Nonlocal optical effects on the fluorescence and decay rates for admolecules at a metallic nanoparticle

Journal of Chemical Physics

Volumn 126, Issue 19, 2007, Pages

  Vielma, Jason ^a   Leung, P T ^a  

^a PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HYDRODYNAMIC MODEL; MULTIPOLAR INTERACTIONS; NONLOCAL EFFECTS; RADIATIVE RATE;

DECAY (ORGANIC); ELECTRONS; METALS; OPTICAL PROPERTIES;

NANOPARTICLES;

EID: 34249081774     PISSN: 00219606     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.2734549     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. R. R. Chance, A. Prock, and R. Silbey, Adv. Chem. Phys. 1, 37 (1978).
2. P. Anger, P. Bharadwaj, and L. Novotny, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 113002 (2006).
3. S. Kuhn, U. Hakanson, L. Rogobete, and V. Sandoghkar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 017402 (2006).
4. E. Dulkeith, A. C. Morteani, T. Niedereichholz, T. A. Klar, J. Feldmann, S. A. Levi, F. C. J. M. van Veggel, D. N. Reinhoudt, M. Moller, and D. I. Gittins, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 203002 (2002).
5. E. Dulkeith, M. Ringler, T. A. Klar, J. Feldmann, A. Munoz Javier, and W. J. Parak, Nano Lett. 5, 585 (2005).
6. The presence of an optimal distance in such processes involving two competing mechanisms has been well known for a long time since the 1980s. See, e.g., P. T. Leung and T. F. George, J. Chem. Phys. 85, 4729 (1986) and references therein.
7. See, e.g., the earlier review articles by J. I. Gersten and A. Nitzan, Surf. Sci. 0039-6028 10.1016/0039-6028(85)90293-6 158, 165 (1985) and by M. Moskovits, Rev. Mod. Phys. 57, 783 (1985).
8. See, e.g., the earlier review articles by J. I. Gersten and A. Nitzan, Surf. Sci. 0039-6028 10.1016/0039-6028(85)90293-6 158, 165 (1985) and by M. Moskovits, Rev. Mod. Phys. 57, 783 (1985).
9. J. Gersten and A. Nitzan, J. Chem. Phys. 75, 1139 (1981), and the mathematical appendix to this paper: AIP Document No. PAPS JCP SA-75-1139-32, Section B. See also their above reference in Ref..
10. R. Ruppin, J. Chem. Phys. 76, 1681 (1982).
11. H. Chew, J. Chem. Phys. 87, 1355 (1987).
12. Y. S. Kim, P. T. Leung, and T. F. George, Surf. Sci. 195, 1 (1988).
13. P. C. Das and A. Puri, Phys. Rev. 65, 155416 (2002).
14. W. Ekardt and Z. Penzar, Phys. Rev. B 34, 8444 (1986).
15. O. Andreussi, S. Corni, B. Mennucci, and J. Tomasi, J. Chem. Phys. 121, 10190 (2004).
16. M. Caricato, O. Andreussi, and S. Corni, J. Phys. Chem. B 110, 16652 (2006).
17. R. Carminati, J. J. Greffet, C. Henkel, and J. M. Vigoureux, Opt. Commun. 261, 368 (2006).
18. See, e.g., G. D. Mahan, Many-Particle Physics, 3rd ed. (Plenum, New York, 2000), Sec. 5.5.
19. P. T. Leung, Phys. Rev. B 42, 7622 (1990).
20. A similar study has been carried out even earlier by other researchers using a slightly different approach based on the Green dyadic formulation, see G. S. Agarwal and S. V. O'Neil, Phys. Rev. B 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.28.487 28, 487 (1983). The corresponding effects on the emission frequency of the molecule was also studied in P. T. Leung, and M. H. Hider, J. Chem. Phys. 98, 5019 (1993).
21. A similar study has been carried out even earlier by other researchers using a slightly different approach based on the Green dyadic formulation, see G. S. Agarwal and S. V. O'Neil, Phys. Rev. B 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.28.487 28, 487 (1983). The corresponding effects on the emission frequency of the molecule was also studied in P. T. Leung, and M. H. Hider, J. Chem. Phys. 98, 5019 (1993).
22. A very comprehensive review up to our previous work in Ref. was recently published by J. I. Gersten. The review entitled " Theory of fluorophore-metallic surface interactions. " can be found in Trends in Fluorescence Spectroscopy, edited by, C. D. Geddes, and, J. Lakowicz, (Springer, New York, 2005), pp. 197-222.
23. R. Fuchs and F. Claro, Phys. Rev. B 35, 3722 (1987).
24. U. Kreibig and M. Vollmer, Optical Properties of Metal Clusters (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1995).
25. L. B. Scaffardi, N. Pellegri, O. de Sanctis, and J. O. Tocho, Nanotechnology 16, 158 (2005).
26. R. Ruppin, Phys. Rev. B 11, 2871 (1975).
27. T. L. Jennings, M. P. Singh, and G. F. Strouse, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 128, 5463 (2006).
28. The comparison between the hydrodynamic (H) and the Lindhard-Mermin (LM) models as applied to total decay-rate calculations has been studied previously for planar metallic surfaces [see S. Corni and J. Tomasi, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.1558036 118, 6481 (2003)], and for core-shell particles [see R. Chang and P. T. Leung, Phys. Rev. B 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.73.125438 73, 125438 (2006); R. Chang and P. T. Leung, Phys. Rev. B 75, 079901 (E) (2007)]. While a significant difference between the two models has been observed in the former case, very close results between the two models were obtained in the latter case for a molecule at 1 nm from a metallic nanoshell. The LM model is in principle more accurate than the H model since the latter is simply the lowest order (in wave vector) approximation of the former, and it excludes electron-hole pair excitations in the metal. A detailed comparison between the two models as applied to calculations of each of the fluorescence, radiative, and nonradiative rates will be of interest and will be left for a future endeavor.
29. The comparison between the hydrodynamic (H) and the Lindhard-Mermin (LM) models as applied to total decay-rate calculations has been studied previously for planar metallic surfaces [see S. Corni and J. Tomasi, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.1558036 118, 6481 (2003)], and for core-shell particles [see R. Chang and P. T. Leung, Phys. Rev. B 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.73.125438 73, 125438 (2006); R. Chang and P. T. Leung, Phys. Rev. B 75, 079901 (E) (2007)]. While a significant difference between the two models has been observed in the former case, very close results between the two models were obtained in the latter case for a molecule at 1 nm from a metallic nanoshell. The LM model is in principle more accurate than the H model since the latter is simply the lowest order (in wave vector) approximation of the former, and it excludes electron-hole pair excitations in the metal. A detailed comparison between the two models as applied to calculations of each of the fluorescence, radiative, and nonradiative rates will be of interest and will be left for a future endeavor.
30. The comparison between the hydrodynamic (H) and the Lindhard-Mermin (LM) models as applied to total decay-rate calculations has been studied previously for planar metallic surfaces [see S. Corni and J. Tomasi, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.1558036 118, 6481 (2003)], and for core-shell particles [see R. Chang and P. T. Leung, Phys. Rev. B 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.73.125438 73, 125438 (2006); R. Chang and P. T. Leung, Phys. Rev. B 75, 079901 (E) (2007)]. While a significant difference between the two models has been observed in the former case, very close results between the two models were obtained in the latter case for a molecule at 1 nm from a metallic nanoshell. The LM model is in principle more accurate than the H model since the latter is simply the lowest order (in wave vector) approximation of the former, and it excludes electron-hole pair excitations in the metal. A detailed comparison between the two models as applied to calculations of each of the fluorescence, radiative, and nonradiative rates will be of interest and will be left for a future endeavor.
31. A. T. George, Opt. Commun. 188, 321 (2001).
32. T. Marniv and H. Metiu, Phys. Rev. B 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.22.4731 22, 4731 (1980)
33. G. E. Korzeniewski, T. Marniv, and H. Metiu, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.443117 76, 1564 (1982)
34. G. E. Korzeniewski, T. Marniv, and H. Metiu, J. Chem. Phys. 76, 2697 (1982).