4.8 Article

Collective magnetic response of CeO2 nanoparticles

Journal

NATURE PHYSICS
Volume 12, Issue 7, Pages 694-+

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/NPHYS3676

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Science Foundation Ireland as part of the NISE project [10/IN1.I3006]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The magnetism of nanoparticles and thin films of wide-bandgap oxides that include no magnetic cations is an unsolved puzzle(1). Progress has been hampered by both the irreproducibility of much of the experimental data, and the lack of any generally accepted theoretical explanation. The characteristic signature is a virtually anhysteretic, temperature-independent magnetization curve that saturates in an applied field that is several orders of magnitude greater than the magnetization. It would seem as if a tiny volume fraction, less than or similar to 0.1%, of the samples is magnetic and that the energy scale is unusually high for spin magnetism. Here we investigate the effect of dispersing 4 nm CeO2 nanoparticles with powders of gamma Al2O3, sugar or latex microspheres. The saturation magnetization, M-s approximate to 60 A m(-1) for compact samples, is maximized by 1 wt% lanthanum doping. Dispersing the CeO2 nanopowder reduces its magnetic moment by up to an order of magnitude, and there is a characteristic length scale of order 100 nm for the magnetism to appear in CeO2 nanoparticle clusters. The phenomenon is explained in terms of a giant orbital paramagnetism that appears in coherent mesoscopic domains due to resonant interaction with zero-point fluctuations of the vacuum electromagnetic field. The theory explains the observed temperature-independent magnetization curve and its doping and dispersion dependence, based on a length scale of 300 nm that corresponds to the wavelength of a maximum in the ultraviolet absorption spectrum of the magnetic CeO2 nanoparticles. The coherent domains occupy roughly 10% of the sample volume.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available