Atomic beam study of a superconductorșs magnetic vortex lattice

Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics

Volumn 55, Issue 9, 1997, Pages 5655-5658

  Dapore Schwartz, Samuel ^a   Woodard, Nathan G ^a   Lafyatis, Gregory P ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0013355212     PISSN: 10980121     EISSN: 1550235X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.55.5655     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. P. L. Gammel et. al Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 2592 (1987).
2. D. J. Bishop, Physica B 169, 72 (1991).
3. C. A. Bolle et. al Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 112 (1991).
4. ibid. D. G. Grier, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 2270 (1991).
5. H. F. Hess, Physica B 169, 422 (1991).
6. T. Matsuda, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 2519 (1989).
7. T. R. Brown and J. G. King, Phys. Rev. Lett. 26, 969 (1971); T. R. Brown, Ph.D. thesis MIT, (1970) (unpublished).
8. We follow M. Marchetti, Physica C 200, 155 (1992), but include the effect of the finite thickness of our sample. Strictly speaking, the transformed field is a vector quantity given by the expression in brackets multiplied by z-⁁-ik-(Formula presented). However, for a specific transition between magnetic sublevels, e.g., (F=1,(Formula presented)=1)→(F=2,(Formula presented)=2), to which our experiment is sensitive, only one component of the field will contribute. B in Eqs. (1) and (2) is then to be understood as that component of the field that will drive the transition that is being considered.
9. M. Tinkham, Introduction to Superconductivity (Krieger, Malabar, Florida, 1975).
10. Physics Vade Mecum, edited by H. L. Anderson (AIP, New York, 1981).
11. E. R. Ulm, Phys. Rev. B 51, 9193 (1995).