High-precision magnetization, $M(T,H),$ data have been taken along the c axis (easy direction of magnetization) of a high-purity Gd single crystal in the critical region near the ferromagnetic-paramagnetic phase transition. Elaborate data analyses demonstrate that the single power laws, by themselves, do not adequately describe the observed field dependence of M at the Curie point TC, M(TC,H), and the temperature variations of spontaneous magnetization, $M(T,0),$ and initial susceptibility, χ(T), in the asymptotic critical region |ε|=|(T-TC)/TC|<~2×10^-3, but do so only when the multiplicative logarithmic corrections (LC), predicted by the renormalization group (RG) calculations for dipolar Ising (spin dimensionality $n=1)$ spin systems at the upper marginal space dimension d*=3, are taken into account. Such data analyses also permit the first accurate determination of LC exponents (x^',x), the asymptotic critical exponents β, γ, and δ, and critical amplitudes B ̂ \^, ^Γ, and D ̂ \^ for $M(T,0),$ χ(T), and M(TC,H). The exponents x^', x, β, γ, and δ, as well as the universal amplitude ratio R_χ=D ̂ \^B^δ-1^Γ possess the same (within the uncertainty limits) values as those yielded by the RG calculations for a $d=3$ uniaxial dipolar ferromagnet. Moreover, the presently determined values of β, γ, and δ, together with the reported value of the specific heat critical exponent α, obey the scaling relations β+γ=βδ and α+2β+γ=2 accurately. By establishing that gadolinium belongs to the $d=3,$ $n=1$ dipolar static universality class, the present results resolve the long-standing controversy surrounding the nature of the asymptotic critical behavior of Gd.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Srinath et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: