
(0)
Premultiplication with 1 and integration result in:
Z Z
(0) (0) (1) (0)
(0)
1 H E d = 1 E (1) H (1) u1 (0) + . . . + u6 (0) d
1 6
| {z }
0
Z Z
(1) (0) (0) (1) (0) (0)
0 = u1 E 1 1 d + . . . + u6 E 1 6 d
Z Z (40)
(0) (1) (0) (0) (1) (0)
u1 1 H 1 d . . . u6 1 H 6 d.
17
R (0)
Using the abbreviation i (1) (0) d Hij we obtain a system of six equations:
H j
0 = u1 H11 E (1) + u2 H12 + + u6 H16
0 = u1 H21 + u2 H22 E (1) + + u6 H26
.. .. (41)
. .
0 = u1 H61 + u2 H62 + + u6 H66 E (1)
Z
Rn,l (r) (r) Rn,l(r) r 2 dr (43)
0
Z Z 2 Z 1/2
m
Ylml (, ) ms () l
s Yl l (, ) ms () sin d d d.
0 0 1/2
Z
2
hc n,l = h
Rn,l (r) (r) Rn,l(r) r 2 dr. (44)
0
s = lz sz + 21 (l+ + l ) 12 (
l s+ + s ) + 2i1 (l+ l ) 2i1 (
s+ s )
= lz sz + 4 (l+ s+ + l s+ + l+ s + l s l+ s+ + l s+ + l+ s l s )
1
= lz sz + 1 (l+ s + l s+ )
2
(47)
ml ms s ml ms = ml ms lz sz + 21 (l+ s + l s+ ) ml ms
l
= ml ms lz sz ml ms
+ 21 ml ms l+ s ml ms
+ 12 ml ms l s+ ml ms . (48)
(1)
General hints to the evaluation of matrix elements mH n :
18
(i) Evaluate H (1) n . This will result in a constant a multiplied by a wavefunction which
may or may not be the same as the original. For (1)
the
present
let
us assume H n = a n .
(ii) The result of (i) is then premultiplied man .
by
m giving
(iii) Since a
is a constant we have
m an = a m n and we are
thus left
with the task of
evaluating m n . Provided m and n are orthonormalised, m n = 1 when m = n
but is zero otherwise.
On account of orthonormalised states
ml ms ml ms = ml ,ml ms ,ms , (49)
the integral is not zero when ml = ml and ms = ms . The wavefunctions are eigenfunctions
of lz und sz , so that the application of the operator products in eq. (48) on the wavefunction
on its right-hand side yields:
lz sz ml ms = ml ms h 2 ml ms
l+ s ml ms =
p p
l(l + 1) ml (ml + 1) s(s + 1) ms (ms 1) h 2 ml + 1 ms 1
l s+ ml ms =
p p
l(l + 1) ml (ml 1) s(s + 1) ms (ms + 1) h 2 ml 1 ms + 1
where s = 12 . For diagonal elements only lz sz may contribute, whereas for off-diagonal
elements only the step operators may account:
ml ms l+ s ml 1 ms + 1 ml ms l s+ ml + 1 ms 1
Matrix elements (46) which may contribute are restricted to the condition
ml + ms = ml + ms (50)
1 12 l+ s 0 21 0 12 l+ s 1 12
1
0 2 l s+ 1 12 1 21 l s+ 0 12 .
1 (51)
ml ms 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2 2
1
1 2 1
2
q
1 12 21 1
2
1 q
0 2 1
2
0
q
0 12 0 1
2
q
1 21 1
2
21
1 12 1
2
19
1 1
H11 = 2 1 2 lz s z 1 2 = 1 12 1 21 1 21 = 21
h
1
H22 = 1 lz s
z
1 1 = 1 ( 1 ) = 1
2
h 2 2 2 2
H33 = 0 12 lz sz 0 12 = 0 12 = 0
2
h
1
H44 = 2 0 2 lz s z 0 12 = 0 ( 12 ) = 0
h
1
H55 = 1 l z s
z
1 1 = (1) 1 = 1
2
h 2 2 2 2
H66 = 1 12 lz sz 1 12 = (1) ( 12 ) = 12
2
h
1 1
1 1
q1
H23 = 1 l s
0 = 2 1 1 1
1 1
= 2 = H32
2 2 +
2
h 2 2 2 2
1 q
1 1
H45 = 2 0 2 2 l+ s
1
1 2 = 2 2 1 = 12 = H54
h
Diagonalisation of the 2 2 blocks of the H matrix:
q
1 1
2 E (1) 2
q = ( 1 E (1) )(E (1) ) 1 2 = 0
1 (1) 2 2
2
E
(1) 1 (1)
E(1) = 2
; E(2) = .
(1)
Evaluation of the zeroth-order functions for E(1) = 21 :
q
0 = 2 2 u2(1) + 12 u3(1)
1 1
u2(1) q 1 q q
x(1) = = 2; u2(1) = 13 ; u3(1) = 23
u3(1)
q q2 1
1
2 = 3
1 2 + 3 0 2 .
1
(52)
(1)
For E(2) = , the result is:
q
0 = 21 + u2(2) + 12 u3(2)
u2(2) q q
x(2) = = 2; u2(2) = 23 ; u3(2) = 1
3
u3(2)
q q1 1
3 = 3 1 2 + 3 0 2 .
2 1
(53)
20
The functions are not only eigenfunctions of the operators s and s
l l but also of
l2 + s + s
l l + s2 =
l + s 2 = 2 . (56)
If 2 acts on a quartet state function Q (1 , 2 , 4 , 6 ) and on a doublet state function
D (3 , 5 ), respectively, the result is
2 Q = l2 + 2 s + s2 Q
l
= h 2 ( 15
2 2 + 2 12 + 34 Q = h 4
2 ( 32 )( 52 ) Q
) Q = h
2 j2 (j2 + 1) Q
= h where j2 = 23 (57)
2 D = l2 + 2 s + s2 D
l
2 2 2 1 + 34 D = h
= h 2 ( 34 ) D = h
2 ( 21 )( 32 ) D
2 j1 (j1 + 1) D
= h where j1 = 21 . (58)
Eigenfunctions are obtained with the help of vector coupling coefficients (Clebsch-Gordan
coefficients) (see Table 7).
21
Table 7: Vector coupling coefficients for
systems with j2 = 1/2
1
j= m2 = 2
m2 = 21
s s
1
j1 + m + 21 j1 m + 1
2
j1 + 2
2j + 1 2j1 + 1
s 1 s
1 j1 m + 12 j1 + m + 1
2
j1 2
2j1 + 1 2j1 + 1
q q2
2 ; 5 52 32 = 7 2 2 7 1 12
5 1
2 2
q q
3 ; 4 52 12 = 47 1 12 37 0 12
1 ; 8 72 72 = 3 1
q 2 q6
2 ; 7 72 52 = 1
7
3 1
2
+ 7 2 12
3
q q5 2
32
3 ; 6 72 32 = 2 1
2 2 + 7 1 2 1
q7 q4
4 ; 5 72 12 = 3
7
1 1
2
+ 7 0 12
a)
Short form of the functions: the first symbol refers to the upper sign, the second
to the lower one.
The calculation of the coefficients is demonstrated for 52 25 (first line in Table 8).
Assignments: j = 5/2, m = mj = 5/2, j1 = l = 3, and m2 = ms = 1/2 (j2 = s = 1/2)
The roots of the lower row of Table 7 become
s s
j1 + m + 21
3 + 52 21 q
m2 = 12 : = = 67
2j1 + 1 7
s s
j1 m + 12 3 52 + 21 q
1
m2 = 2 : = = 17
2j1 + 1 7
Since the Condon-Shortley standard assignment is j1 s and j2 l the sign of the coef-
ficients has to be changed according to the phase relation |jb ja jmi = (1)ja +jb j |ja jb jmi.
Finally, weq obtain
5 5 q
= 6 3 1 + 1 2 + 1 .
2 2 7 2 7 2
22
Problems
4. Calculate the matrix elements hl, ml |lq |l, ml i (where q stands for z, +, ):
(a) h0, 0|lz |0, 0i, (b) h2, 2|l+ |2, 1i, (c) h2, 2|l+
2
|2, 0i, (d) h2, 0|l+l |2, 0i.
5. The 14 microstates |ml ms i of a f 1 system (l = 3, s = 12 ) yield under the influence
of spin-orbit coupling 14 eigenstates |jmj i which, apart from the states | 27 72 i,
are linear combinations of two microstates each. Use Table 7 to evaluate the vector
coupling coefficients for the coupled states | 52 12 i, | 25 12 i, | 27 32 i, and | 27 32 i. Control
your results with the entries of Table 8.
6. What levels (multiplets J) may arise from the terms (a) 1 S, (b) 2 P , (c) 3 P , (d) 3 D,
(e) 4 D? How many states (distinguished by the quantum number MJ ) belong to
each level?
(59)
Van Vleck equation
=H
operator: H (0) + B H (1) En = Wn(0) + Bz Wn(1) + Bz2 Wn(2) + . . . .
z
(1) (2)
Wn , Wn : First- and second-order Zeeman coefficient
n = En /B = Wn(1) 2BWn(2) . . .
Zeeman operator:
one-electron system Hmag = e l + 2 s B where e = e/(2me ) (61)
H mag,z = lz + 2 s z Bz (62)
e
single term Hmag = e L + 2S B (63)
H mag,z = L z + 2Sz Bz (64)
e
23
Example 2.4 Magnetic susceptibility of the 4f 1 /4f 13 free ion systems
The 14 spin-coupled eigenfunctions of the 4f 1 /4f13 systems are given in Table 8. Apply-
ing Zeeman operator (63) the assigned matrix elements in scheme (67) are to be evaluated:
(67)
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
(1)
z 1
Calculation of the off-diagonal element 2 H
(1)
5 5
1 = 7 5 e (lz + 2
2 H s z )
z 2 2 2 2
Dq
q q q1 E
1 1 6
1 6 1 1
= e 7
3 2
+ 7
2 + 2 z
l + 2s z 7
3 2
7
2 + 2
e h
= 6 3 12 lz + 2sz 3 12 3 12 lz + 2 sz 2 + 12
7 | {z } | {z }
(3 1) h 0
1
i 6
+ 6 2 + 2 lz + 2sz 3 2 6 2 + 2 lz + 2
1 1
sz 2 + 2 =
1
B
| {z } | {z } 7
0 (2 + 1)h
(2)
We obtain with eq. (32) for W| 5 5
i
:
2 2
75 2
(2)
h
2 2
| e (lz + 2
sz )| 25 52 i (6/49) 2B 12 2B
W| 5 5 i = (0) (0)
= = .
2 2 W7/2 W5/2 (7/2) 343
24
(0) (1) (2)
J MJ Wn Wn /B Wn /2B
5 5
(5/2) gJ1 [12/(343 )]
2 2
5 3
2 (3/2) gJ1 [20/(343 )]
(0) 2 2
Tab. 9: Energies Wn and Zeeman co- 5 1
(1) (2) (1/2) gJ1 [24/(343 )]
efficients Wn , Wn of a free f 1 system 2 2
7 7
(gJ1 = 6/7 for 2F5/2 , gJ2 = 8/7 for 2F7/2 ) (7/2) gJ2
2 2
7 5
(5/2) gJ2 +[12/(343 )]
2 2 3
7 3 2
(3/2) gJ2 +[20/(343 )]
2 2
7 1
(1/2) gJ2 +[24/(343 )]
2 2
25
3 Lanthanide ions in cubic and non-cubic ligand fields
The evaluation of LF effects on f systems requires more effort than on d systems:
On account of the larger angular momentum quantum number l, the number of
ligand field parameters is larger, for example two instead of one for cubic symmetry;
The number of microstates used in complete magnetochemical analyses is larger for
f systems (for example 91 microstates for f 2 compared to 45 for d2 ).
Ground multiplets of the f 1 to f 13 ions:
f N f 14N f 1 f 13 f 2 f 12 f 3 f 11 f 4 f 10 f5 f9 f6 f8 f7
(71)
ground 2
multiplet F 5 2F 7 3
H4 3H6 4
I 9 4I 15 5
I4 5I8 6
H 5 6H 15 7
F0 7F6 8
S7
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
C04 = 1
8
(35 cos4 30 cos2 + 3)
4
C4 = 1
16
70 sin4 ei4
C06 = 1
16
(231 cos6 315 cos4 + 105 cos2 5)
6 3
C4 = 32
14 sin4 (11 cos2 1) ei4
26
h p i h p i
cub 4 4 4 4 6 6 6 6
HLF = B0 C0 + 5/14 (C4 + C4 ) + B0 C0 7/2 C4 + C4 (75)
With the help of integrals of the type hYml l |Cqk |Yml i [3], listed in Table 10 (p electrons)
l
and Table 13 (f electrons), LF effects can be evaluated. The k values in eq. (72) comprise
terms with k 2l and k even. The term with k = 0 has spherical symmetry, produces
no splitting and is therefore omitted. The relevant k values for LF terms are k = 2 (p
electrons), k = 2 and 4 (d electrons), k = 2, 4, and 6 (f electrons). Notice that the
operators Cqk act only on the orbital part of a wave function.
With the help of the matrix components of the electrostatic interactions, shown in
Table 10, the 3 3 matrix (77) is obtained. Notice that only the red numbers corre-
sponding to c2 are relevant. Since the operator C02 does not change ml , matrix elements
< ml | C02 | ml > with ml 6= ml are automatically zero.
ml ml c0 5 c2 a)
Table 10: Matrix components of electro-
static interactions, ck (lml , l ml ) for l = l = 1 1 +1 1
1; ck (l ml , lml ) = (1)ml ml ck (lml , l ml ). 1 0 0 + 3
Red numbers are relevant for Examples 3.1 0 0 +1 +2
and 3.3, the blue number for Example 3.3
1 1 0 6
only.
a)
The numerical factor
5 is the denominator for
all ck values of the column.
ml |1i | 1 i | 0 i
h 1 | 51 B02
3 3 matrix of operator (76): (77)
h 1 | 15 B02
2 2
h0| B
5 0
Results: (i) All off-diagonal matrix elements are zero; (ii) LF operator eq. (76) splits
the threefold degenerate p1 system (in the absence of spin-orbit coupling) into an orbital
doublet | 1i with energy ELF = B02 /5 and a singlet | 0 i with energy ELF = 2B02 /5.
4)
Electronic p states are not split by cubic ligand fields.
27
Example 3.2 The p1 system under the action of spin-orbit coupling and a cylindrical
ligand field (cf. spin-orbit matrix (51))
+H
H cyl = (r) s + B02 C02
l (78)
SO LF
1
ml ms 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2 2
1 21 1
2
B02 /5
q
1 12 21 B02 /5 1
2
q
0 21 1
2
2B02 /5
q
0 12 2B02 /5 1
2
q
1 21 1
2
12 B02 /5
1 12 1
2
B02 /5
1 1 2
2
1 1 1
H11 = 1 lz s
z 1 + B0 1 C0 1 = B02 /5
2 | 2 {z
h 2
} | {z } | 2 {z 2 } 2
2 /2
h 1/5 1
1 1
H22 = 2 1 12 lz sz 1 12 + B02 1C02 1 = 12 B02 /5
h
| {z } | {z } | 2 {z 2 }
h2 /2
1/5 1
H33 = 2 0 12 lz sz 0 12 + B02 0C02 0 21 21 = 2B02 /5
h
| {z } | {z } | {z }
0 2/5 1
1 1
H44 = 2 0 12 lz sz 0 12 + B02 0C02 0 = 2B02 /5
h
| {z } | {z } | 2 {z 2 }
0 2/5 1
H55 = 2 1 21 lz sz 1 21 + B02 1C02 1 12 21 = 21 B02 /5
h
| {z } | {z } | {z }
h2 /2
1/5 1
1
1 1 1
H66 = 1 lz s
z
1 1 + B02 1C02 1 2 2 = 2 B02 /5
2 2 2
h
| {z } | {z }| {z }
2 /2
h 1/5 1
1 q
1 1 0 1
H23 = 1 l+ s
= = H32
2 |
h 2 2
{z 2
} 2
2/2
1 1
q1
H45 1
= 2 0 2 2 l+ s 1 2 = 2 = H54
h
|
{z }
2/2
28
H22 = /2 B02 /5, H33 = 2B02 /5, H23 = H32 = / 2
2 H23 2 2
tan 2 = = = 1 3 2 (79)
H22 H33 /2 + 3B02 /5 2
+ B /
5 0
cyl
Result: The combined effect of HSO + HLF splits the sixfold degenerate spin orbital
states into three doublets. The composition of the wave functions depends on the ratio
B02 /. No simple closed expressions can be given for the functions.
or
3.2.2 Orthorhombic LF: HLF + HSO
Example 3.3 The p1 system in orthorhombic ligand fields
q
or 2 2 2 2 2
HLF = B0 C0 + B2 C2 + C2 2
where C2 = 38 sin2 exp(2i) (80)
ml |1i | 1 i |0i
h1| 15 B02 5
6
B22
Matrix elements of operator eq. (80):
6
h 1 | 5
B22 15 B02
2 2
h0| B
5 0
Determination of the correct zeroth order functions by application of scheme eq. (37):
H11 = H22 = B02 /5, H12 = H21 = 6 B22 /5
(
2 H12 2 6 B22 /5 2 6 B22 /5 + for B22 < 0
tan 2 = = = =
H11 H22 B02 /5 + B02 /5 0 for B22 > 0
2 = 90 = 45 ; cot 45 = 1
E1,2 = B02 /5 6 B22 /5, 1,2 = ( 2)1 (| 1 i | 1 i)
E3 = 2 B02 /5, 3 = | 0 i
Result: Neglecting spin, the orthorhombic ligand field splits the threefold degenerate
orbital states into three singlets.
Example 3.4 The p1 system under the action of spin-orbit coupling and an orthorhombic
ligand field
+H
H or = (r) s + B02 C02 + B22 (C22 + C2
l 2
) (81)
SO LF
The matrix elements of this operator are stated in scheme (82). The E (1) s in the
diagonal elements are omitted and also the multiplicative factor hc for the spin-orbit
coupling matrix elements which are usually given in the energy equivalent cm1 . The
empty off-diagonal elements are automatically zero. The diagonalisation of the 3 3
29
blocks, the energies and the composition of the wave functions must be calculated with
the aid of a computer.
(82)
1
ml ms 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1
2 2 2 2 2 2
1 21 1
2
B02 /5 0 6B22 /5
q
0 12 0 2B02 /5 1
2
q
1 21 6B22 /5 1
2
12 B02 /5
q
1 12 12 B02 /5 1
6B22 /5
2
q
0 21 1
2
2B02 /5 0
1 12 6B22 /5 0 1
2
B02 /5
3.3 Cubic LF
3.3.1 Group theoretical tools I [9, 8]
Character tables of the point groups serve Tab. 11: Character table of the symmetry
to assign the LF states with respect to sym- groups O and Td
metry and degeration. For the cubic sys-
tems O and Td Table 11 is relevant. It is O E 8 C3 3 C2 6 C4 6 C2
applicable to Ln ions with integer J. The Td E 8 C3 3 C2 6 S4 6 d
degree of degeneration of the LF states is re- A1 a) 1 1 1 1 1 1 b)
sponsible for the orbital contribution of the A 1 1 1 1 1 2
2
lanthanides magnetic moment: The singlet
E 2 1 2 0 0 3
states A1 (1 ) and A2 (2 ) as well as the dou-
blet state E(3 ) are non-magnetic, while the T1 3 0 1 1 1 4
triplet states T1 (4 ) and T2 (5 ) are mag- T2 3 0 1 1 1 5
netic. For half-integer J all states are on
a)
principle magnetic; for cubic LF character Mulliken nomenclature.
b)
Bethe nomenclature.
tables of the respective double groups O and
Td are relevant [8, 10] (cf. Table 12). Usually Bethes nomenclature is used for f systems,
see , e. g., the article of Lea, Leask, Wolf (LLW[16]).
| {z }
irrelevant for restricted basis 2F5/2
the free ion multiplets split according to 2F5/2 G (8 ) + E (7 ) and 2F7/2 G (8 )
+ E (7 ) + E (6 ). If HSO is distinctly stronger than HLF it is convenient to consider
30
Tab. 12: Character table of the double groups O and Td
4 C3 4 C23 3 C2 3 C4 3 C34 6 C2
O E R
4 C23 R 4 C3 R 3 C2 R 3 C34 R 3 C4 R 6 C2 R
4 C3 4 C23 3 C2 3 S4 3 S34 6 d
Td E R
4 C23 R 4 C3 R 3 C2 R 3 S34 R 3 S4 R 6 d R
A1 (1 )a) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
A2 (2 ) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
E(3 ) 2 2 1 1 2 0 0 0
T1 (4 ) 3 3 0 0 1 1 1 1
T2 (5 ) 3 3 0 0 1 1 1 1
E (6 )b) 2 2 1 1 0 2 2 0
E (7 ) 2 2 1 1 0 2 2 0
G (8 ) 4 4 1 1 0 0 0 0
a)
1 5 : integer J; 1 3 : non-magnetic.
b)
6 8 : half-integer J; magnetic.
HLF acting only on the ground multiplet 2F5/2 [ G (8 ) + E (7 )]. This approximation
has the advantage that H cub can be restricted to the fourth degree term (k = 4), since
LF
the corresponding LF matrix elements of the sixth degree term are zero. Using Table 8
and Table 13 the matrix elements of H cub in scheme (83) are obtained.
LF
Normally, the spin-orbit coupled states |J MJ i are used as a basis for the multiplet.
In the following examples, however, we write them as |ML MS i basis with the advantage
cub on the orbital function |M i becomes obvious.
that the action of H LF L
31
LF
Example 3.5 Evaluation of the diagonal element H11 = h 25 |H cub 5
| 2 i of matrix (83)
cub
H11 = 1 6 | 3, 1 i + | 2, 1 i
6 h 3, 12 | + h 2, 12 | H
7 LF 2 2
(i) Integration with respect to the spin, (ii) insert of ck (lml , l ml ) values 5) :
H11 = 17 6 h 3 |H cub | 3 i + h 2 |H cub | 2 i =
LF LF
h i
1 4 4 4 6 6 6 1
B0 6 h 3 |C | 3 i + h 2 |C | 2 i + B 6 h 3 |C | 3 i + h 2 |C | 2 i = B04 .
7 | {z0 } | {z0 } 0
| 0
{z 0
} 21
c4 (33,33)=3/33 c4 (22,22)=7/33 0
3 5 3 1 1
4f 1 (cub) 52
2
2
2
2
2
5
1 5
2 21 21
3 5
2 21 3
21
5
HLF matrix of 2F5/2 2 1 5 (83)
21 21
3
5
213
2 21
1
2
2 21
1
2 2
21
cub | 3 i
Example 3.6 Evaluation of the off-diagonal element h 25 |H LF 2
cub
H12 = 1 2 | 1, 1 i + 5 | 2, 1 i
6 h3, 12 | + h2, 21 | H
7 LF 2 2
H12 = 1 cub | 1 i + 5 h 2 |H
12 h 3 |H cub | 2 i =
7 LF LF
h q i
1 4 5 4 4
7
B 0 14
12 h 3 |C 4 | 1 i + 5 h 2 |C 4 | 2 i
| {z } | {z }
42/33 70/33
q h i
72 B06 12h 3 |C46 | 1i + 5 h 2 |C46 | 2 i = 5
21
B04
| {z }
0
The HLF matrix (83) has two identical 1 1 and two identical 2 2 blocks. The former
two correspond to the |MJ i states | 21 i and | 12 i yielding the first-order correction to the
energy E (1) = ELF = (2/21) B04. The energy of the other states is obtained by applying
eqn. (36):
1 4
B0 E 5
B04 E1 = 2 B04
21 21 21
= 0 =
5 3
E2 = 4 B 4 .
21
B04 21 B04 E 21 0
32
The sixfold degenerate multiplet 2 F5/2 is split by a cubic LF in a doublet (E ; 7 ) and a
quartet (G ; 8 ) (see Table 14). In octahedral surrounding with negatively charged ligands
E is the ground state (A40 , B04 > 0), whereas in tetrahedral symmetry the splitting pattern
is reversed. The splitting E(G , E ) = (6/21) B04 is in the range of a few 100 cm1 , that
is, several orders of magnitude smaller than for d ions, caused by smaller radial integrals
and larger metalligand distances for the 4f ions.
Magnetic susceptibility
Zeeman operator (eq. (66)):
mag,z = g J B
H where e = e/(2me ), gJ = 6/7
e J z z
Application of the z component of the Zeeman operator onto the six symmetry-adapted
linear combinations of the ground multiplet 2F5/2 (Table 14) yields the matrix elements
in Table 15 (in units of gJ B Bz and = ELF (G ) ELF (E ) = (6/21) B04).
(1) (2)
(0) Wn Wn
Wn
gJ B gJ2 2B
20
(0) (1) (2)
Table 15: Wn , Wn and Wn of the 4f 1 system |G, i 11/6 +
9
cub
perturbed by HLF ( (6/21)B04)
|G , i 1/2 0
i 20
|E M 0 5/6
9
Diagonal element:
H11 = hG |H mag,z |G i
5 5
= ( 6 )( 2 ) + ( 16 )( 23 ) gJ B Bz = ( 11
6
)gJ B Bz
Off-diagonal element:
H15 = hG |H mag |E i
hq q z q q i
1 5 5 1 5 3 2 5
= 6
(
6 2
) 6 6
( 2
) g B
J B z = ( 3
) gJ B Bz .
33
(0) (1) (2)
Substitution of Wn , Wn , and Wn into the Van Vleck eq. (60) yields the magnetic
susceptibility of the 4f 1 system in cubic ligand fields:
NA 2B 2
m = 0 where (84)
3kB T eff
2 25 40 130 40
gJ + kB T + kB T exp
12 3 12 3 kB T
2eff = .
1 + 2 exp
kB T
Fig. 8 shows the eff T and the 1
m T behaviour for = +605 cm
1
(LF ground state
E (7 ), B0 = 2 119 cm , oct.) and = 605 cm (G (8 ), B0 = 2 119 cm1 , tetrah.,
4 1 1 4
cube).
a
2.4 c 500
2.0 e
400
-3
f
1.2
5
200
0.8 b
100
c-1
0.4
0.0 0
0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400
T/K T/K
Fig. 8: Ce3+ in cubic LF; eff T (a,c,e) and 1
m T diagrams (b,d,f); = 605 cm
1
oct.,
1
(e,f), = 605 cm tetrah., cube, (c,d); straight lines (a,b) correspond to the free ion.
Discussion
1. The ligand field effect produces a distinct deviation from free ion magnetic be-
haviour, except Ln ions with 4f 7 configuration (Eu2+ , Gd3+ ).
2. At very low temperature the 1 m vs. T curves for systems with an odd number of
4f electrons (half-integral J) become nearly straight lines running into the origin
(Curie-like behaviour, explicable with eq. (84)), provided that cooperative magnetic
effects are absent.
4. Warning: The upper region of the 1 m versus T curves does not follow the Curie
7
or Curie-Weiss law (except 4f ions). To compare the magnetic behaviour of Ln
ions in a crystal with that of free ions, the eff versus T plot is suited.
34
5. Cooperative effects between magnetically active ions can be described by a so-called
molecular-field parameter MF:
1 1
m = m (LF) MF . (85)
6. Susceptibility equations of the type (84) are not only suited for molecular and ionic
systems, but also for intermetallics with stable Ln valence. The 6s and 5d valence
electrons are delocalised to a high degree and yield normally only a small TIP.
7. Ce, Yb, Eu are candidates for mixed-valence behaviour (Ce3+/4+ , Yb2+/3+ , Eu2+/3+ ).
200
5+ 4 Yb
3+
mol / ( 10 mol m )
U
-3
160
3
120
6
meff
2 Ce 3+
80
Ce3+ 1
c-1
40 5+
3+ U
Yb
0 0
0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400
T/K T/K
Fig. 9: Typical 1 m T diagrams of com- Fig. 10: Typical eff T diagrams of com-
pounds with Ce(III), Yb(III) and U(V) in an pounds with Ce(III), Yb(III) and U(V) in an
octahedral ligand field. octahedral ligand field.
3.3.3 4f N systems
cub reads
For many-electron lanthanide systems H LF
N n
X q o N n
X q o
LF
H cub
(4f N ) = B04 C04 (i) + 5
[C44 (i) + 4
C4 (i)] + B06 C06 (i) 72 [C46 (i) + C4
6
(i)] (86)
14
i=1 i=1
35
Coupling schemes: The 4f states are controlled by Hee , HSO (see Fig. 11) and the
ligand field 6) (HLF ), where the order of energetic effects is Hee > HSO > HLF (except for
the 4f 4 , 4f 5 , 4f 6 systems where HSO HLF )7) . To describe the electronic situation, three
coupling schemes are distinguished, depending on the relative strength of HLF and on the
desired accuracy in LF parameter determination [15].
0
1
2
15/2
3
-1
5 6
E / 10 cm
13/2
6 4
3
11/2 5
4 5
5 9/2
3
7/2 2
1
0 J=4 J= 5/2 J=0 J=6
3+ 3+ 3+
Pr Sm Eu Tb 3+
Fig. 11: Energies of ground state multiplets of selected Ln3+ ions (kB T =
208.6 cm1 at 300 K)
36
3.3.4 Magnetic behaviour of the series Cs2 NaLnCl6 (overview)
On the basis of spectroscopic data of the series Cs2 NaLnCl6 9) [13] (see Tab. 16) the mag-
netic behaviour is calculated with program CONDON 10) , developed by Schilder and
Lueken [12]. The eff T data for the representative metal ions Pr3+ [4f 2 ], Nd3+ [4f 3 ],
Sm3+ [4f 5 ] and Eu3+ [4f 6 ] are compared with those of the free ions.
Cs Cl
Ln
Na
The chemical environment of the Ln ions, compared to the one of d ions, has only a
minor effect on the 4f electrons. The LF effect produces splittings of HLF 102 cm1
9)
Elpasolite type structure, Ln3+ point symmetry Oh .
10)
CONDON considers ligand field effects on the J-mixing level and, beyond this model, the applied
field dependence of the magnetic susceptibility as well as intermolecular spin-spin exchange couplings.
37
leading generally to paramagnetism, described by the temperature dependence of the
effective Bohr magneton number eff :
1/2
NA 2eff 2B 3kB T m
m = 0 where eff = = 797.7(T m)1/2 (87)
3kB T 0 NA 2B
As a rule, eff approaches the free Ln ion value for T > 200 K (see Table 2, Figs. 8, 10,
13, 14).
Pr3+ : Applying B04 = 1938 cm1 and B06 = 290 cm1 the 1 m T plot in Fig. 13 (left)
is obtained. The octahedral LF effect produces temperature independent paramagnetism
below 100 K in agreement with the predicted non-magnetic ground state A1 (see Table 17).
Nd3+ : The magnetic behaviour of Cs2 NaNdCl6 exhibits Curie paramagnetism in the
temperature range under investigation (see Fig. 13, right). This behaviour is expected
for Ln ions with an odd number of 4f electrons in magnetically diluted systems without
cooperative interactions.
Sm3+ : On account of low lying multiplets, eff of the free Sm3+ ion is already temper-
ature dependent (see Fig. 14 (left), curve b, and Fig. 11). After switching on the cubic
ligand field (curve a), a drastic modification is observed at T < 200 K.
Eu3+ : In the complete temperature range the magnetic properties of Eu3+ compounds
are determined by the TIP on account of the non-magnetic ground multiplet with J = 0
(see Fig. 14, right). The effect of a cubic ligand field is negligible.
2.0
mol /10 mol m
120 2.0
meff
100
meff
1.6
80 1.2
1.0
5
50 0.8
40
0.4
0 0.0 0 0.0
c -1
38
4.0 8
d 7
c a
3.0 6
5
-3
mol /10 mol m
2.0 4 b
meff
b 3
-7
1.0 a c
2
d
c-1
1
0.0 0
0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400
T/K T/K
Compared to the two multiplets of the 4f 1 (Ce3+ ) free ion, the 4f 2 (Pr3+ ) free ion has
13 multiplets and, in consequence, exhibits a more complicated LF splitting pattern (see
Table 17 and ref. [13]).
Table 17: Spectroscopically determined levels of the Pr3+ ion (Oh , octahedron)
in Cs2 NaPrCl6 . The energy increases from top to bottom and from left to right.
3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 3 3 1 3 1
H4 H5 H6 F2 F3 F4 G4 D2 P0 P1 I6 P2 S0
(1) b)
A1 [1 ](0 a) ) T1 E c) E T1 E A1 T2 A1 T1 A1 T2 A1
(1)
T1 [4 ](236) T2 T2 T2 T2 T1 E E T1 E
(1)
E[3 ](422) E A1 A2 A1 T1 T2
(2)
T2 [5 ](701) T1 A2 [2 ] T2 T2 A2
(2)
T1 T2
(2)
T2 E
b) c)
a)
Experimental energy data in cm1 ; 2300 cm1; 4392 cm1 [13].
39
According to the procedure outlined in 3.3.2, only the ground multiplet 3H4 will be
considered for the 4f 2 ion, that is, one starts with the |JMJ i basis consisting of the
2J + 1 = 9 states |4 4i, |4 3i, . . . , |4 4i. The 4f 2 situation is much more complicated
than the 4f 1 one for the following reasons: In order to apply the entries of Table 13,
the |JMJ i functions have to be decomposed into the microstates of the two electrons
(cf. ref. [7], page 120). Subsequently, the operator eq. (88) must be applied. Then the
respective LF matrix elements have to be summed up and collected in a 9 9 matrix.
After diagonalisation of this matrix, the symmetry adapted functions and their energies
are obtained as a function of the LF parameters B04 and B06 .
These calculations would be time-consuming and must be worked out by a computer,
using, for example, the program CONDON [12] which is at our disposal. In general, this
program uses the complete set of basis functions, but can be restricted to the ground
multiplet11) . The results, obtained by CONDON with the restricted basis, are presented
in Table 18. A splitting in a singlet (A1 ), a doublet (E) and two triplets (T1 , T2 ) is
obtained and the entries of Table 17 are confirmed.
Tab. 18: Functions and energies after perturbation of the 3H4 (4f 2 )
ground multiplet by a cubic ligand field
q
1
24
14 | 0 i + 5 | 4 i + 5 | 4 i |A1 a1 i 28 b4 80 b6
q
1
24
10 | 0 i + 7 | 4 i + 7 | 4 i |Ei
q 4 b4 + 64 b6
1
2
(| 2 i + | 2 i) |Ei
q q
18 | 3 i 78 | 1 i |T1 1i
q
1
2
(| 4 i | 4 i) |T1 0i 14 b4 + 4 b6
q q
1 7
8
| 3 i + 8
| 1 i |T1 1i
q q
7
8
| 3 i 18 | 1 i |T2 1i
q
1
2
(| 2 i | 2 i) |T2 0i 26 b4 20 b6
q q
78 | 3 i + 18 | 1 i |T2 1i
a)
A1 1 , E 3 , T1 4 , T2 5 [6].
4 272
b)
b4 = (15/2)J B04 , b6 = (315/4)J B06 ; J = 5 445 , J = 4 459 455 .
11)
As an alternative, a rather simple method is available to determine LF effects for cubic lanthanide
systems, if the description of the LF effect within the ground multiplet is sufficient. In this method an
operator is applied that consists of so-called operator-equivalents instead of the Racah tensors. We will
come back to its practice in 3.3.7 and in Appendix 2.
40
3.3.6 4f 2 system (Pr3+, 3H4 : HLF
cub
+ Hmag )
Applying the Zeeman operator eq. (66) on the eigenfunctions, the matrix elements (89)
are obtained (in units of gJ B Bz ; gJ = 4/5).
(89)
A1 E T1 T2
M a1 1 0 1 1 0 1
q
20
A1 a1 0 0
q3
28
0 0 3
E
0 2
1 7
1 2
2
q q
20 28
T1 0 3 3
0
1 21 2
7
7 5
1 2 2
T2 0 2 0
7
1 2
52
41
(0) (1) (2)
Setting Wn , Wn and Wn into the Van Vleck eq. (60), the susceptibility equation
(0)
for the Pr3+ ion in cubic ligand fields is developed (where X Wn ()/kB T ):
NA 2B 2
m (Pr3+ ) = 0 where 2eff = gJ2 (90)
3kB T eff
40kB T 56kB T 24kB T
exp(XA1 ) + + exp(XE )
(T1 ; A1 ) (T1 ; E) (T2 ; E)
3 21kB T 40kB T 56kB T
+ + exp(XT1 )
2 (T2 ; T1 ) (T1 ; A1 ) (T1 ; E)
75 21kB T 24kB T
+ exp(XT2 )
2 (T2 ; T1 ) (T2 ; E)
1
exp(XA1 ) + 2 exp(XE ) + 3 exp(XT1 ) + 3 exp(XT2 )
For negatively charged ligands (Q > 0) which coordinate the Ln ion octahedrally, A04 (oct.)
is positive and consequently also A04 < r 4 > = B04 , whereas the A04 s for tetrahedron and
cube are negative (angle coordinates for tetrahedron: (, /4), (, 5/4), ( , 3/4),
12)
Notice, that radial integrals < rk > are positive quantities.
13)
The elementary charge e is positive; the charge of the electron is e. Ligands with the charge Qe
are negatively charged for Q > 0.
42
( , 7/4), where cos = 1/ 3; additionally for the cube (, 3/4), (, 7/4), (
, /4), ( , 5/4)):
14 Qe2 28 Qe2
A04 (tetr.) = ; A04 (cube) = (92)
9 R5 9 R5
A06
6 1/2
Qe2 X 6 4
A06 (oct.) = C (j , j ), where C06 (j , j ) = Y06 (j , j )
R7 j=1 0 13
6
Qe2 X 1 6 4 2 3 Qe2
= (231 cos j 315 cos j + 105 cos j 5) = (93)
R7 j=1 16 4 R7
8 Qe2 16 Qe2
A06 (tetr.) = ; A06 (cube) = (94)
9 R7 9 R7
For negatively charged ligands (Q > 0), A06 is positive, regardless the polyhedron.
Having fixed the sign of the LF parameters B04 and B06 , the possible LF ground states
of the Ln ion under investigation can be determined. If the program CONDON is at
our disposal, we need only the values of B04 and B06 as an input to obtain energy and
composition of the LF states. Otherwise, we can benifit from tables of eigenvectors and
diagrams of energy eigenvalues, expressed as a function of the ratio between the fourth
and sixth degree terms of H cub , that are published for all J-manifolds of the lanthanides
LF
by Lea, Leask, Wolf [16]. The immediate application of these diagrams and tables is
the prediction of spectroscopic energy level schemes and possible g-factors for lanthanide
ions in cubic coordination. We start with introductory remarks concerning the operator
equivalent technique.
43
k are obtained, whose matrix elements are proportional to the matrix elements of H
O cub .
q LF
Simple examples of operator equivalents are:
For cubic symmetry only terms with k = 4 and 6 are relevant, so that the multiplet under
consideration is generally characterised by the two figures J and J 15) . The two following
equations show the operator and its operator equivalent:
N n
X q o N n
X q o
cub (4f N ) = B 4
H 4 5 4 4 6
C0 (i) + 14 [C4 (i) + C4 (i)] + B0 6 7 6 6
C0 (i) 2 [C4 (i) + C4 (i)]
LF 0
i=1 i=1
h q i h q i
cub = B 4 O
H 4 + 5 4 + O
O 4 + B 6
O6 7 O6 + O
6 (95)
LF 0 J 0 14 4 4 0 J 0 2 4 4
The matrix elements hJMJ |O k |JM i that are necessary to set up HLF matrices are avail-
q J
able and collected in the Tables 35 38 on pages 89 90. In the following three examples
the handling of operator equivalents is shown.
Inspecting the Tables 35 and 36 the relevant data for the basis | 52 MJ i are:
4| 1 i =
h 12 |O 15 4| 5 i =
h 52 |O 15/2
0 2 0 2
3 4 3 5 4 3
(99)
h 2 |O0 | 2 i = 45/2 h 2 |O4| 2 i = 15 14/2.
15)
Exceptions are the multiplets 2F5/2 (Ce3+ [4f 1 ]) and 6H5/2 (Sm3+ [4f 5 ]) with J = 5/2, where only
is relevant.
the fourth degree term (k = 4) in H LF
44
Verification of h 25 |O04 | 5 i = 15 , given in eq. (99)
2 2
n o
04 | 5 i = 1 35 5 4 30 5 7 25 5 2 + 3 5 2 7 2 6
h 25 |O 5 7
2 8 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
1
960 15
= 128 (21 875 23 750 + 3 675 840) = 128 = 2
Notice that, applying operator equivalents, the factor h
is always omitted.
2
To complete the matrix elements they must be multiplied by J = 315
(see Table 23).
Example 3.8 shows the evaluation of the Stevens factor J .
Example 3.8 Evaluation of J for 2F5/2 [4f 1 ]
4 | 5 i (Example 3.7):
J is derived by comparing h 52 |C04 | 52 i (Example 3.5) with h 25 |O 0 2
4| 5 i J = 2 2
h 52 |C04 | 25 i = J h 25 |O 0 2 2
=
| {z } | {z } 3 57 315
1/21 15/2
2
On the basis of the operator-equivalent matrix elements (99) and J = 315 (Example 3.8)
cub 2
the HLF matrix within the basis F5/2 can be set up. It is identical to matrix (83).
Example 3.9 Application of the operator-equivalent method to Pr3+ [4f 2 ], 3H4 , J = 4
For the 4f 2 system both the fourth and the sixth degree terms of the LF operator equiv-
alents eq. (95) have to be applied. According to the 1st column in Table 17, the 9-fold
degenerate ground multiplet 3H4 decomposes under the action of a cubic LF into the
terms A1 , E, T1 , and T2 . In order to verify the splitting by use of the operator-equivalent
method, we need the matrix elements hMJ |O 0k |MJ i and hMJ |O
4
k
|MJ 4i for k = 4 and
k = 6 (Table 20 and Tables 35 38 in Appendix 2) as well as J = (4/5 445) and
J = (272/4 459 455), given in Table 23. The 9 9 matrix is divided into one 3 3 block
and three 2 2 blocks:
4 0 4
4 14 b4 + 4 b6 70 (b4 6 b6 ) 0
0 70 (b4 6 b6 ) 18 b4 20 b6 70 (b4 6 b6 )
4 0 70 (b4 6 b6 ) 14 b4 + 4 b6
15
315
where b4 = 2
J B04 , and b6 = 4
J B06 (100)
3 1 2 2
3 21 b4 17 b6 7 (5 b4 + 3 b6 )
1 7 (5 b4 + 3 b6 ) 9 b4 + b6
2 11 b4 + 22 b6 15 b4 + 42 b6
2 15 b4 + 42 b6 11 b4 + 22 b6
Evaluation of the H cub matrix yields the energies and eigenfunctions given in Table 21.
LF
The splitting in a singlet (A1 ), a doublet (E) and two triplets (T1 , T2 ) is confirmed.
45
qk in the basis
Tab. 20: Matrix elements of the operator equivalents O
2
|JMJ i (J = 4) for 4f and cubic symmetry (see Appendix 2)
qk |M i
hMJ |O k=4 k=6 qk |M i
hMJ |O k=4 k=6
J J
0k | 0 i
h 0 |O 135 1575 0k | 4 i
h4 |O 105 315
k| 1 i
h1 |O 135 315 k | 2 i 45 70 945 14
h2 |O
0 2 4 4 2 2
k| 2 i
h2 |O 165 3465 k | 1 i 105 10 945 2
h3 |O
0 2 2 4 2 4
0k | 3 i
h3 |O 315 5355 h4 |O 4
k
|0i 105 945 5
2 4
Tab. 21: Functions and energies after perturbation of the 3H4 (4f 2 )
multiplet by a cubic ligand field
Level tuning [16]: The ground state of an Ln ion in a cubic LF depends on J B04 and
J B06 . We want to obtain information about the succession of ELF of the LF states as a
function of the ratio J B04 /J B06 . Using the operator equivalent matrix elements in Tables
35 38, the (2J + 1) (2J + 1) matrix can in principle be drawn up. The tables contain
factors common to all the matrix elements, F (4) and F (6). These factors are separated
out in order to keep the energy values in the same numerical range for all ratios of the
fourth and sixth degree terms. We start out from eq. (95)
h q i h q i
H LF
cub
= J B04 O 04 + 5 O 44 + O
4
4
+ J B0
6 6
O 0 7
O 6
4 +
O 6
4
14 2
| {z } | {z }
b
O 4 b
O 6
46
= J B04 Ob 4 + B6 O b6
J 0
Ob4 Ob6
= J B04 F (4) + J B06 F (6) . (101)
F (4) F (6)
In order to cover all possible values of the ratio between the fourth and sixth degree terms
a mixing parameter x has been introduced which is governed by the relative magnitude
of B04 and B06 . Furthermore, a factor W has been defined that scales ELF :
Solving both eqs. (102) for W , an equation is obtained that covers all possible values of
the ratio between B04 and B06 . It follows that
J B04 x F (6)
= , (103)
6
J B0 1 |x| F (4)
For each J-manifold x is allowed to take the values in the range 0 1. The energy
expressions for the LF states as a function of B04 F (4) = b4 and B06 F (4) = b6 are
replaced by W x and W (1 |x|), respecticely. Table 22 exhibits the results for the 4f 2
system and Fig. 15 displays the corresponding diagram ELF /W versus x.
ELF /W
ELF
x = 0 x = 1
A1 28 b4 80 b6 W [28x 80(1 |x|)] 80 28
E 4 b4 + 64 b6 W [4x + 64(1 |x|)] 64 4
T1 14 b4 + 4 b6 W [14x + 4(1 |x|)] 4 14
T2 26 b4 20 b6 W [26x 20(1 |x|)] 20 26
Diagrams like Figs. 15 and 16, displaying LF energy eigenvalues ELF /W as a function of
the LF parameters, are available for all J-manifolds of the lanthanides ground multiplets
[16]. In examples 3.10 and 3.11 the diagrams are used to determine the LF ground state for
Pr3+ [4f 2 ] and Nd3+ [4f 3 ] in cubic LF. In example 3.12 the construction of the x ELF /W
diagram for Pr3+ is demonstrated.
47
60
E (G3) G
(2) (2)
( G8 )
40 40
20 T1 (G4) 20
E (G6)
x X
-20
T2(G5)
-40 -40 (1) (1)
G ( G8 )
A1(G1) -60
-1 0 1 -1 0 1
Fig. 15: x(ELF /W ) plot of Pr3+ [4f 2 ] (J = Fig. 16: x(ELF /W ) plot of Nd3+ [4f 3 ] (J =
4) in cubic ligand fields [16] 9/2) in cubic ligand fields [16]
48
The x(ELF /W ) diagram in Fig. 16 shows that for the situation x > 0 and W < 018)
either the quartet G or the doublet E is the ground state. Thus, ignoring interionic spin-
spin couplings, an octahedrally coordinated Nd3+ ion should exhibit Curie paramagnetism
regardless T . Fig. 13 (right) exhibits the magnetic behaviour.
Note, that the diagrams in Figs. 15 and 16 differ distinctly: While for the Pr3+ ion
exclusively straight lines result, one straight line and two curves are observed for the
Nd3+ ion (see Remarks on page 49 for further details).
Nd3+ : The signs of W and x for a tetrahedral/cubical LF:
Since both W and x are negative (according to J , J , B04 < 0 and B06 > 0, eq. (103)) the
ground state is the quartet G .
Final remarks
According to todays standard practice, we use the operator equivalents that are
related to the Racah tensors Cqk [17] while Stevens definition relates to the spher-
ical harmonics Yqk [18, 19]. Since the article of Lea, Leask, Wolf [16] is based on
Stevens definition Yqk , some hints to the conversion factors between both derivations
is informative with respect to the application of the LLW diagrams:
(i) The LLW diagrams can be applied directly, since the conversion factor for both
W and x is 1. In other words, the values O4 /F (4) (based on Yqk ) in equation
b4 /F (4) (based on C k ) in eq. (104) are identical and the
(5) of ref. [16] and O q
same is true for the sixth degree terms (k = 6).
(ii) Conversion factors 4for operator
equivalents (see eq. (96) and (97)):
p
O 4 = 1 O 4, O = 70/8 O 4
; 6 = 1 O 6, O
O 6 = 63/128 O 6
0 8 0 4 4 0 16 0 4 4
Consequence of the conversion factors:
Conversion of F (4) and F (6) [21] into F (4) and F (6) (Table 23), respectively:
F (4) = 81 F (4), F (6) = 16 1
F (6)
(iii) The LF parameters, used by LLW, B04 (LLW) and B06 (LLW) [16], include the
Stevens factors J and J , while in todays standard practice, used by us,
both are separated:
B04 (LLW) = J B04 , B06 (LLW) = J B06
Within the x(ELF /W ) diagrams there are two types of i curves to be considered:
(i) curves that are straight lines and (ii) curves that deviate more or less from
straight lines.
(i) A state i whose energy eigenvalue is a linear function of x, occurs once only in
the decomposition of the J-manifold. For example, in the cubic Pr3+ systems
with ground multiplet J = 4 each split term A1 (1 ), E(3 ), T1 (4 ), T2 (5 )
occurs once only. So, the diagram exhibits only straight lines. The state
functions have fixed compositions (see Table 21) independent of B04 and B06 .
Other examples are ions in cubic LFs with J = 52 (E (7 ), G (8 )) and 27 (E
(6 ), E (7 ), G (8 )).
18)
According to the negative sign of W , one has to mirror the x(ELF /W ) diagram at the x axis with
the consequence that the ELF /W axis shows downwards for W < 0.
49
Tab. 23: Ground states of Ln3+ ions in cubic ligand fields [16]
Ln3+ [4f N ] Ce3+ [4f 1 ] Pr3+ [4f 2 ] Nd3+ [4f 3 ] Sm3+ [4f 5 ] Tb3+ [4f 8 ]
2S+1 2 3 4 6 7
LJ F5/2 H4 I9/2 H5/2 F6
2 52 7 13 1
J 35 2 475 1 089 315 99
2 4 136 26 2
J 315 5 445 467 181 10 395 16 335
272 1 615 1
J 0 4 459 455 42 513 471
0 891 891
F (4)a) 15
2
15
2
21
2
15
2
15
2
F (6) 0 315 b)
4
315 0 945
2
+ d)
[O]c) E [ +1 ] A1 [ +
] G , E [
+
] +
E [ +1 ]
A2 , A1 [ ]
+
[T ] G [ +1 ] A1 , T2 [ + ] G [
]
G [ +1 ] A2 , E [
+
]
Ln3+ [4f N ] Dy3+ [4f 9 ] Ho3+ [4f 10 ] Er3+ [4f 11 ] Tm3+ [4f 12 ] Yb3+ [4f 13 ]
2S+1 6 5 4 3 2
LJ H15/2 I8 I15/2 H6 F7/2
2 1 4 1 2
J 315 450 1 575 99 63
8 1 2 8 2
J 135 135 30 030 45 045 49 005 1 155
4 5 8 5 4
J 3 864 861 3 864 861 3 864 861 891 891 27 027
F (4) 15
2
105
2
15
2
15
2
15
2
F (6) 3 465
4
3 465
4
3 465
4
945
2
315 b)
4
[O] E , E [ +
]
E, A1 [ + ] E , G [ +
+
] A2 , A1 [
] +
E [ ]
[T ] E , G [ +
+
]
E, T2 [ ] E , E [ +
] A2 , E [
+
] E , E [ +
+
]
a)
F (4) and F (6) are equivalent to F (4) and F (6) [16] and consider the different
definitions of the operator equivalents O qk and Oqk .
b)
Note that there is a misprint in the corresponding Table 4.39 of ref. [7].
c)
Indices O and T identify the expected LF ground state for octahedral and
tetrahedral (cubal) symmetry and negatively charged ligands (A1 1 ; A2 2 ; E
3 ; T1 4 ; T2 5 ; E 6 ; E 7 ; G 8 ).
d)
Combination of signs for the W and x parameter W x .
50
(ii) Systems with J > 4 decompose as well into states which occur more than once
and deviate from straight lines. Taking J = 29 (Nd3+ ) as an example, decom-
cub (1) (2)
position by HLF takes place into the states E (6 ), G (8 ), G (8 ). Here
(1) (2)
the energy of the states G (8 ) and G (8 ) depends in a more complicated
way on the ratio B04 /B06 and consequently on x (see Fig. 16)19) . This is the
consequence of the fact that the functions of both states transform according
to the same irreducible representation of the cubic group. The state E (6 ),
however, occurs once only. So, its energy is a linear function of x.
The multiplets of Ln3+ ions with the same J, e. g., the two pairs Tb3+ , Tm3+ (J = 6)
and Dy3+ , Er3+ (J = 15/2), respectively, are each reduced in cubic ligand fields into
the same irreducible representations.
Exact values for LF parameters cannot be calculated reliably. However, the sign
of Bqk values can often be predicted. Consequently, the signs of x and W can be
deduced, leading to the determination of the ground state.
Systems with non-integer J have exclusively magnetic states (showing Curie para-
magnetism 20) ), while in the systems with integer J ligand field ground states may be
produced which are nonmagnetic, for example A1 (1 ), A2 (2 ) and E(3 ), yielding
temperature independent paramagnetism (TIP).
The x(ELF /W ) diagrams are helpful not only for cubic systems but also for coor-
dination polyhedra that dont deviate greatly from cubic symmetry, that is, have
cubic pseudo symmetry.
To verify Fig. 15 we use Pr3+ in Cs2 NaPrCl6 as an example with B04 = 1 938 cm1 and
B06 = 290 cm1 (Table 16). With the help of the entries in Table 23 as well as eqs. (102)
and (103), the following data result:
4 4 15
b4 = J F (4)B0 = W x = 1938 cm1 = 10.68 cm1
5 445 2
6 272 315
b6 = J F (6)B0 = W (1 |x|) = 290 cm1 = 1.393 cm1
4 459 455 4
b4 x b4
= = 7.665 = x = 0.8845, W = = 12.07
b6 1 |x| x
Table 24 exhibits the LF energies corresponding with x = 0.8845 and W = 12.07.
Note that the calculated energy values, appearing in the last column of Table 24, are not
identical with the observed ones (see Table 17). One reason for the discrepancy is caused
by the fact that in our model only the ground multiplet 3H4 has been considered instead
of the full basis.
The energy difference between the LF term of highest energy (T2 ) and lowest energy
(A1 ) of the ground multiplet, usually called crystal field overall splitting (CFOS for short),
amounts to 660 cm1 (calc.) and 701 cm1 (obs.).
19)
The states are listed as a function of x in ref. [16].
20)
Curie paramagnetism means that m increases with decreasing T .
51
Tab. 24: Calculated energies ELF of the LF states of Pr3+ in Cs2 NaPrCl6 on
the basis of spectroscopically determined values B04 = 1938 and B06 = 290 cm1
[13].
ELF,calc. /cm1 a)
ELF,obs. b)
Problems
7. Determine the crystal field overall splitting (CFOS) for the Dy3+ ion in Cs2 NaDyCl6
on the basis of Fig. 35. Apply eqs. (102) and (103) as well as the entries in Table 23
and take the B04 and B06 values for Dy from Table 16. (Solutions are specified in
section 5.)
52
3.4 Non-cubic LF
3.4.1 Ligand field operators (single electron systems)
Lowering the symmetry results in LF operators with an increasing number of terms21) :
cyl = B 2 C 2 + B 4 C 4 + B 6 C 6
H (105)
LF 0 0 0 0 0 0
For d electron systems only terms with k 4 are relevant. The number of terms for f(d)
systems with cylindrical, hexagonal, tetragonal, trigonal symmetry is 3(2), 4(2), 5(3),
operators (including the symmetry Ih ) is given
6(3), respectively. A complete list of H LF
in ref. [15].
cyl
3.4.2 4f 1 system (Ce3+ , 2F5/2 : HLF )
In the following calculations the basis functions are restricted to the multiplet 2F5/2 23) .
cyl (2F5/2 ) = B 2 C 2 + B 4 C 4
Ligand field operator: H (109)
LF 0 0 0 0
Operator (109), acting on 2F5/2 , produces solely diagonal elements (q = 0). The matrix
elements hMJ |C0k |MJ i for k = 4 are known from matrix (83). The data for k = 2 are
obtained with the help of Table 8 and Table 13:
h21 |C02 | 12 i = 8
35
; h32 |C02 | 32 i = 2
35
; h52 |C02 | 52 i = 10
35
.
53
(0)
|MJ i En,LF Wn
| 21 ia) 8
B2
35 0
+ 2
B4
21 0
cyl | 23 i 2
B2 3
B4
Table 25: Splitting of the 2 F5/2 [4f 1 ] multiplet by H LF
35 0 21 0
| 25 i 10 B2 +
35 0
1
B4
21 0
a)
Wavefunctions adapted to
the magnetic field in x-direction:
| i = 12 | 21 i + | 12 i .
cyl
3.4.3 4f 1 system (Ce3+ , 2F5/2 : HLF + Hmag )
In a cylindrical/hexagonal LF the multiplet 2F5/2 is split in three doublets depending on
B02 and B04 (see section 3.4.2). To gain the susceptibility equation the influence of the
magnetic field must be considered parallel to the unique axis z and in a second direction
perpendicular to z, that is, x.
Magnetic field parallel to the unique axis: H mag,z = eg Jz Bz (g = 6 )
J J 7
The results are available in the third column of Table 26. Applying Van Vlecks equation
(60) the susceptibility equation for mk is
NA 2B 2
mk = 0 where (110)
3kB T effk
1 1 9 25 2
3 exp + + exp
4 kB T 4 4 kB T 6
2effk 2
= gJ , gJ =
1 2 7
exp + 1 + exp
kB T kB T
(0) (0) 6 5
and 1 = W1/2 W3/2 = B2
35 0
+ B4
21 0
(0) (0)
2 = W5/2 W3/2 = 12 B2 +
35 0
4
B4.
21 0
cyl , H
Table 26: Splitting of the 2 F5/2 [4f 1 ] multiplet by H magk (z) and H
mag (x);
LF
(0) (1) (1) (2)
energies ELF Wn , Zeeman coefficients Wn,z and Wn,x , Wn,x
(0) (1) (1) (2)
|MJ i En,LF Wn Wn,z /gJ B Wn,x /gJ B Wn,x /gJ2 2B a)
| 12 ib) 8
B2
35 0
+ 2
B4
21 0
21 32 2/1
| 32 i 2
B2
35 0
3
B4
21 0
23 0 5/(42 ) 2/1
| 52 i 10 B2 +
35 0
1
B4
21 0
25 0 5/(42 )
(0) (0) 6 5 (0) (0)
a)
1 = W1/2 W3/2 = 35 B02 + 21 B04 ; 2 = W5/2 W3/2 = 12 2
35 B0 +
4 4
21 B0
b)
Wave functions adapted to H mag : | i = 1 | 1 i + | 1 i .
2 2 2
54
Magnetic field perpendicular to the unique axis:
H mag,x = egJ JxBx = egJ 1
J+ + J Bx
2
mag | 5 i
h 25 |H x 2
The matrix elements h 25 |H mag | 5 i and h 3 |H mag | 3 i are zero. On account of the
x 2 2 x 2
1 1 3
off-diagonal element h 2 |Hmagx | 2 i = 2 gJ B Bx , the correct zeroth-order functions have
to be determined:
W (1) 3 g
n 2 J B (1) 3 1 1 1
3 = 0; W = g ; | i = | i + | i .
2 gJ B Wn(1) n(1,2) 2 J B 2 2 2
3
5
0 1 1
2 2
3
2 2
5
0 1 1
+ 1 1 3
2
1 1 23
55
Problems
8. In which respect does the magnetic susceptibility of a mononuclear lanthanide sys-
tems with Ln point symmetry (i) Oh , (ii) Dh, (iii) D2h differ?I
r1 2 2
1 ra 2
rb 1
rb2
ra1
a ra b b
1 = D1 D2 2 = D3 3 = D1 + D2 4 = D4
|00i |11i |10i | 1 1 i
56
a and b are normalised:
Z Z
a (1) a (1)d1 = b (2)b (2)d2 = 1,
Symmetry of the orbital forces a distinct multiplicity of the spin function on account
of the Pauli principle
Evaluation of the energy E(S) and E(T ) of the singlet and triplet states
2 2
h e2 e2 2 2
h e2 e2 e2
H= (1) (2) +
2me r rb1 2me r rb2 r12
| {z a1 }| {z a2 }
h(1)
h(2)
where
57
D E
h = a (i) h(i) a (i) (one-centre
D E
= b (i) h(i) b (i) one-electron integral)
D E
hab = a (i) h(i) b (i) (transfer or hopping integral)
2
Jab = a (1)b(2) e /r12 a (1)b (2) (Coulomb integral)
2
Kab = a (1)b(2) e /r12 a (2)b (1) (Exchange integral).
D E
1 g
Example: Evaluation of E(S) = 1
g1 H 1
1. Integration over the spin:
1
2
h(1)(2) (1)(2)|(1)(2) (1)(2)i =
1
2 |
h(1)(2)|(1)(2)i + h(2)(1)|(2)(1)i
{z } | {z }
1 1
h(2)(1)|(1)(2)i h(1)(2)|(2)(1)i = 1.
| {z } | {z }
0 0
Singlet-triplet splitting:
1
Application of the Heitler-London model to dinuclear complexes having S1 = S2 = 2
centres
58
4.2 Heisenberg operator
The interaction between the unpaired electrons of centre 1 with the ones of centre 2 are
phenomenologically described by an apparent spin-spin coupling, whose magnitude and
sign are given by the spin-spin coupling parameter (exchange parameter) Jex :
ex = 2Jex S
H 1 S
2 where 2Jex = E(T, S) (120)
is an effective operator, describing but not explaining the spin-spin coupling.
H ex
Basis: spin functions in the form | MS MS i where the first MS refers to electron 1 and
the second to electron 2
H-Matrix:
1 1 1 1 1 1 (125)
MS1 MS2 1 1
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
1 1
Jex /2
2 2
1 1
2 2 Jex /2 Jex
1 1
2
2 Jex Jex /2
1 1
2 2 Jex /2
59
Evaluation of the diagonal element H11 :
2Jex 21 21 Sz1 Sz2 21 12 = 2Jex 21 21 = Jex /2
Evaluation of the off-diagonal element H23 :
2Jex 12 21 12 S1 S+2 12 12 = Jex (1)(1) = Jex
Results:
Tab. 27: Spin functions and exchange ener-
gies of the S1 = S2 = 21 system
Spin function MS S E
1 1 1 1
1 0 0 3
J
2 2 2 2 2 2 ex
1 1
1
2 2
1 1 1 + 1 1 0 1 21 Jex
2 2 2 2 2
1 1
1
2 2
E 2 S +1 S
11
30 J 5
9
20 J 4
7
12 J 3
5 2
6J
3 1
2J
1 0
0
Fig. 18: Relative energies and multiplicities of the spin states of a dinuclear Fe3+ complex
(S = 52 ); for Cu2+ (S = 21 ) only the two lowest levels are relevant, while for Gd3+ (S = 72 ) the
two levels with S = 6 (E = |42Jex |) and S = 7 (E = |56Jex |) have to be added.
60
1
Magnetic susceptibility of a spin-spin-coupled system with S1 = S2 = 2
10 10
-1
E / cm c
8 MS
8
-1
1 b
/ 10 m mol
6
6
3
0 a
S=1 4
-7
4
2 E(T,S)
-1
m
2
S= 0 0
0
-2 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 5 10 15 20 25
B0 / T T /K
Fig. 19: Correlation diagram of a S1 = Fig. 20: m versus T diagram of a
S2 = 21 system under the influence of S1 = S2 = 12 exchange-coupled system
isotropic intramolecular spin-spin cou- with Jex = 2 cm1 at applied fields of
pling (Jex = 2 cm1 ) and applied field B0 = 0.01 T (a), 3.5 T (b), and 5 T (c)
1
Application of the Van Vleck equation (60) to a dinuclear system with S1 = S2 = 2
Zeeman operator:
Mz = e g(Sz1 + Sz2 ) Bz = e g Sz Bz
H
| {z }
H (1)
(126)
S MS 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0
1 1 gB Bz
1 0 0
1 1 gB Bz
0 0 0
Matrix elements:
|11i = g Bz W (1)
h11|H Mz B |11i = gB
|1 1i = g Bz W (1)
h1 1|H Mz B |11i = gB
61
1.0 10 a
e
9 b
c c
/ ( 10 mol m )
0.8 8 d
-3
e
d 7
0.6 6
5
b
7
0.4 4
3
0.2 a 2
cmol
-1
1
0.0 0
0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400
a T/K b T/K
2.0 e
d Jex values [cm1]:
c curve a: 50
1.5
b curve b: 25
meff
1.0 curve c: 0
curve d: +25
0.5 a
curve e: +50
0.0
0 100 200 300 400 Fig. 21 a: m T diagram
c T/K
Fig. 21 b: 1
m T diagram
Fig. 21 c: eff T diagram
62
Frequency (S ) of the states S : (S ) = (S ) (S + 1)
(S ) is the coefficient of X S in the expansion (X S + X S1 + . . . + X S )n
3. the ground term of the metal ion has no first order orbital moment
With regard to the LF symmetry of the lanthanide our choice is cubic and cylindrical for
two reasons: (i) the former is isotropic and the latter anisotropic, (ii) the number of LF
parameters is low [15] (cf. scheme (129)) 24 ) .
63
Cubic (Oh , Td )
N
X n p 4 o n p 6 o
cub =
H B04 C04 (i)+ 5/14 C4 (i) + C44 (i) + B06 C06 (i) 7/2 C4 (i) + C46 (i)
LF
i=1
p p
fixed relations: B44 = 5/14 B04 , B46 = 7/2B06
Cylindrical (Dh )
N
X
cyl =
H B02 C02 (i) + B04 C04 (i) + B06 C06 (i)
LF
i=1
12 -1
Jex = 0.5 cm
Jex = 0
10 Jex = -0.5 cm
-1
8
eff
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
T/K
64
4.5.2 Group theoretical tools II
We saw in 3.3.1 that on the basis of group theory it is possible to assign the LF split
terms of Ln ions. Symmetry aspects are also useful to assign the splitting produced by
the combined effect of H cub (eq. (86)) + H
iso (eq. (120)) on the product functions of the
LF ex
two interacting metal ions. The following examination is restricted to the simple case of
homodinuclear Ln systems equipped with orbital contributions of the magnetic moments.
The product states split under the action of H iso in singlets, doublets and triplets.
ex
The split pattern is obtained in two steps:
application of ab (R) = a (R)b (R) , where i is the character and R is a symme-
try operation, given in the headlines of Table 28.
a (R) and b (R) are the characters of the irreducible representations a and b ,
while ab (R) is the character of the (in general reducible) product state.
Example: The character system of the product functions ab 3 resulting from the
single-ion states a3 and b3 , 3 3 , is given in line 8 of Table 28.
P
application of ai = h1 R i (R) (R) to determine the irreducible parts of ab 3 ;
ai : frequency of i in ; h: order of the group;
i (R): character of the ith irreducible representation
P i for the group element R;
(R): character of of the group element R; R : sum over all group elements.
1
a1 = 24 (1 1 4 + 8 1 1 + 3 1 4 + 6 1 0 + 6 1 0) = 1
1
a2 = 24 (1 1 4 + 8 1 1 + 3 1 4 6 1 0 6 1 0) = 1
1
a3 = 24 (1 2 4 + 8 (1) 1 + 3 2 4 + 6 0 0 + 6 0 0) = 1
a4 = a5 = 0; = 3 3 1 2 3
65
For metal ions with half-integer J three types of cubic states exists: the doublets 6 (E ),
7 (E ), and the quartet 8 (G ) (cf. Tab. 29).
4 C3 4 C23 3 C2 3 C4 3 C34 6 C2
O E R
4 C23 R 4 C3 R 3 C2 R 3 C34 R 3 C4 R 6 C2 R irreducible representations
4 C3 4 C23 3 C2 3 S4 3 S34 6 d of the coupled states
Td E R 2 3
4 C3 R 4 C3 R 3 C2 R 3 S4 R 3 S4 R 6 d R
1 (A1 )a) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 (A2 ) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
3 (E) 2 2 1 1 2 0 0 0
4 (T1 ) 3 3 0 0 1 1 1 1
5 (T2 ) 3 3 0 0 1 1 1 1
6 (E )b) 2 2 1 1 0 2 2 0
7 (E ) 2 2 1 1 0 2 2 0
8 (G) 4 4 1 1 0 0 0 0
6 6 c) 4 4 1 1 0 2 2 0 1 4
7 7 4 4 1 1 0 2 2 0 1 4
8 8 16 16 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 24 25
6 7 4 4 1 1 0 2 2 0 2 5
6 8 8 8 1 1 0 0 0 0 3 4 5
7 8 8 8 1 1 0 0 0 0 3 4 5
4 6 d) 6 6 0 0 0 2 2 0 6 8
5 6 6 6 0 0 0 2 2 0 7 8
2 6 2 2 1 1 0 2 2 0 7
3 6 4 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 8
4 7 6 6 0 0 0 2 2 0 7 8
5 7 6 6 0 0 0 2 2 0 6 8
2 7 2 2 1 1 0 2 2 0 6
3 7 4 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 8
2 8 4 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 8
3 8 8 8 1 1 0 0 0 0 6 7 8
4 8 12 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 7 2 8
5 8 12 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 7 2 8
a)
1 5 : integer J; 1 3 : non-magnetic.
b)
6 8 : half-integer J; magnetic.
c)
Direct products where both metal ions have half-integer J or S.
d)
Direct products where one metal has integer J and the other has half-integer J or S.
66
4.5.3 Ce3+ Ce3+ (cub)
Fig. 23 exhibits the 4f 1 ions cubic
LF splitting of ground and excited
multiplet 2F5/2 and 2F7/2 , respectively
(2F5/2 7 + 8 ; 2F7/2 7 + 8 +
6 ). The LF ground state in octa-
hedral coordination is the doublet 7
and in tetrahedral/cubical coordina-
tion the quartet 8 .
iso
Switching on Hex with Jex = 5 cm1
between the two Ce3+ ions each
in octahedral LF the four prod-
uct states 7 7 split into 1 4
(see Fig. 24) with ground state 1
for Jex < 0 and 4 for Jex > 0.
The splitting of the excited 16 prod-
iso
uct functions 8 8 by Hex is more
complicated (see caption of Fig. 24).
Figs. 25 and 26 display the variations
Fig. 23: Ce3+ [4f 1 ]: Cubic LF splitting of the
eff vs. T for octahedral and tetrahe-
multiplets 2F5/2 and 2F7/2 ; left: octahedral LF;
dral/cubical LF and positive and neg-
right: tetrahedral/cubical LF.
ative Jex . Note that eff for the 8 LF
ground state is distinctly larger than for the doublet 7 (maximum at 2.2 and 1.3, respec-
tively, at T = 1 K).
67
Fig. 25: eff vs. T plot of an exchange-coupled Fig. 26: eff vs. T plot of an exchange-coupled
Ce-Ce unit in an oct. LF (B04 = 1 100 cm1 ); Ce-Ce unit in a cubical/tet. LF (B04 = 1 100
Jex > 0, triplet ground state (4 ); Jex < 0, cm1 ); Jex > 0, triplet ground state; Jex < 0,
singlet ground state (1 ). singlet ground state.
Remark to Fig. 26: The product states 8 8 are split by Hex into 1 (singlet (1))
2 (singlet (1)) 3 (doublet (2)) 2 4 (triplets (3)) 2 5 (triplets (3)). For Jex > 0, the
sequence of split terms is given with increasing energy by (3) (3) (3) (1) (3) (2)
(1); for Jex < 0, this order is reversed. (Remember that only the triplets are magnetic.)
(2)
| 3/2 i
ELF /cm1
(2)
0 | 5/2 i
68
4.5.4 Nd3+ Nd3+ (cub)
For B04 > 0 (oct. LF; W < 0, x > 0; cf. Ex. 3.11)
the LF ground state is 6 while for B04 < 0 (cub/
(2)
tet) 8 is lowest in energy (see Fig. 28).
Fig. 28: Splitting of the Nd ground multiplet Fig. 29: Splitting of the 8 8 product states
(1) (2)
by cubic LFs (4I9/2 6 8 8 ) [16]. of NdNd by Hex ( 1 2 3 2 4 2 5 ).
4.0 -1
4.0 -1
Jex = 1 cm Jex = 1 cm
Jex = 0
Jex = 0 -1
Jex = -1 cm
-1
Jex = -1 cm
3.5 3.5
3.0 3.0
eff
eff
2.5 2.5
2.0 2.0
1.5 1.5
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
T/K T/K
Fig. 30: eff vs. T plot of an exchange-coupled Fig. 31: eff vs. T plot of an exchange-coupled
NdNd unit in an octahedral LF (LF ground NdNd unit in a cubical/tetrahedral LF (LF
state 6 ). For Jex > 0, the ground state is ground state 8 ). For both situations, Jex < 0
magnetic (triplet 4 ), while for Jex < 0, the and Jex > 0, the ground state is a singlet, that
ground state is nonmagnetic (singlet 1 ), that is, eff 0 as well as eff 0 at T 0 (cf.
is, eff 0 at T 0. Fig. 29).
Results: Fig. 30: Only a little increase of eff is observed after switching on Hex ;
Fig. 31: For the ferromagnetically coupled Nd-Nd the peak of eff at 1 K is remarkable.
69
4.5.5 Sm3+ Sm3+ (cub)
0.40 0.8 -1
Jex = 1 cm
-1 Jex = 1 cm
Jex = 0
0.35 Jex = 0 0.7
-1
Jex = -1 cm
-1 Jex = -1 cm
0.30 0.6
0.25 0.5
0.4
eff
eff
0.20
0.15 0.3
0.10 0.2
0.05 0.1
0.00 0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
T/K T/K
7 7 1 4 8 8 1 2 3 24 25
70
4.5.7 Dy3+ Dy3+ (cub)
12 12
10 10
-1 -1
Jex = 1 cm Jex = 1 cm
8 Jex = 0 8 Jex = 0
-1 -1
Jex = -1 cm Jex = -1 cm
6
eff
6
eff
4 4
2 2
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
T/K T/K
Fig. 36: eff versus T plot of an exchange- Fig. 37: Exchange-coupled dinuclear Dy unit
coupled DyDy unit in an octahedral LF (B04 = in a cubical/tetrahedral LF (B04 = 2 000 cm1 ;
(1)
2 000 cm1 ; LF ground state 6 ). LF ground state 8 ).
Results: For LF ground state 6 (Fig. 36) Jex > 0 enhances eff in the whole temperature
range while for Jex < 0 eff diminishes. For LF ground state 8 (Fig. 37) it is remarkable
that for Jex > 0 eff drops steeply from 11.3 to 2.2 far below eff = 8.9 of the uncoupled
Dy-Dy pair, caused by a very weak magnet contribution of the ground triplet.
71
4.5.8 Dy3+ Dy3+ (cyl)
(2)
420 | 11/2 i
(2)
404 | 9/2 i
.. .. ..
. . .
(2)
315 | 7/2 i
(2)
305 | 13/2 i
.. .. ..
. . .
(2)
206 | 5/2 i
.. .. ..
. . .
(2)
114 | 3/2 i
ELF /cm1
(2)
62 | 1/2 i
eff a)
3+
Ln
Ce3+ Nd3+ Sm3+ Tb3+ Dy3+ 1. Cubic Ln systems are no good
free ion 2.54 3.62 0.84 9.72 10.64 candidates for large eff ;
72
4.6 Heterodinuclear transition metallanthanide systems
ML MS J MJ MJ = ML + MS J
q q 1
3 23 1 12 + 13 0 12
2
1
2
1
2
1 2
q P1/2
2
q1 1 1 2
5 3
1 1
2
3 0 12
2 2
21
Since the calculations are restricted to the ground multiplet J = 1/2, H ex can be
applied in the form
H ex = 2Jex (g 1) J S = 2(g 1)J ex
J
S
z z +
J
S
x x +
J
S
y y
| J {z } J
De Gennes
h i
1
= 2(gJ 1)Jex Jz Sz + 2 J+ S + J S+ (131)
with the advantage, that for the p system the basis functions |J MJ i can be used.
Basis functions of ps: | MJ MS i, MJ referring to the p electron and MS to the s electron
According to g1/2 = 23 for 2 P1/2 (see eq. (2)), the De Gennes factor is g1/2 1 = 13 , and
(gJ 1)J is the component SJ of S in direction of J .
H-Matrix of operator (131):
Tab. 31: Functions and ex-
1 1 1 1 1 1 change energies of the J = 21 ,
MJ MS 21 12
2 2
2 2
2 2 S = 12 system
1 1 1
J
2 2 6 ex Function E
1 1
2 2 16 Jex 1
J
3 ex
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 12 Jex
2 2 2 2 2
2
2 1
J
3 ex
16 Jex 1 1
1 1
2 2
2 2 1
J
6 ex 1 1 1 1
1 + 1
J
2 2 2 2 2 6 ex
(132) 1 1
2 2
Evaluation of the diagonal element H11 :
2( 31 )Jex 12 21 Jz Sz 12 21 = ( 23 )Jex 12 1
2
= 16 Jex
25)
The complete set of basis functions of 2 P1/2 and 2 P3/2 is given Table 6.
73
Evaluation of the off-diagonal element H23 :
( 23 )Jex 12 21 ( 21 )J S+ 12 12 = ( 32 )Jex ( 12 )(1)(1) = 31 Jex
74
4.6.2 Gd3+ Cu2+ (S = 1/2)
Fig. 39: eff vs. T plot of a ferromagnetically coupled and an uncoupled Gd3+ Cu2+ unit as a
function of the applied field: Jex = 5 cm1 (solid lines), Jex = 0 (dotted lines); gGd = gCu = 2;
B0 = 0.01 (a), 0.1 (b), 1.0 T (c).
The solid lines in Fig. 39 refer to a heterodinuclear Gd3+ Cu2+ complex (SGd = 7/2;
SCu = 1/2) of ferromagnetically coupled spins with the exchange parameter Jex = 5 cm1 .
Solely for B0 = 0.01 T (a) the expected plateau at eff = 8.94 is obtained at T
2 K except for T 0.2 K. In order to adjust Jex by fitting procedures to corresponding
experimental data, it is justified to apply a susceptibility equation valid for B0 0 (Van
Vleck approach). For measurements with the stronger field 0.1 T (b) and all the more 1 T
(c) deviations are obvious, which are not adequately described by the simple model. They
could be misinterpreted, however, as an additional antiferromagnetic intermolecular spin-
spin coupling. A similar problem arises if a corresponding uncoupled system is considered
(Fig. 39, dotted lines). A straight line parallel to the T axis is obtained at eff = 8.13 for
B0 0 (curve a) while increasing deviations from this reference line to lower values are
again obvious with increasing field (b, c), falsely interpreted as an intramolecular spin-
spin coupling of antiferromagnetic nature. Hence, either the measurements are carried
out at very weak applied fields or the extended susceptibility formula is used as in the
given model calculations.
75
4.6.3 Ce3+ (cub)Cu2+ (S = 1/2)
After discussion of the p1 s1 case under the influence of HSO + Hex , we pass to the f 1 s1
system perturbed by HSO + HLF + Hex . To clarify the computational procedures, the low-
temperature magnetic behaviour of a system consisting of a 4f 1 ion, exchange-coupled
to a pure spin system with S = 12 , is described with restricted basis functions. After
oct
switching on HSO and HLF acting on the Ce3+ ion, only the ground doublet 7 (E ) is
considered for spin-spin coupling with the 2 S1/2 system (represented here by Cu2+ [3d9 ]).
The procedure is outlined by three steps:
H
4f 1 SO
2
F5/2 + 2 F7/2
H oct
2 LF
F5/2 7 + 8
Hex
7 6 2 5
The wave functions of the Ce3+ doublet 7 are given in Tab. 32. The state is assumed to
be thermally isolated (similar to 2 P1/2 of the ps molecule (see section 4.6.1) on account
of HSO > HLF (oct) Hex ) and exchange-coupled to the S = 12 pure spin system.
|Mi |MJ i
E q E q E
1 5 5 3
E = 6 2
6 2
E q E q E 7
1
E = 6
52 56 23
1 1 (133)
MJ MS E , 21 E ,
2
E ,
2
E , 1
2
1
E , 2 5
42 Jex
1
E , 2 5
J
42 ex
21 5
Jex
1
E , 2 5
21 Jex 5
J
42 ex
1
E , 2 5
42 Jex
Results:
15 5 10
Esinglet = 42 Jex Etriplet = 42 Jex E = Etriplet Esinglet = 21 Jex
Simulation calculations: For Jex > 0, the triplet state 5 is the ground state while for
Jex < 0 the singlet 2 has the lowest energy (as is predicted for the restricted basis).
76
Figs. 40 and 41 exhibit the corresponding eff vs. T plots and Figs. 42 and 43 the 1m vs.
26)
T plots . Inspecting Fig. 40 it is remarkable that at T > 5 K the antiferromagnetic spin-
spin coupling yields higher eff values than the ferromagnetic spin-spin coupling. This
finding is the consequence of the fact that corresponding to Hunds third rule J is L S
and that for a spin-spin coupling of antiferromagnetic nature the spin parts of the JS
dinuclear unit cancel to a certain degree, so that the orbital part is enhanced. As opposed
to that, the spin-spin coupling of ferromagnetic nature leads to a further weakening of
the orbital part of the 4f 1 configuration. The fact that the eff values of the uncoupled
CeCu unit at T < 2 K are larger than the eff values of both coupled systems is the
consequence of the reduction of orbital parts according to the exchange splitting.
3.0 1.0
-1
Jex = 10 cm
Jex = 0
-1
2.5 Jex = -10 cm 0.8
2.0 0.6 -1
Jex = 10 cm
eff
eff
-1
Jex = -10 cm
1.5 0.4
1.0 0.2
0.5 0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
T/K T/K
Fig. 40: eff vs. T plot of an exchange-coupled Fig. 41: eff vs. T plot of an exchange-coupled
Ce3+ Cu2+ (S = 12 ) unit; Ce in octahedral LF Ce3+ Cu2+ (S = 12 ) unit at T <1.5 K; Ce in
(B04 = 1 100 cm1 ). octahedral LF (B04 = 1 100 cm1 ).
2.5
Jex = 10 cm-1 Fig. 42: 1m vs. T plot of the exchange-
Jex = 0
coupled Ce (oct)Cu2+ (S = 21 ) unit.
3+
Jex = -10 cm-1
2.0
-3
1.5
peratures, the spin-spin coupling produces
small parallel shifts of the 1
m T curve of
7
0.0 where (1
m ) corresponds with the shifted
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 curve and MF is the molecular field param-
T/K eter.
26)
The data presented in Figs. 40 43 have been calculated with the full basis set of 14 2 = 28
functions (using the computer program CONDON).
77
Fig. 43 displays that at T < 5 K the blue curve (Jex < 0) tends to temperature
independent paramagnetism (TIP), whereas the red curve (Jex > 0) exhibits Curie para-
magnetism.
1.4
-1
Jex = 10 cm
Jex = 0
1.2 -1
Jex = -10 cm
1.0
-3
m / 10 mol m
0.8
6
0.6
-1
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5
T/K
.. ..
. .
(2) (3)
316 3 321 4/5
.. ..
ELF /cm1 . ELF /cm1 .
(1) (3)
7 2 7 5
(3) (1)
0 5 0 2
Jex > 0 Jex < 0
1 vs. T plot of an exchange-coupled Ce3+ (oct)Cu2+ (S = 1 ) unit, showing the
Fig. 43: m 2
crossing of the red and blue curve around 0.2 K and the energy splitting of the two lowest states
5 and 2 due to Hex .
In Fig. 43 the black reference curve of the uncoupled system follows Curies law in
a good approximation on account of the thermally isolated states 7 (Ce) and 6 (Cu).
Both states show linear 1
m T behaviour (apart from a very small 2
nd
order Zeeman
contribution of 7 ).
78
of the fact that the residual component of the spin-spin coupling strengthens the orbital
part of the lanthanides moment.
4.5
4.0
3.5 Jex = 5 cm
-1
Jex = 0
3.0
-1
Jex = -5 cm
2.5
eff
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
T/K
Fig. 44: eff vs. T diagram of an exchange- Fig. 45: eff vs. T diagram of an exchange-
coupled Nd3+ Cu2+ unit with Nd in a cubic coupled Nd3+ Cr3+ unit with Nd in a cubic
LF (B04 = 2 000 cm1 ) and Cu regarded as a LF (B04 = 2 000 cm1 ) and Cr regarded as a
pure spin system S = 21 . pure spin system S = 32 .
12 -1
Jex = 5 cm
Jex = 0
-1
Jex = -5 cm
10
eff
4
0 10 20 30 40 50
T/K
k
Fig. 46: eff vs. T diagram of an exchange- Fig. 47: DyDy(cyl): eff
eff
k
coupled Dy3+ Cu2+ unit where Dy is in a cubic Dy(cyl)Cr: eff
eff
LF (B04 = 2 000 cm1 ) whereas Cu is regarded Tb(cyl)Cr:
k
eff
eff
as a pure spin system S = 21 .
79
4.6.6 Gd3+ V3+
The 4f ion (Gd3+ , 8 S7/2 ) is regarded as a pure spin system, unaffected by ligands, zero-
field splitting ignored. The electronic situation of the transition metal ion (for example
V3+ ) depends on HLF and HSO , demonstrated in Figure 48.
5
-3
4
mol m
3
7
/ 10
eff
mol
-1
2
1
0 0
T/K
Fig. 48: eff versus T and 1 m versus T diagrams showing the predicted mag-
3+ 2
netic behaviour of V [3d ] ion in octahedral (solid lines) and orthorhombic sur-
rounding (dashed lines); parameter values [6]: Racah parameters B = 861 cm1 ,
C = 4 165 cm1 , = 209 cm1 , B04 = 25 000 cm1 for the octahedral coordination,
B02 = 34 000, B22 = 16 000, B04 = 3 500, B24 = 1 800, B44 = 2 300 cm1 for
orthorhombic symmetry.
While the octahedral system shows between 100 K and 300 K nearly temperature inde-
pendent paramagnetism, the orthorhombic one approximates to a Curie paramagnet with
only slightly varying eff . The two situations differ distinctly in the orbital contributions
to the magnetic moment. The expected magnetic properties of the V3+ Gd3+ unit is
given in Figures 49 and 50).
If V3+ is octahedrally coordinated, eff in the uncoupled situation (Jex = 0) is tem-
perature dependent owing to the loss of magnetic activity of vanadium with decreasing
temperature (see the solid reference line in Figure 49, eff = 8.37 (300 K) 8.05 (50 K)).
When T approaches zero solely the magnetism of Gd3+ contributes. The uncoupled system
with vanadium in orthorhombic symmetry, however, exhibits a temperature independent
eff , except for T 25 K. This is the consequence of the nearly total quenching of orbital
contributions of vanadiums valence electrons owing to the low-symmetric ligand field. In
consequence, the transition metal ion behaves in a wide temperature range as a pure spin
system S = 1.
80
10
9
eff
7
-1
J [cm ] 8
ex
10
B [T]
5 7 0
6
2 0
0 1
6
-2 5
-5
5 5
-10
0 50 100 150
T / K
Fig. 49: eff versus T diagram (B0 = 0) showing the predicted mag-
netic behaviour of an exchange-coupled 3d2 (oct)4f 7 species where Jex =
0, 2, 5, 10 cm1 ; insert: model calculations for Jex = 2 cm1 and B0 = 0,
1, and 5 T.
10
10
eff
Jex [cm 9
-1
]
10
6 5
8 B0 [T]
2 0
0 7 1
-2 5
5 -5
6
-10 0 50 100 150
T/K
Fig. 50: eff versus T diagram (B0 = 0) showing the predicted mag-
netic behaviour of an exchange-coupled 3d2 (rhomb)4f 7 species where Jex =
0, 2, 5, 10 cm1 ; insert: model calculations for Jex = 2 cm1 and B0 = 0,
1, and 5 T.
81
Switching on the intramolecular spin-spin coupling Jex we see a distinct dependence
of the magnetic properties on the sign of Jex and the transition metals symmetry: Re-
garding first the cubic case with a ferromagnetic coupling (Jex > 0), eff increases, for
antiferromagnetic coupling (Jex < 0) eff decreases compared to the reference line. How-
ever, in contrast to pure spin systems, where we expect a plateau at low temperature,
the course is more complicated reflecting the reduction of vanadiums paramagnetism.
If the transition metal site has only orthorhombic symmetry significant alterations are
ascertained in the course of eff versus T : At low temperature plateaus become apparent
at eff 9.9 and 5.9 for positive and negative Jex corresponding to systems with total
spin S = 9/2 and 5/2, respectively. The decrease of eff at the lowest temperatures is
again due to small orbital contributions of vanadiums electronic system.
Problems
9. The Bleaney-Bowers formula, eq. (127), approaches for high temperature the Curie-
Weiss law m = C/(T ). Determine the relation between
P Jex and . Is the result
in agreement with the relation = (2S(S + 1)/3kB ) i zi Jex ?
10. What magnetic behaviour is obtained, if in the Bleaney-Bowers formula, eq. (127),
Jex is set to 0?
11. What are the electronic (4f N ) and the LF symmetry relevant preconditions for build-
ing up a homodinuclear Ln molecule with large eff and high magnetic anisotropy?
12. Magnetochemical results are often presented as m T , 1
m T or eff T diagrams.
What type of diagram is suited for (a) Curie paramagnetism, (b) intramolecular
ferromagnetic interactions, (c) intramolekular antiferromagnetic interactions, (d)
diamagnetic behaviour, (e) TUP behaviour?
13. To reliably characterise magnetic properties measurements at different field strength
are essential. What is the reason?
14. A frequent mistake in magnetochemical investigations is the application of too strong
magnetic fields. Why may this be unfavourable?
15. To evaluate the paramagnetic part of the susceptibility of a compound with macro-
cyclic ligands, the problem may occur that the incremental method for the diamag-
netic correction is not as precise as necessary. What is to be done?
16. For a polynuclear complex one observes at high temperature Curie-Weiss behaviour
with > 0 and in the low-temperature region field-dependent susceptibilities. What
magnetic collective effect can be expected?
17. With decreasing temperature the eff data of a homodinuclear compound increase
weakly and then, after passing a maximum at low temperature, steeply drop. (i)
What is the reason for this behaviour? (ii) What model (susceptibility expression)
should be tried to simulate the behaviour?
18. You notice that the paramagnetic properties of a homodinuclear molecular com-
pound is not satisfactorily described with the corresponding eq. (128). What simple
extensions of the model are in principle possible?
82
5 Solutions
1. Verify the Russell-Saunders ground multiplets for Nd2+ and Er3+ given in Table 2.
Nd2+ [4f 4 ]: L = 6, S = 2, J = 4 = 5 I4 .
Er3+ [4f 11 ]: L = 6, S = 3/2, J = 15/2 = 5 I15/2 .
2. Evaluate the susceptibility equation for a free p1 system perturbed by spin-orbit
coupling. (Hint: Apply eq. (3); note that for the single-electron system LS .)
1
3
2 2
+ 21 32 2
g1/2 = 1 + 1
3 = 23
2
3
5 2 1 2 3
+ 2
g3/2 = 1 + 2 2 3 2 5 2 = 43
2 2 2
2 2 k T
1/2 = 32 1
2
3
2
+ 2 2
3
1 3
2 B
= 31 + 8 k9BT
2 3 5
3/2 = 43 2 2
+ 2 34 1 43 2 kBT = 20 3
4 k9BT
NA 2B Z
m = 0 , where
3k T N
B
Z = 2 3 + 9 exp 8 k3BT + 4 20
1 8 kB T
3
4 kB T
9
exp 815
kB T
N = 2 exp 8 k3BT + 4 exp 815
kB T
1 8 kB T 40 8 kB T 3
+ + exp
NA 2B 3 9 3 9 2 kB T
m = 0 (134)
3kB T 3
1 + 2 exp
2kB T
To verify eq. (134), it is recommended to develop the susceptibility equation for the
borderline case 0 (use p the approximation exp x 1 x). For an uncoupled
1
system the relation = L(L + 1) + 4S(S + 1) B holds, so that for the p system
(L = 1, S = 1/2) the permanent magnetic moment = 5 B and the susceptibility
equation m = 0 5NA 2B /(3kB T ) must be the results.
3. Use the spherical harmonics in Table 3 and construct the real functions dx2 y2 and
dxy with the help of eqs. (8). Verify the results with the data given in Table 4.
hq i
1 1 15 2
2
[n,l,ml + n,l,ml ] = 2 32
sin (cos 2 + i sin 2 + cos 2 i sin 2)
q
= sin2 cos 2 = dx2 y2
15
16
hq i
1 [n,l,ml n,l,ml ] = i1 2 15
sin 2
(cos 2 + i sin 2 cos 2 + i sin 2)
2 32
q
15
= 16
sin2 sin 2 = dxy
83
4. Calculate the matrix elements hl, ml |lq |l, ml i (where q stands for z, +, ):
(a) h0, 0|lz |0, 0i, (b) h2, 2|l+ |2, 1i, (c) h2, 2|l+2
|2, 0i, (d) h2, 0|l+l |2, 0i.
(Hint: Apply eqs. (20))
(a) h0, 0|lz |0, 0i = 0 (b) h2, 2|l+ |2, 1i = 2 3 1 2 h h2, 2|2, 2i = 2 h
| {z }
2 2 1
(c) h2, 2|l+
2
|2, 0i = 6 h h2, 2|l+ |2, 1i = 2 6 h h2, 2|2, 2i = 2 6 h
| {z }
p 1
(d) h2, 0|l+ l |2, 0i = 6 h h2, 0|l+|2, 1i = 6 + (1 + 1) h 6h 2
h2, 0|2, 0i = 6 h
| {z }
1
6. What levels (multiplets J) may arise from the terms (a) 1 S, (b) 2 P , (c) 3 P , (d) 3 D,
(e) 4 D? How many states (distinguished by the quantum number MJ ) belong to
each level?
(a) 1 S: J = 0 (1 state)
(b) 2 P : J = 12 (2), J = 32 (4)
(c) 3 P : J = 0 (1), J = 1 (3), J = 2 (5)
(d) 3 D: J = 1 (3), J = 2 (5), J = 3 (7)
(e) 4 D: J = 21 (2), J = 32 (4), J = 52 (6), J= 7
2
(8)
7. Determine the crystal field overall splitting (CFOS) for the Dy3+ ion in Cs2 NaDyCl6
on the basis of Fig. 35. Apply eqs. (102) and (103) as well as the entries in Table 23
and take the B04 and B06 values for Dy from Table 16.
8 15
J F (4)B04 = Wx = 1 614 cm1 = 0.7166 cm1
135 135 2
27)
According to the phase convention one has to change the sign of a and b (cf. Example 2.3).
84
4 3465
J F (6)B06 = W (1 |x|) = 148 cm1 = 0.1327 cm1
3 864 861 4
x
= 5.401 = x = 0.8438, W = 0.8493
1 |x|
On account of W > 0 the ELF /W axis points upwards. Consequently, the LF
ground state at x = 0.8438 is 6 . The corresponding LF state of highest energy
(3) (3)
is 8 . The energy separation ELF /W between 8 and 6 is 490 cm1 , so that
CFOS = ELF = 490 0.8493 cm1 = 416 cm1 , in agreement with the data given
in ref. [26], p. 2591.
8. In which respect does the magnetic susceptibility of a mononuclear lanthanide sys-
tems with Ln point symmetry (i) Oh , (ii) Dh, (iii) D2h differ?
(i) Oh : isotropic (cubic) system (x = y = z )
(ii) Dh : anisotropic (cylindrical) system (x = y 6= z )
(iii) D2h : anisotropic (orthorhombic) system (x 6= y 6= z )
9. The Bleaney-Bowers formula, eq. (127), approaches at high temperature the Curie-
Weiss law m = C/(T ). Determine the relation between
P Jex and . Is the result
in agreement with the relation = [2S(S + 1)/3kB ] i zi Jex,i ?
NA 2B g 2 1
m = 0 (exp x 1 x for x 0)
3kB T 1 2Jex
1 + exp
3 kB T
2 2
NA B g 1 0 NA 2B g 2 0 NA 2B g 2 3
0 = =
3kB 4 2Jex 2Jex Jex 4
T T 4kB 3kB T
3 3kB T T 2kB
Jex X Jex
= ; [2S(S + 1)/3kB ] zi Jex,i = for S = 12 , i = 1, zi = 1
2kB i
2k B
10. What magnetic behaviour is obtained, if in the Bleaney-Bowers formula, eq. (127),
Jex is set to 0?
NA 2B g 2 1 NA 2B g 2 3
m = 0 J
ex =0
m = Curie law
3kB T 1 2Jex 3kB T 4
1 + exp
3 kB T
11. What are the electronic (4f N ) and LF symmetrical preconditions for building up a
homodinuclear Ln molecule with large eff and high magnetic anisotropy?
(i) Ln from the second half of the Ln series (on account of free ion ground states
with J = L + S);
(ii) Ln with half-integer J (nonmagnetic LF ground states of the Ln ion are ruled
out);
(iii) Ln with large S and large L;
(iv) anisotropic LF, for example unique axis anisotropy (cylindrical, hexagonal,
tetragonal)
85
12. Magnetochemical results are often presented as m T , 1
m T or eff T plots. What
type of diagram is suited for molecular systems showing (a) Curie paramagnetism,
(b) intramolecular ferromagnetic interactions, (c) intramolekular antiferromagnetic
interactions, (d) diamagnetic behaviour, (e) TUP behaviour?
(a) 1
m T (b) eff T (c), (d), (e) m T
15. To evaluate the paramagnetic part of the susceptibility of a compound with macro-
cyclic ligands, the problem may occur that the incremental method for the diamag-
netic correction is not as precise as necessary. What is to be done?
Measurement of the magnetic susceptibility of the ligand.
16. For a polynuclear complex one observes at high temperature Curie-Weiss behaviour
with > 0 and in the low-temperature region field-dependent susceptibilities. What
magnetic collective effect can be expected?
Ferromagnetism
17. With decreasing temperature the eff data of a homodinuclear compound increase
weakly and then, after passing a maximum at low temperature, steeply drop. (i)
What is the reason for this behaviour? (ii) What model (susceptibility expression)
should be tried to simulate the behaviour?
(i) Intramolecular spin-spin coupling of ferromagnetic nature, intermolecular spin-
spin coupling of antiferromagnetic nature.
1
(ii) Consideration of a molecular field parameter MF : 1
m = (m ) MF
18. You notice that the paramagnetic properties of a homodinuclear molecular com-
pound is not satisfactorily described with the corresponding eq. (128). What simple
extensions of the model are in principle possible?
(i) Addition of a TIP term 0 ;
(ii) Consideration of intermolecular exchange interactions by a molecular field pa-
rameter MF .
86
6 Appendix 1
6.1 Magnetic quantities
Table 33: Definitions, units and conversion factors [5]
87
The legal SI units are not generally accepted. The CGS-emu system is still widely
used in magnetochemistry. Therefore, use magnetic quantities which are indepen-
dent of the two systems, e. g., eff or 2eff instead of m T .
Do not mix the systems, e. g., use G (Gauss) instead of T (Tesla) in the CGS-emu
system.
J eV s1 cm1 K T kJ/mol
1J 1 6.24151 1.50919 5.03411 7.24292 1.07828 6.02214
1018 1033 1022 1022 1023 1020
1 eV 1.0218 1 2.1799 8.6554 1.6045 1.72760 9.64853
19 14 3 4
10 10 10 10 104 101
1 s1 6.62607 4.13567 1 3.33564 4.79922 7.14477 3.99031
1034 1015 1011 1011 1011 1013
1 cm1 1.98645 1.23984 2.99792 1 1.43877 2.14195 1.19626
23 4 10
10 10 10 102
1K 1.38066 8.61739 2.08367 6.95039 1 1.48874 8.31451
1023 105 1010 101 103
1T 9.27402 5.78839 1.39963 4.66864 6.71710 1 5.58494
24 5 10 1 1
10 10 10 10 10 103
1 kJ/mol 1.66054 1.03642 2.50607 8.35933 1.20272 1.79053 1
1021 102 1012 101 102 102
88
7 Appendix 2: Matrix elements of operator equiva-
lents
Tab. 35: 4 [20]
Matrix elements of the operator equivalents O 0
hMJ ||MJ i
J F (4)a)
12 32 25 72 92 11
2
13
2
15
2
5
2
15/2 2 3 1
7
2
15/2 9 3 13 7
9
2
21/2 18 3 17 22 18
11
2
15 28 12 13 33 27 33
13
2
15/2 108 63 13 92 132 77 143
15
2
15/2 189 129 23 101 201 221 91 273
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
4 15/2 18 9 11 21 14
5 105/2 6 4 1 6 6 6
6 15/2 84 64 11 54 96 66 99
7 3/2 756 621 251 249 704 869 429 1001
8 105/2 36 31 17 3 24 39 39 13 52
a)
In ref. [20] the respective products F (4) O
04 etc. are listed.
hMJ ||MJ 4i
J F (44)
h 25 || 32 i h 72 || 21 i h 92 || 12 i h 11 || 3 i
2 2
h 13
2 2
|| 5 i h 15 || 7 i
2 2
5
p
2
3 35/2 5
7
p
2
3 35/2 5 3 35
9
p
2
21 5/2 5 3 5 2 3 2
11
2
3 35 35 3 105 5 21 165
13
p
2
3 35/2 42 5 35 6 15 22 15 11 715
15
p
2
3 35/2 42 15 10 231 15 77 5 429 5005 1365
h2|| 2i h3|| 1i h4||0i h5||1i h6||2i h7||3i h8||4i
p
4 3 35/2 15 5 7 70
p
5 3 35/2 35 5 42 3 70 210
p
6 3 35/2 70 21 10 15 14 5 66 3 55
p
7 3 35/2 126 70 3 5 462 15 33 5 143 1001
p
8 3 35/2 210 6 1155 15 154 5 1001 15 015 5 273 2 455
89
Tab. 37: 6 [20]
Matrix elements of the operator equivalents O 0
hMJ ||MJ i
J F (6)
12 23 52 72 29 11
2
13
2
15
2
5
2
0 0 0 0
7
2
315/4 5 9 5 1
9
2
315 8 6 10 11 3
11
2
945/2 20 4 25 11 31 11
13
2
135 200 25 185 227 11 319 143
15
2
3465/4 75 25 45 87 59 39 117 65
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
4 315/4 20 1 22 17 4
5 315/2 40 12 36 29 48 15
6 945/2 40 20 22 43 8 55 22
7 945/4 200 125 50 197 176 55 286 143
8 3465/4 120 85 2 93 128 65 78 169 104
hMJ ||MJ 4i
J F (64)
h 25 || 32 i h 72 || 21 i h 29 || 12 i h 11 || 3 i
2 2
h 13 || 5 i
2 2
h 15 || 7 i
2 2
5
2
0 0
7
2
45 14/4 7 3 3 35
9
2
315 2/4 16 3 6 2 30 2
11
2
135 7/2 63 105 13 21 7 165
13
2
135 14/2 56 5 21 6 13 22 46 11 6 715
15
2
495 14/4 42 15 6 231 3 77 7 429 3 5005 5 1365
h2|| 2i h3|| 1i h4||0i h5||1i h6||2i h7||3i h8||4i
4 135 14/4 14 7 2 70
5 45 14/4 168 13 42 12 70 15 210
6 135 14/4 168 35 10 8 14 21 66 28 55
7 45 14/4 1260 546 3 6 462 147 33 126 143 45 1001
8 495 14/4 252 6 1155 6 154 3 1001 2 15 015 19 273 12 455
90
References
[1] A. F. Williams, A Theoretical Approach to Inorganic Chemistry, Springer, Berlin
(1979).
[2] J. H. Van Vleck, Electric and Magnetic Susceptibilities, Oxford University Press,
Oxford 1932.
[10] H. Bethe, Termaufspaltung in Kristallen, Ann. Phys. 1929, 5, 133 - 208; further
publication of this article in: Symmetry in chemical theory, Benchmark papers in
inorganic chemistry, vol. 4, ed. J. P. Fackler, Jr., Dowden, Hutchinson, Ross, Inc.
1973 (ISBN: 0-87933-018-X).
[12] H. Schilder, H. Lueken, Computerized magnetic studies on d, f, dd, ff, and dS,
fS systems under varying ligand and magnetic fields J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 2004,
281, 17- 26.
91
[16] K. R. Lea, M. J. M. Leask, W. P. Wolf: The Raising of Angular Momentum Degen-
eracy of f-Electronic Terms by Cubic Crystal Fields, J. Phys. Chem. Solids, 1962,
23, 1381 - 1405.
[17] D. Smith, J. H. M. Thornley, The use of operator equivalents, Proc. Phys. Soc. 1966,
89, 779.
[18] K. W. H. Stevens, Matrix elements and operator equivalents connected with the
magnetic properties of rare earth ions, Proc. Phys. Soc. A [London] 1952, 65, 209.
[19] R. J. Elliott, K. W. H. Stevens, Proc. Roy. Soc. A [London] 1953, 218, 553.
[22] A. J. Kassman, Relationships between the coefficients of the tensor operator and
operator equivalent methods, J. Chem. Phys. 1970, 53, 4118 - 4119.
[25] A. Schroder, R. van den Berg, H. von Lohneysen, H. Lueken, Solid state commun.
1988, 65, 99 - 101.
[26] C. A. Morrison, R. P. Leavitt, and D. E. Wortman, J. Chem. Phys. 1980, 73, 2580
- 2598.
92