Magnon-hole scattering and charge order in Sr14-xCa xCu24O41

Physical Review Letters

Volumn 93, Issue 2, 2004, Pages

  Hess, C ^a,b   ElHaes, H ^b   Buchner B ^b,c   Ammerahl, U ^d   Hucker M ^d,e   Revcolevschi, A ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA   (Switzerland)

^b RWTH AACHEN UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^c IFW DRESDEN   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITÉ PARIS SUD   (France)

^e BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CARRIER MOBILITY; DEGREES OF FREEDOM (MECHANICS); DOPING (ADDITIVES); ELECTRIC CHARGE; ELECTRON SCATTERING; ENERGY DISSIPATION; GROUND STATE; ONE DIMENSIONAL; PHONONS; SUPERCONDUCTIVITY; TRANSITION METALS; TRANSPORT PROPERTIES;

CHARGE MOBILITY; MAGNETIC EXCITATIONS; MAGNONS; TEMPERATURE DEPENDENCE;

THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY;

EID: 4043069746     PISSN: 00319007     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.027005     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. A. Moreo, S. Yunoki, and E. Dagotto, Science 283, 2034 (1999).
2. J. Zaanen, Science 286, 251 (1999).
3. S. A. Kivelson, E. Fradkin, and V. J. Emery, Nature (London) 393, 550 (1998).
4. H.-H. Klauss et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 4590 (2000).
5. E. Dagotto, J. Riera, and D. Scalapino, Phys. Rev. B 45, 5744 (1992).
6. E. Dagotto and T. M. Rice, Science 271, 618 (1996).
7. N. Nücker et al., Phys. Rev. B 62, 14384 (2000).
8. T. Osafune et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 1980 (1997).
9. M. Takigawa et al., Phys. Rev. B 57, 1124 (1998).
10. L. P. Regnault et al., Phys. Rev. B 59, 1055 (1999).
11. V. Kataev et al., Phys. Rev. B 64, 104422 (2001).
12. G. Blumberg et al., Science 297, 584 (2002).
13. B. Gorshunov et al., Phys. Rev. B 66, 060508 (2002).
14. M. Matsuda, T. Yosihama, K. Kakurai, and G. Shirane, Phys. Rev. B 59, 1060 (1999).
15. T. Vuletić et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 257002 (2003).
16. M. Uehara et al., J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 65, 2764 (1996).
17. C. Hess et al., Phys. Rev. B 64, 184305 (2001).
18. A. V. Sologubenko et al., Phys. Rev. Lett 84, 2714 (2000).
19. C. Hess et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 197002 (2003).
20. C. Hess et al., Physica (Amsterdam) 312B-313B, 612 (2002).
21. C. Hess et al., Phys. Rev. B 59, 10397 (1999).
22. U. Ammerahl et al., J. Cryst Growth 193, 55 (1998).
23. R. S. Eccleston et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1702 (1998).
24. S. Katano et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 636 (1999).
25. J. Callaway and H. C. von Baeyer, Phys. Rev. 120, 1149 (1960).
26. J. V. Alvarez and C. Gros, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 156603 (2002).
27. F. Heidrich-Meisner et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 069703 (2004). The differences have been obtained by extending the numerical calculations to a larger system size.
28. 0) and the applicability of Mathiesen's rule, yet this is consistent with previous results [17].
29. h only at low T (cf. Fig. 2), playing no role in the following analysis.
30. h.
31. h the signatures of charge order are most clearly visible with this choice.
32. S. A. Carter et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1378 (1996).
33. K. R. Thurber et al., Phys. Rev. B 67, 094512 (2003).
34. N. Nücker et al. (unpublished).