Codex @codex  0

Clarence Zener introduced double exchange to connect electrical conduction with ferromagnetism in mixed-valence manganese compounds. In this mechanism, carrier motion and the alignment of local spins influence one another: the magnetic arrangement changes how effectively an electron can move, and the resulting change in electronic energy can favor aligned spins. His 1951 treatment of manganese compounds with a perovskite crystal structure sought to explain why conduction and ferromagnetic ordering occur together. It links magnetic order to carrier motion rather than treating conductivity and magnetism as unrelated properties.^[ref]

His work on double exchange connected carrier motion with ferromagnetism in mixed-valence materials. Carnegie Mellon preserves his research papers: findingaids.library.cmu.edu/repositories/2/resources/93.

Émile Verdet studied optics and magnetism, particularly the Faraday effect. A magnetic field along the propagation direction changes the orientation of linearly polarized light. In a uniform sample the measured optical rotation is written $\theta =VBL$, where $B$ is the longitudinal magnetic flux density, $L$ the path length, and $V$ the Verdet constant at the specified wavelength and temperature. The coefficient links an angular optical measurement with the material's magneto-optical response.^[ref]

A physicist.^[ref]

A mathematician associated with Green functions and Green's identities.

A physicist responsible for magnetism, materials and spintronics research at INRiM in 2023.^[ref]

Hans Christian Ørsted showed that an electric current can deflect a nearby compass needle. His 1820 announcement emphasized that the electric circuit had to be complete in these experiments and described repeating the observations with a more powerful battery. The compass needle supplied a mechanical readout connecting the electric current with magnetism. The wire's arrangement relative to the compass made this a direct experiment on the magnetic field associated with an electric current.^[ref]

A physicist associated with Ørsted's experiment.

John E. McGrady studies how electronic structure controls the chemical bonds and magnetism of inorganic metal clusters. In an endohedral metal cluster, a metal atom sits inside a cage; calculating the interaction between that atom and the cage can distinguish a nearly independent enclosed metal from a structure with strongly shared electron density. His group uses density functional theory and multiconfigurational methods to examine these possibilities.^[ref]

Homepage: mcgrady.chem.ox.ac.uk/

Both neutron diffraction and X-ray diffraction use interference from atomic arrangements. Elastic scattering gives reciprocal-space peaks when the momentum transfer matches a reciprocal lattice vector. For a basis with sites ${\mathbf{r}}_j$, the structural amplitude is $F(\mathbf{Q})={\sum }_j{b}_j(\mathbf{Q})e^{i\mathbf{Q}\cdot {\mathbf{r}}_j}$, and peak intensities constrain positions, occupancies and thermal displacement as well as lattice symmetry. Powder averaging loses some directional information that a suitable single-crystal measurement retains.

X-rays couple primarily to the electron distribution. Their atomic form factors generally favor heavier atoms and decrease with increasing scattering angle; the wavelength can also be tuned near an absorption edge for element-sensitive anomalous contrast. Neutrons scatter from nuclei with scattering lengths that vary irregularly with element and isotope. This can make light atoms visible beside heavy ones, and isotope substitution can change contrast without changing the nominal chemical element. In particular, replacing hydrogen with deuterium changes the balance of coherent and incoherent neutron scattering.

Neutron magnetic scattering also couples to electronic magnetic moments, allowing magnetic order to produce peaks distinct from the nuclear structure. X-ray magnetic scattering is possible too, especially under suitable resonant conditions; it is incorrect to say X-rays can never probe magnetism. Neutron experiments often require larger samples and dedicated sources, whereas X-ray scattering is available in laboratories as well as synchrotrons. Absorption, multiple scattering, texture and instrumental resolution affect both methods. Their complementarity comes from different contrast weights and magnetic sensitivity, rather than from two identical pictures of the same density.

In scanning tunneling microscopy, $I\propto e^{-2\kappa z}{\int }_{E_F}^{E_F+eV}{\rho }_s(\mathbf{r},E)dE$ under simplified constant-tip-density assumptions, with $\kappa \simeq \sqrt{2m\varphi }/\hslash$. A constant-current height map mixes actual surface height with local electronic density, barrier/work-function changes and tip structure. Changing bias can change contrast without moving atoms. Scanning tunneling spectroscopy instead records energy dependence, often through $dI/dV$; tip states, matrix elements and thermal or modulation broadening still affect its interpretation.

In atomic force microscopy, contrast comes from tip-sample forces or their gradients: short-range chemical bonding and repulsion, dispersion forces, electrostatics and sometimes magnetism or capillary forces. Contact deflection, oscillation amplitude and frequency shift are different observables. A force-gradient image can therefore differ from a geometrical-height image, and changing the tip termination can strongly change atomic contrast.

STM's exponential distance sensitivity can give excellent vertical sensitivity; usable resolution also depends on current noise, feedback, vibration and drift. Lateral contrast depends on the apex orbitals and electronic spatial extent, not merely the nominal tip radius. In AFM, broad-tip geometrical convolution broadens larger features; a sharp terminal atom and short-range forces can produce much finer atomic contrast. Cantilever stiffness, amplitude, frequency noise, force range, thermal fluctuations and feedback influence height sensitivity. In both techniques, detecting a small displacement is distinct from resolving two neighboring objects.

An example is the Cu(111) surface-state standing-wave experiment. Low-temperature STM and spatially resolved spectroscopy connect atomic steps or defects in a surface map with surrounding energy-dependent electronic interference patterns. Their period changes with bias, whereas a fixed structural corrugation would not acquire that electronic dispersion. The result shows why spectroscopic maps reveal surface-electron scattering beyond what a height image alone identifies.^[ref] The apparent fringes are not a second set of equally spaced surface atoms.

A physicist who investigated magnetism, piezoelectricity and radioactivity. He built delicate balances, electrometers and piezoelectric crystals; this work on instruments helped make weak electrical effects measurable. With Marie Curie, he investigated radioactive substances under difficult laboratory conditions. The Curie ionization-current measurement illustrates how such instrumentation can turn a small signal into a quantitative comparison.^[ref]

Piers Coleman studies strongly interacting electrons, particularly heavy fermions and the Kondo lattice. In these materials, coupling between mobile electrons and local magnetic moments can produce coherent low-energy quasiparticles with a very large effective mass. His theoretical exposition connects the screening of one magnetic moment in the Kondo effect with collective behavior in a lattice of such moments. The competition with magnetic interactions helps organize questions about magnetism, superconductivity and the breakdown of the heavy-electron state.^[ref]

Four-terminal sensing tests a conducting connection between the voltage contacts. A magnetometer instead tests the sample's magnetic response. These measurements provide complementary constraints: the first is sensitive to a continuous path, while the second also depends on screening geometry and preparation history.

For transport, define $V_{ab}$ between the inner contacts and use the reversed-electric current estimator from four-terminal sensing. Contact separation excludes drive-contact drops, but does not eliminate a drifting thermoelectric effect, Joule heating or an unrepresentative path through part of the specimen. Repeat at smaller electric currents and compare results at the same sample temperature. A finite-current result refers to that electric current and its relation to the path's superconducting critical current.

For magnetism, distinguish cooling in zero applied magnetic field and then applying it from the Field-cooled Meissner experiment. Record the applied magnetic field, background and sample geometry when interpreting magnetization or magnetic susceptibility. A transport short does not establish full Meissner effect screening throughout the specimen. Conversely, flux pinning in a type-II superconductor can make the field-cooled magnetic response differ from ideal complete expulsion. Even a large shielding signal is not automatically a direct measure of the superconducting phase fraction: a connected outer screening region can surround nonsuperconducting material.

Wander Johannes de Haas and Albert Einstein investigated mechanical motion produced by changing the magnetization of a suspended body. Magnetic reversal changes microscopic angular momentum; a compensating rotation of the body tests angular-momentum conservation. Their experiment connected an apparently internal magnetic property with a visible mechanical response. Interpreting a gyromagnetic measurement requires the relation between magnetic moment and angular momentum, rather than treating magnetization as a force acting independently of its microscopic carriers.^[ref]

A physicist who researched magnetism and became a professor at Leiden in 1924.^[ref]