Theory of a magnetic microscope with nanometer resolution

Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics

Volumn 64, Issue 5, 2001, Pages

  Johansson, Peter ^a   Apell, S Peter ^b   Penn, D R ^c  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

^c NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DIPOLE; ELECTRIC FIELD; MAGNETISM; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MICROSCOPY; NANOPARTICLE; POLARIZATION; SCANNING FORCE MICROSCOPY; THEORY;

EID: 0035425382     PISSN: 10980121     EISSN: 1550235X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.64.054411     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Within the theory we will present here, the resolution is mainly determined by the size of the electromagnetic cavity formed between the tip and sample. This leads to a resolution limit of the order of 5–10 nm. The 1-nm resolution was obtained in STM light emission experiments by R. Berndt (private communication) that make use of very sharp tips.
2. A L. Vázques de Parga and S F. Alvarado, Phys. Rev. Lett.72, 3726 (1994).
3. N. Majlis, A. Levy Yeyati, F. Flores, and R. Monreal, Phys. Rev. B52, 12 505 (1995).
4. D T. Pierce, A. Davies, J A. Stroscio, and R J. Celotta, Appl. Phys. A: Mater. Sci. Process.66, S403 (1998).
5. S P. Apell, D R. Penn, and P. Johansson, Phys. Rev. B61, 3534 (2000).
6. T J. Silva and S. Schultz, Rev. Sci. Instrum.67, 715 (1996).
7. I I. Smolyaninov, A V. Zayats, and C C. Davis, Opt. Lett.22, 1592 (1997).
8. L. Aigouy, S. Gresillon, A C. Boccara, J C. Rivoal, V. Mathet, C. Chappert, J P. Jamet, and J. Ferre, J. Microsc.194, 295 (1999).
9. R. Wiesendanger, H.-J. Güntherodt, G. Güntherodt, R J. Gambino, and R. Ruf, Phys. Rev. Lett.65, 247 (1990).
10. S. Heinze, M. Bode, A. Kubetzka, O. Pietzsch, X. Nie, S. Blügel, and R. Wiesendanger, Science288, 1805 (2000).
11. J D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics (Wiley, New York, 1999).
12. We use a local dielectric function. Nonlocal effects are small, and would not change the results of this calulation in any considerable way. For a more detailed discussion of this, see Sec. IV D of Ref. 15.
13. J. Zak, E R. Moog, C. Liu, and S D. Bader, Phys. Rev. B43, 6423 (1991);
14. Phys. Rev. BJ. ZakE R. MoogC. LiuS D. Bader46, 5883(E) (1992).
15. M. B. Stearns, in Magnetic Properties of Metalds, Landolt-Börnstein, New Series, Group III, Vol. 19, Pt. a, edited by H.P.J. Wijn (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1986), p. 113.
16. P. Johansson, Phys. Rev. B58, 10 823 (1998).
17. Note that, strictly speaking, there are contributions in Eqs. (2.38) and (2.39) that are second order in (formula presented). They are, however, negligibly small.
18. The quantity (formula presented) was denoted (formula presented) in Ref. 5.
19. T. Junno, K. Deppert, L. Montelius, and L. Samuelson, Appl. Phys. Lett.66, 3627 (1995).
20. M R. Pufall, A. Berger, and S. Schultz, J. Appl. Phys.81, 5689 (1997).