This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
The crystalline structure of manganese formate dihydrate Mn(HCCO) 2 .2H 2 O may be described by stacking along the a axis two parallel layers of non-equivalent manganese Mn 2+ ions, consisting of antiferromagnetically coupled A ions and weakly interacting B ions. The A layers are characterized by formate bridges related each A ion to the four neighbouring ions, while the B ions are isolated from each other. On the other hand, the A layers are related to the B layers by formate bridges. The induced magnetization density has been determined by polarized-neutron diffraction, slightly above (and below) the antiferromagnetic (AF) ordering temperature T N =3.7 K. A field of 0.8 T was applied to the single crystal along b. The experimental conditions studied, below T N the AF moments of the A ions are canted, with a weak ferromagnetic component along b. Magnetic moments are observed on the carbon and oxygen atoms of the A-A and A-B formate bridges, demonstrating the role of the formate group in the indirect exchange magnetic interaction between A ions. At 5.5 K, alternate positive and negative signs are found on the O-C-O pathway between two A ions and between the A and B ions: O(1)(0.022(6) mu B )-C(1)(-0.017(7) mu B )-O(2)(0.015(6) mu B ) and O(3)(0.024(7) mu B )-C(2)(-0.011(9) mu B )-O(4)(0.013(7) mu B ). The induced moments on A and B are equal to 0.38(2) mu B and 1.73(2) mu B , respectively. At 2.5 K, the measurements have been confined to the reflections with k+l even, which do not contain any contribution from the AF components. The magnetization density observed around the A ions is then the sum of the spontaneous weak ferromagnetic component (0.09 mu B ) and of the component induced by the field (0.19 mu B ). The spin distribution on the bridges is perturbed in the magnetically ordered phase; in particular, the alternation of signs is no longer observed.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Radhakrishna et al. (1993) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: