Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-rkxrd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T01:36:14.615Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Spin Configurations and the Dynamic Response of Antiferromagnetically Coupled Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 September 2012

F.C. Nörtemann ,
R.L. Stamps  and
R.E. Camley
F.C. Nörtemann
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, CO, 80933–7150
R.L. Stamps
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, CO, 80933–7150
R.E. Camley
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, CO, 80933–7150
Get access

Abstract

We present a calculation of spin waves in coupled multilayered structures which is based on exact evaluation of both exchange and dipolar fields. The ground state spin configuration in antiferromagnetically coupled multilayers can differ significantly from the uniformly canted ground state usually assumed. This non-uniform ground state is found to radically alter the character of the spin wave modes and sometimes lead to a strong localization of the wave to the outermost magnetic films of the Multilayer.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 313: Symposium Q1 – Magnetic Ultrathin Films, Multilayers and Surfaces/Magnetic Interfaces-Physics and Characterizations , 1993 , 479
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Grünberg, P., Schreiber, R., Pang, Y., Brodsky, M. B. and Sowers, H., Phys. Rev. Lett., 57 2442 (1986)Google Scholar
2. Baibich, M. N., Broto, J. M., Fert, A., Nguyen Van Dau, F., Petroff, F., Etienne, P., Creuzet, G., Friederich, A., and Chazelas, J., Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 2472 (1988)Google Scholar
3. Binasch, G., Grünberg, P., Saurenbach, F., and Zinn, W., Phys. Rev. B 39, 4828 (1989)Google Scholar
4. Parkin, S. S. P., More, N., Roche, K. P., Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 2304 (1990)Google Scholar
5. Camley, R. E. and Barnás, J., Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 664 (1989)Google Scholar
6. Levy, P. M., Zhang, S. and Fert, A., Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 1643 (1990)Google Scholar
7. Vedyayev, A., Dieny, B. and Ryzhanova, N., Europhys. Lett. 19, 329 (1992)Google Scholar
8. Nörtemann, F. C., Stamps, R. L., Carriço, A. S., and Camley, R. E., Phys. Rev. B 46, 10847 (1992)Google Scholar
9. Nörtemann, F. C., Stamps, R. L. and Camley, R. E., to appear in Phys. Rev. BGoogle Scholar
10. Benson, H. and Mills, D.L., Phys. Rev. 178, 839 (1969);Google Scholar
Erickson, R.P. and Mills, D.L., Phys. Rev. B 43, 10715 (1991);Google Scholar
Erickson, R.P. and Mills, D.L., Phys. Rev. B 44, 11825 (1991)Google Scholar