loading

Logout succeed

Logout succeed. See you again!

ebook img

Microscopic mechanisms of magnetization reversal PDF

file size0.15 MB
languageEnglish

Preview Microscopic mechanisms of magnetization reversal

Microscopic mechanisms of magnetization reversal Vladimir L. Safonov Center for Magnetic Recording Research, University of California -San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA 92093-0401 (February 2, 2008) 4 0 0 Our aim in this paper is to develop a self-consistent 2 Twoprincipalscenariosofmagnetization reversalarecon- picture that describes the entire reversal process. We n sidered. Inthefirstscenarioallspinsperformcoherentmotion considertwopossible scenarios: 1)the magnetizationre- a and an excess of magnetic energy directly goes toa nonmag- verses uniformly, involving nonlinear dynamic damping; J netic thermal bath. A general dynamic equation is derived 2)themagnetizationreversesnonuniformly,involvingthe 8 which includes a tensor damping term similar to the Bloch- excitation of nonlinear spin waves. We give an explicit 2 Bloembergen formbutthemagnetization magnituderemains criterion for this nonuniform process for an untra-thin constant for any deviation from equilibrium. In the second ] reversal scenario, the absolute value of the averaged sample magnetic film. r Scenario #1: the total film magnetization M is con- e magnetization is decreased byarapid excitation of nonlinear | | h spin-wave resonances by uniform magnetization precession. stant during reversal. All spins perform a coherent mo- t tion (the role of non-uniform spin motions is neglected). o We have developed an analytic k-space micromagnetic ap- . proach that describes this entire reversal process in an ultra- Anexcessofmagnetic energygoesdirectly toanonmag- at thinsoftferromagneticfilmforupto90o deviationfromequi- netic thermal bath. We derive a general magnetization m librium. Conditions for the occurrence of the two scenarios dynamicequationfromanonlinearoscillatormodel. The are discussed. nonlineardampingfollowsfromthevarietyofwell-known - d physical damping mechanisms [7], [8]. Here we extend n our previousresults for uniaxialsymmetry to the caseof o non-uniaxial symmetry. c Scenario #2: the total film magnetization M de- [ | | creases. Experimentally it was observed in Ref. [10]. I. INTRODUCTION 1 Large angle magnetization motion can excite spin-wave v instabilities, which increase substantially the magnetiza- 0 Studies of magnetization reversal in ultra-thin ferro- tion reversalrate [11]. We explicitly evaluate the second 9 magnetic films under an applied external magnetic field orderSuhlinstabilityandconstructaself-consistentthe- 5 1 areofgreatimportanceinmagneticrecordingphysics. A ory of magnetization switching for up to 90o from equi- conventional theoretical tool to study magnetization re- 0 librium. versalis based on the phenomenologicalLandau-Lifshitz 4 The problem of nonlinear spin-wave excitation during 0 equation [1] or, its equivalent modification with the reversal has been explored by numerical simulations in / Gilbert form of relaxation [2]. These equations conserve t nanograins [12], [13], and thin films [14], [15]. All these a the absolute value of magnetization (M = const) in a simulationshavebeenperformedusingconventionallocal m single domain region. Both equation|s w|ere introduced micromagnetic modeling, which includes: a) the anal- - (a) for small magnetizationmotions and (b) for the case ysis of intra- and inter-cell interactions, b) analysis of d ofuniaxialmagneticsymmetry. Theenergylossesarede- phenomenological dynamic equations, and c) computer n fined by an isotropic phenomenological damping fitting o simulations. There are two principal problems in this parameter α (“damping constant”). c technique: 1) the physical problem of the introduction : Recently a theoretical approach[3], [4], [5], [6], [7] has of local phenomenological damping (and corresponding v been developed to correctthe limitations of the Landau- i magnetic noise) and 2) the computing problem in the X Lifshitz-Gilbert (LLG) theory. The main idea was to case of a large number of cells. r represent the magnetization dynamics as the motion of Bothproblemsoflocalmicromagneticmodelingcanbe a a damped nonlinear oscillator with the random force of avoided by developing the k-space micromagnetic mod- thermal fluctuations. The oscillator model is a conve- eling as we do in this work. Our theory includes: a) an nienttooltoestablisha“bridge”betweenthemicroscopic analysisofspin-wavespectraandinteractionsinanultra- physics,wheretherotationaloscillatorcomplexvariables thin film, b) the calculation of the effective scattering naturally describe spin excitations and the macroscopic processes(mostoftheaccumulatedenergyistobetrans- magnetization dynamics. It has been rigorously shown formed to nonlinear spin waves), c) the analysis of self- by including specific coupling of a magnetic system to consistent dynamic equations with microscopic damping a variety of loss mechanisms [8], [9] that for small oscil- (andnoise,ifnecessary). Notethatasimilartechniqueto lations near equilibrium the macroscopic damping term study nonlinear spin-wave dynamics has been developed reflects the anisotropy of the system. 1 ∗ ∗ ∗ inthetheoryofparametricmagnonexcitation(mainlyin a=uc+vc , a =uc +vc, (4) the bulk, see, e.g., [16], [17], [18], [19]). We have already +ω ω 0 0 considered k-space modeling in application to magnetic u= A , v = B A− . 2ω − 2ω noiseinathinfilm[20]. RecentlyDobinandVictora[21] r 0 |B|r 0 estimated the increment of the second order Suhl insta- The energy in terms of the normal mode coordinates c bility and correspondingeffective magnetizationreversal ∗ and c is simply: time for up to 25o deviationfromequilibrium in the film plane. Here we give an explicit analytic formulation to M V s ∗ describemagnetizationreversal(switching)forupto90o / =ω0c c, (5) E γ deviationfromequilibriuminultra-thinfilms intermsof (cid:18) (cid:19) spin-wave pair excitations. where ω = √ 2 2 = γ H H is the ferromag- 0 A −B x0 y0 netic resonance frequency. The dynamic equations fopr c and c∗ are independent II. SCENARIO #1: |M|=CONST and can be written as: dc dc∗ In this section we consider the magnetization rever- +ηc= iω c, +ηc∗ =iω c∗. (6) 0 0 sal without spin-wave excitations. The approach is to dt − dt transformthe magnetizationdynamics without damping Here η is the linear relaxation rate, which can be found to normal mode coordinates. Then we introduce nonlin- microscopically [8]. In the case of large magnetization ear damping, which has a connection with microscopic motionwecanwrite acorrespondingnonlinearoscillator physics and return back to magnetization coordinates. equation in the form: The analysis parallels the approach for low-level excita- tions. dc ∗ ∗ Let us consider small-amplitude magnetization mo- +η(N)c=G(c,c ), N c c. (7) dt ≡ tions of a single-domain ferromagnetic particle in the vicinity of equilibrium state M z , where z is the unit Here G(c,c∗) corresponds to the gyromagnetic term 0 0 || vector in the equilibrium direction. The magnetization γm H . The nonlinear relaxation rate η(N) can eff − × rotation around effective field in this case, in general, is be estimated from the known relaxation process for the b b elliptical and the magnetic energy can be represented uniform precession [7]. We assume that m = 1 and E | | as a quadratic form: therefore no spin waves are excited. Using back transformations (4) and (2), we can de- / MsV = γHx0m2 + γHy0m2 . (1) rive an equation (corresponding to (7)) in terms of m- E γ 2 x0 2 y0 components: (cid:18) (cid:19) Here m M/M , x and y are the unit orthogonal dm ↔ vectors in≡the planse pe0rpendic0ular to the equilibrium di- dt =−γm×Heff− Γ ·(m−z0), (8) rection,Ms is the satburationbmagnetizationandV is the mz0 0 0 npeasrst”iclfieevldosl,umweh.icHhxin0calunddeHbyo0tharme ipcorsoistcivoepiKciatntedl “shstaipffe- ↔Γ =2η(N) 1+0mz0 1+mmz0z0b 0 , 0 0 1 anisotropies and the external magnetic field. The pa-   rameter M V/γ ~S, where ~ is Planck’s constant and   s ≡ where S is the total spin of the film. From the Holstein-Primakoff transformation [22] we m2 m2 have: N = ωA(1−mz0)+ ωB 1x0+−m y0. (9) 0 0 z0 m+ =a 1+m , m =1 a∗a, (2) z0 z0 − Note that the Eq.(8) conserves the magnitude of m. − ∗ ± m =ap 1+mz0, m =mx0 ±imy0, For small deviations from equilibrium, when mz0 ≃ 1, this equations exactly correspondto Bloch-Bloembergen where a∗ and a dpescribe spin excitations. equations [24] with η(0) = 1/T and 1/T = 2/T . From 2 1 2 The magnetic energy (1) can be written in the Eq.(8)we see that one can expect the anomalously large quadratic form: damping in the case of 180o reversal when 1+m 0 z0 → (see,also[7],[25]). Simplenumericalanalysisshowsthat M V / s = a∗a+ B(aa+a∗a∗), (3) magnetization dynamics in the framework of Eq.(8) for E γ A 2 angles about 70o (and smaller) can be approximated by (cid:18) (cid:19) LLG dynamics. This can explain why the switching ex- where =γ(H +H )/2and =γ(H H )/2. The A x0 y0 B x0− y0 periment [10] with M = const was well fitted by LLG non-diagonal terms in (3) are eliminated by the linear | | equation. canonical transformation (e.g., [23]): 2 III. SCENARIO #2: |M|6=CONST where ∆() is the Kroneckerdelta function: ∆(q)=1, if · q=0 and ∆(q)=0 otherwise. Weshallconsideranultra-thinferromagneticfilm(τ Thequadraticuniaxialanisotropyenergy(z isaneasy L L ) with the magnetization: M(r)=M m(r), r=× axis, see, Fig. 1) in the k-space is: y z s × (y,z). Thevariationofthe unitvectormwithinthefilm thickness (−τ/2 ≤ x ≤ τ/2) will be neglected. Locally Eanis =−VK1 (−my0,ksinθ0+mz0,kcosθ0) k one has: m(r) = m2 +m2+m2 =1. X Inorde|rtoin|troqducexcollecytivemzagnetizationmotions, ×(−my0,−ksinθ0+mz0,−kcosθ0). (15) we assume that the film is periodic along both y and The Zeeman energy in the external magnetic field z directions with periods Ly and Lz, respectively. The H0 =(0, H0sinθH, H0cosθH) is: Fourier series representation can be written as = VM H [m sin(θ θ )+m cos(θ θ )]. m(r)= mkexp(ik r), (10) EZ − s 0 y0,0 H − 0 z0,0 H − 0 · (16) k X Ly Lz The demagnetization energy (see, [26]) is defined by : 1 mk = dy dz m(r)exp( ik r), L L − · y z Z0 Z0 Edmag =2πMs2V {G(kτ)mx0,kmx0,−k (17) k k = 2πn /L , k = 2πn /L ( < n ,n < ) are X thyeThweaveequvyeilcibtyorriucmzomisposnuepnpztosseizndtt−hoe∞bpelaaneu.ynifozrmly∞mag- +[1−G(kτ)][ kky0 2my0,kmy0,−k (cid:18) (cid:19) netized state, in which the magnetization is oriented in k 2 k k the (y,z) plane along an equilibrium axis z0. The trans- + kz0 mz0,kmz0,−k+2 yk02z0my0,kmz0,−k]}, formation from the (x,y,z) coordinates to equilibrium (cid:18) (cid:19) coordinates (Fig.1) (x0,y0,z0) is defined by where G(x)=[1 exp( x)]/x. − − y cosθ sinθ y = 0 0 0 (11) z sinθ cosθ z 0 0 0 B. Spin waves (cid:18) (cid:19) (cid:18)− (cid:19)(cid:18) (cid:19) Here θ determines a rotation in the film plane, x = x . 0 0 We shallutilize aclassicalformofthe spinrepresenta- Analogoustransformationshouldbeusedfor(m ,m ) y z → tion in terms of Bose operators introduced in Refs. [27], (m ,m ) and wave vector components (k ,k ) y0 z0 y z → [28]andconvenientfor 2Dsystems. For the unit magne- (k ,k ). Note that boththe absolute value ofthe wave y0 z0 tizationvectormthisrepresentationintermsofcomplex vector k = k and the scalar product k r are invariant | | · variables a and a∗ can be written as: in respect to choice of system of coordinates. a a∗ m =i − , (18a) x0 √2 A. Magnetic energy a+a∗ m = 1 m2 sin , (18b) eneTrhgey,menagerngeyticofeannerisgoytroofptyh,eZfielemmacnonetnaeinrgsythaendexdcehmanagge- y0 q − x0 (cid:18)a√+2a∗(cid:19) m = 1 m2 cos . (18c) netization energy: z0 − x0 √2 q (cid:18) (cid:19) = exch+ anis+ Z + dmag. (12) An expansionof (18a)-(18c)up to the fourth order gives E E E E E accuracy 6%forabout90o deviationfromequilibrium: The exchange energy A( m)2 can be represented ∼ as − ▽· a a∗ m =i − , (19a) x0 √2 Eexch =VA k2(my0,kmy0,−k+mz0,kmz0,−k), (13) a+a∗ a3+(a∗)3 3a∗a2 3(a∗)2a Xk my0 ≃ √2 + −6√2 − , (19b) where A is the exchange constant and V =τLyLz is the a4+(a∗)4 2a∗a3 2(a∗)3a film volume. To obtain (13) we have used the following m 1 a∗a − − . (19c) z0 ≃ − − 12 formula: The following Fourier representation for a(r) (and its Ly Lz 1 complex conjugate) will be used: dy dz exp[i(k+k )r]=∆(k+k ), (14) 1 1 L L · y z Z Z 0 0 3 a(r)= akexp(ikrj), (20) The spin-wave frequency, ωk, in an explicit form is k X 1 Ly Lz ωk =γ H0cos(θH −θ0)−HKsin2θ0 ak = dy dz a(r)exp( ik r). h k 2 1/2 LyLz Z0 Z0 − · +4πMs[1−G(kτ)] ky0 +2αEk2 (cid:18) (cid:19) i In general, the magnetic energy can be expressed as [H cos(θ θ )+4πM G(kτ)]1/2. (30) 0 H 0 s × − = (0)+ (1)+ (2)+ (3)+ (4)+..., (21) E E E E E E wherethe superscriptdenotes anorderintermsofa and C. Spin-wave interactions a∗. The zeroth order energy term is equal to Theinteractionenergycanberepresentedintheform: E(0) =−VK1cos2θ0−VMsH0cos(θH −θ0). (22) Eint = Ψ1(1,2,3)c1c2c3 (31) (M V/γ) 3 Theequilibriumuniformlymagnetizedstateisdefinedby s 1X,2,3h the condition: ∂E(0)/∂θ0 =0, which corresponds to +Ψ2(1,2; 3)c1c2c∗−3+c.c. ∆(1+2+3) − H sin2θ =2H sin(θ θ ). (23) 1 i K 0 0 H − 0 + Φ(1,2,3,4)c∗1c∗2c3c4∆(1+2 3 4). 2 − − Here HK =2K1/Ms is the anisotropy field. In order to 1,X2,3,4 have a stable stationary state, we need ∂2 (0)/∂θ2 > 0. The first order energy term (1) = 0 at thEe equili0brium Here for simplicity we use the following notations: k1 ≡ E 1, k2 2, etc., for example, k1+k2+k3 1+2+3. and this condition coincides with Eq.(23). ≡ ≡ The three-wave interaction amplitudes are The quadratic term has the form: 1 (2)/ MsV = ka∗kak+ Bk(aka−k+a∗ka∗−k) , Ψ1(1,2,3)= 2{ψ(1)(u1+v1)(u2v3+u3v2) E (cid:18) γ (cid:19) k (cid:20)A 2 (cid:21) +ψ(2)(v1u3+v3u1)(u2+v2) X (24) +ψ(3)(v1u2+v2u1)(u3+v3) . (32) } and where 1 k =γαEk2 γHK sin2θ0+γH0cos(θH θ0) Ψ2(1,2;3)= 2{ψ(1)(u1+v1)(u2u3+v2v3) A − 2 − +ψ(2)(u2+v2)(u1u3+v1v3) 2 k +2πγM [1 G(kτ)] y0 +G(kτ) , (25) +ψ(3)(u3+v3)(v1u2+v2u1) . (33) s" − (cid:18) k (cid:19) # } Here γ H k k Bk =γαEk2− γH2K sin2θ0 ψ(k)=−√2(cid:18) 2K sin2θ0+4πMs[1−G(kτ)] yk02z0(cid:19). k 2 (34) +2πγM [1 G(kτ)] y0 G(kτ) , (26) s " − (cid:18) k (cid:19) − # The four-waveinteraction amplitude can be expressed as: and α A/M . Using the following linear canonical E s ≡ transformation (e.g., [23]): Φ(1,2,3,4)=Φ (1,2,3,4)+Φ (1,2,3,4)+Φ (1,2,3,4), 0 s Q ∗ ∗ ∗ (35) ak =ukck+vkc−k, ak =ukck+vkc−k, (27) where k+ωk k k ωk Φ =[γH cos(θ θ )+γH cos2θ ] uk = A , vk = B A − , (28) 0 0 H − 0 K 0 2ωk − k 2ωk r |B |r u1u2v3v4+v1v2u3u4 × we obtain n1 [(u1u2+v1v2)(u3v4+v3u4) M V −2 (2) = s ωkc∗kck, ωk = 2k k2. (29) E γ Xk qA −B +(u1v2+v1u2)(u3u4+v3v4)] , (36) o 4 1 1 1 Φs = [ (1)+ (2)+ (3)+ (4)] + 4 P P P P × ω1+ω3−1 ω3 ω4+ω2−4 ω2 (cid:18) − − (cid:19) [(u1u2 v1v2)(v3v4 u3u4) Ψ (1,4 1,4)Ψ (3,2 3,2) × − − 2 2 − − − (u1v2+v1u2)(v3v4+u3u4) 1 1 − + −(u1u2+v1v2)(v3u4+u3v4) ×(cid:18)ω1+ω4−1−ω4 ω3+ω2−3−ω2(cid:19) 1 −2(v1u2+u1v2)(v3u4−u3v4)], (37) −Ψ2(2,3−2,3)Ψ2(4,1−4,1) 1 1 + × ω2+ω3−2 ω3 ω4+ω1−4 ω1 ΦQ =[ (1+2)+ (3+4)](u1u2u3u4+v1v2v3v4) Ψ (cid:18)(2,4 2,4)Ψ−(3,1 3,1) − (cid:19) Q Q 2 2 +[ (1+4)+ (2+3)](u1v2u3v4+v1u2v3u4) − − 1 − 1 Q Q + . (44) +[Q(1+3)+Q(2+4)](u1v2v3u4+v1u2u3v4), (38) ×(cid:18)ω2+ω4−2−ω4 ω3+ω1−3−ω1(cid:19) The energy (41) together with the Hamilton’s equa- P(k) α k2 HK sin2θ +2πM [1 G(kτ)] ky0 2, tions of motion for complex spin-wave variables E 0 s γ ≡ − 2 − k (cid:18) (cid:19) d γ ∂ (39) dt +ηk ck =−i M V ∂cE∗, (45) (cid:18) (cid:19) (cid:18) s (cid:19) k and supplemented by the (microscopic) relaxation rate ηk, representthebasisformagnetizationdynamicsmodeling Q(γk) ≡αEk2− H2K cos2θ0+2πMs[1−G(kτ)](cid:18)kkz0(cid:19)2. innettihzeatkio-snpadceev.iaCtiaolncuslaatki(ntg),cka(∗kt()t,)cw∗k(itt)h,wtheechanelpfinodfmbaacgk- transformation (27) and finally with Eqs. (19a)-(19c), (40) the averaged Ly Lz 1 D. Effective four-wave interactions m(r,t) = dy dz m(r,t)=m0(t), (46) h i L L y z Z Z 0 0 Unitary transformation(see, [29])makes it possible to whichgivesameasureofnon-uniformmagnetizationmo- eliminate forbidden three-magnon interaction terms in tions in the system. In general, m <1 andonly in the Eq.(31) and obtain effective interaction terms. As a re- | 0| case of coherent spin motion m =1. sult we have the following spin-wave energy | 0| M V s ∗ / = ωkckck (41) E. Example E γ (cid:18) (cid:19) k X +1 Φ(1,2,3,4)c∗1c∗2c3c4∆(1+2 3 4), Forsimplicityweshallconsidertheuniformmagnetiza- 2 − − tion precession interacting with one spin-wave pair with 1,2,3,4 X k = (0,0,k) along z . In this case the energy (Hamilto- e 0 where nian) of the system can be reduced to the form: b Φ(1,2,3,4)=Φ(1,2,3,4)+Φ (1,2,3,4)+Φ (1,2,3,4), = 0+ int+ p, (47) 1 2 H H H H (42) where e M V s ∗ ∗ ∗ Φ (1,2,3,4)= Ψ (1,2, 1 2)Ψ (3,4, 3 4) H0/ γ =ω0c0c0+ωk(ckck+c−kc−k) (48) 1 − 1 − − 1 − − (cid:18) (cid:19) 1 1 + , (43) describes the uniform precession and spin-wave pair, × ω1+ω2+ω−1−2 ω3+ω4+ω−3−4 (cid:18) (cid:19) Φ int 00 ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ and (MHV/γ) = 2 c0c0c0c0+2Φ0kc0c0(ckck+c−kc−k) (49) s Φ2(1,2,3,4)=Ψ2(1,2,1+2)Ψ2(3,4,3+4) +Φkk(c∗kckc∗kck+c∗−kc−kc∗−kc−k)+2Φk,−kc∗kckc∗−kc−k 2 1 1 + describes nonlinear interactions in the system, Φ Ψ×2(cid:18)(1ω,31+ω12,3−)Ψω21(+42,2 ω43,+2)ω4−ω3+4(cid:19) Φ(0,0,0,0), Φ0k ≡ Φ(k,0,k,0), Φkk ≡ Φ(k,k,k00,k≡), − − − Φk,−k Φ(k, k,k, k), and ≡ − − e e e e 5 M V s ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ IV. DISCUSSION Hp/ γ =Φp c0c0ckc−k+c0c0ckc−k (50) (cid:18) (cid:19) describes the spin-wave(cid:0)pair excitation by the(cid:1)uniform We have considered two principally different scenarios of magnetization reversal. In the first one the coherent precession, Φ Φ(k, k,0,0). p ≡ − rotationofallspinsistheprincipalmotioninthesystem. The uniform precession and spin-wave pair dynamics ThemagnetizationdynamicsisdefinedbyEq. (8),which are defined by e isreducedtoBloch-Bloembergenforminthecaseofsmall d ∗ magnetization motions. dt+η0 c0 =−iω0c0−2iΦpckc−kc0, (51a) In the second scenario we have considered an ultra- (cid:18) (cid:19) d thing ferromagnetic film with large dimensions in the +ηk ck = iωekck iΦp(c0)2c∗−k, (51b) plane. In this case the role of plane boundaries is negli- dt − − (cid:18) (cid:19) gible and the most convenient technique to describe the where e non-uniform spin motions is their spin-wave representa- ω0 =ω0+Φ00 c0 2+2Φ0k(ck 2+ c−k 2), (52) tioninthek-space. Takingintoaccountlinearspin-wave | | | | | | modes and their scattering, we have constructed a non- ωk =ωk+2Φ0k c0 2+Φkk ck 2+2Φk,−k c−k 2 (53) linear self-consistent theory of magnetization reversal as e e | | | | | | a decay of uniform magnetization precession and non- are nonlinear frequencies and η0, ηk are the relaxation raetes. e linearexcitationofspin-wavepairs. Thistheoryincludes aneffectiveenergy(41)anddynamicequations(45). The Fromtheenergysymmetrywehaveck =c−k (see,also mostimportantspin-wavemodesaredefinedbythereso- [19]). Thus, Eqs.(51a)-(53) represent a self-consistent nonlinear theory of magnetization reversalwith just two nancecondition2ω0 =ωk+ω−k(similartoSuhl’ssecond orderinstability). The excitationofallspinwavesoutof independent complex variables. Simple analysis for both ck(t) and c∗−k(t) exp(κt), where κ is an increment of this resonanceis semalleand teherefore they can be consid- ∝ ered as a part of a thermal bath. In the simple example instability, gives: we have demonstrated that strongly excited spin-wave κ=−ηk+ |Φpc20(0)|2+(ωk−ω0)2. (54) isnwsittacbhiilnitgyracaten. increase substantially the magnetization q This formula is similar to that obtained in Ref. [30] for Note that both scenarios are consistent which each parametric instabilities. The diffeerenceeis that the res- other: inthecaseof m 1Eqs.(45)canbereducedto 0 | |→ onance condition includes nonlinear frequencies: 2ω = the case of a nonlinear oscillator equation considered in 0 ωk+ω−k (all spin waves out of this equality can be in- scenario 1. We also emphasize that the relaxation rates cluded into a thermal bath) and ω is the uniform pre- of uniform precession and spin waves in both scenarios 0 e cession frequency (not a driving field frequency). The can be estimated from microscopic physics. e e onset of instability is defined by Φepc20(0) ≥ηk. Taking m (0) = 0, from Eqs.(18b), (18c) and (27) we can find x0 (cid:12) (cid:12) c0(0) and rewrite this criterion as(cid:12) (cid:12) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS θ (u0+v0) 2ηk/Φp , (55) The author wish to thank H. N. Bertram for many ≥ | | where θ tan−1(m /m )qis the initial deviation angle stimulatingandcriticaldiscussions. Ialsogreatlyappre- ≡ y0 z0 ciate helpful discussions with H. Suhl, C. E. Patton, T. from the equilibrium direction z . Here the parameters 0 J. Silva, P. Kabos, and J. P. Nibarger. This work was u ,v andΦ canbe directlycalculatedusing Eqs. (27), 0 0 p supportedinpartby the NationalInstitute ofStandards (50). The damping ηk can be estimated microscopically and Technology’s Nanotechnology Initiative and partly [7], [8]. supported by matching funds from the Center for Mag- Fig.2 shows two different evolutions in magnetic sys- netic Recording Research at the University of California tem calculated by Eqs.(51a), (51b). Spin-wave pair ex- - San Diego and CMRR incorporated sponsor accounts. citation in Fig.2a is not sufficiently strong during the switchingprocesstoaffecttheuniformmagnetizationdy- namics. The averaged m(r) =m , which gives a mea- 0 h i sure of non-uniform magnetization motions in the sys- tem is relatively small (1 m .0.05). Fig.2b demon- 0 −| | stratesastrongexcitationofspin-waveinstabilitybyuni- form precession and substantial increase of the magneti- [1] L.LandauandE.Lifshitz,Phys.Z.Sowjet.8,153(1935); zation reversalrate. In this case m0 reaches 0.6. For in LandauL. D.Collected Papers. editedby D.terHaar | | ≃ stronger coupling (Φp /ηk > 21) we observed beating (Gordon and Breach, New York,1967) p.101. | | between the uniform precession and the spin-wave pair. [2] T.L.Gilbert,Phys.Rev.100,1243(1955);T.L.Gilbert In this case it is necessary to include into consideration Ph.D.thesis,IllinoisInstituteofTechnology,Chicago,IL, the excitation of another resonance spin-wave pairs. June 1956 (unpublished). 6 [3] V. L. Safonov, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 195, 526 (1999); Figure Captions J. Appl.Phys. 85, 4370 (1999). Fig.1 Equilibrium coordinates in the film plane. [4] V. L. Safonov and H. N. Bertram, in: The Physics of Fig.2 Time evolution of relative absolute amplitudes: Ultra-High-Density Magnetic Recording, edited by M. 1- the uniform precession c (t) without spin-wave exci- 0 | | Plumer, J. van Ek, and D. Weller (Springer, Berlin, tation, 2 - the uniform precession c (t) with spin-wave 0 2001), p.81. excitation, 3 - excited spin waves |c (t)|. Curve # 4 de- k [5] X. Wang, H. N. Bertram, and V. L. Safonov, J. Appl. scribes m0(t). a) Φp /ηk = 9, b|) Φp| /ηk = 21. The Phys.92, 2064 (2002). experim|entalc|onditi|ons| correspondt|o F|ig.2 in Ref. [10]. [6] H.N. Bertram, V. L. Safonov, and Z. Jin, Trans. Magn. 38, 2514 (2002). [7] V. L. Safonov and H. N. Bertram, J. Appl. Phys. 93, 6912 (2003). [8] V.L.SafonovandH.N.Bertram,J.Appl.Phys.94,529 (2003). [9] H. N. Bertram and X. Wang, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. in press (2004). [10] T.J.Silva,P.Kabos,andM.R.Pufall,Appl.Phys.Lett. 81, 2205 (2002). [11] H.Suhl,IEEE Trans. Mag. 34, 1834 (1998). [12] V. L. Safonov and H. N. Bertram, J. Appl. Phys. 85, 5072 (1999); ibid 87, 5508 (2000). [13] V. L. Safonov and H. N. Bertram, Phys. Rev. B 63, 094419 (2001). [14] C. Y. Mao, J. G. Zhu, and R. M. White, J. Appl. Phys. 85, 5870 (1999). [15] E. D. Boerner, H. N. Bertram, and H. Suhl, J. Appl. Phys.87,5389 (2000). [16] E. Schl¨omann, Phys.Rev. 116, 828 (1959). [17] V.E. Zakharov, V. S. L’vov, and S. S. Starobinets, Sov. Phys.Usp. 17, 896 (1975). [18] V.S.L’vov,Wave Turbulence Under Parametric Excita- tion (Springer-Verlag,Berlin, 1994). [19] V. L. Safonov, Q. Shi, M. Mino, and H. Yamazaki, J. Phys.Soc. Japan 66, 1916 (1997). [20] V. L. Safonov and H. N. Bertram, J. Appl. Phys. 91, 7279 (2002). [21] A. Yu. Dobin and R. H. Victora, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 167203 (2003). [22] T. Holstein and H. Primakoff, Phys. Rev. 58, 1098 (1940). [23] M. Sparks, Ferromagnetic-Relaxation Theory (McGraw- Hill, New York,1964). [24] F. Bloch, Phys. Rev. 70, 460 (1946); N. Bloembergen, Phys.Rev.78, 572 (1950). [25] X. Wang, H. N. Bertram, and V. L. Safonov, J. Appl. Phys.93, 7396 (2003). [26] M. Mansuripur, The Physical Principles of Magneto- optical Recording (Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, 1995), p. 488. [27] J. Villain, J. de Physique 35, 27 (1974). [28] V. G. Baryakhtar and D. A. Yablonskii, Theor. Math. Phys.25, 1109 (1975). [29] Q.Shi,V.L.Safonov,M.Mino,andH.Yamazaki,Phys. Lett.A 238, 258 (1998). [30] C. E. Patton, Phys. Stat. Sol. (b) 92, 211 (1979). 7 This figure "Fig1.jpg" is available in "jpg"(cid:10) format from: http://arXiv.org/ps/cond-mat/0401590v1 This figure "Fig2.jpg" is available in "jpg"(cid:10) format from: http://arXiv.org/ps/cond-mat/0401590v1

See more

The list of books you might like