journal article·2018-08-17Open access

Magneto-Stark effect of yellow excitons in cuprous oxide

Patric Rommel, Frank Schweiner, Jörg Main, Julian Heckötter, Marcel Freitag, Dietmar Fröhlich, Kevin Lehninger, Marc Aßmann, Manfred Bayer

Physical Review B· Volume 98· Issue 8

Abstract

We investigate and compare experimental and numerical excitonic spectra of the yellow series in cuprous oxide (${\mathrm{Cu}}2\mathrm{O}$) in the Voigt configuration and thus partially extend the results of F. Schweiner et al. [Phys. Rev. B 95, 035202 (2017)], who considered only the Faraday configuration. The main difference between the configurations is given by an additional effective electric field in the Voigt configuration, caused by the motion of the exciton through the magnetic field. This magneto-Stark effect was already postulated in 1961 by E. F. Gross et al. [Sov. Phys. Solid State 3, 221 (1961)] and D. G. Thomas and J. J. Hopfield [Phys. Rev. 124, 657 (1961)]. Group-theoretical considerations show that, most of all, the field significantly increases the number of allowed lines by decreasing the symmetry of the system. This conclusion is supported by both the experimental and numerical data.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Theoretical and Computational Physics · Spectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies · Magnetic properties of thin films

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (47)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/0370-1573(89)90121-X10.1016/0370-1573(89)90121-X ↗
2. 10.1143/PTPS.98.19810.1143/PTPS.98.198 ↗
4. 10.1103/PhysRev.52.19110.1103/PhysRev.52.191 ↗
5. R. Knox · 1963
6. 10.1038/nature1383210.1038/nature13832 ↗
7. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.02740210.1103/PhysRevLett.115.027402 ↗
8. 10.1103/PhysRevB.95.03521010.1103/PhysRevB.95.035210 ↗
9. 10.1103/PhysRevB.94.04520510.1103/PhysRevB.94.045205 ↗
10. 10.1103/PhysRevB.95.07520410.1103/PhysRevB.95.075204 ↗
11. 10.1103/PhysRevB.95.24520510.1103/PhysRevB.95.245205 ↗
12. 10.1103/PhysRevB.93.07520310.1103/PhysRevB.93.075203 ↗
13. 10.1103/PhysRevB.95.03520210.1103/PhysRevB.95.035202 ↗
14. 10.1103/PhysRevB.93.19520310.1103/PhysRevB.93.195203 ↗
15. 10.1103/PhysRevB.38.601510.1103/PhysRevB.38.6015 ↗
16. P. Korzhavyi · 2011
17. 10.1103/PhysRevB.55.759310.1103/PhysRevB.55.7593 ↗
18. 10.1088/0022-3719/9/8/01410.1088/0022-3719/9/8/014 ↗
19. E. F. Gross · Sov. Phys. Solid State · 1961 · 3 · 221
20. 10.1103/PhysRev.122.3510.1103/PhysRev.122.35 ↗
21. 10.1103/PhysRev.124.65710.1103/PhysRev.124.657 ↗
22. 10.1103/PhysRev.188.129410.1103/PhysRev.188.1294 ↗
23. 10.1103/PhysRevB.88.23520710.1103/PhysRevB.88.235207 ↗
24. V. M. Agranovich · 1991
25. 10.1103/PhysRevB.30.225310.1103/PhysRevB.30.2253 ↗
26. 10.1103/PhysRevB.37.313010.1103/PhysRevB.37.3130 ↗
27. 10.1103/PhysRevB.52.1472810.1103/PhysRevB.52.14728 ↗
28. 10.1103/PhysRevB.53.1645810.1103/PhysRevB.53.16458 ↗
29. 10.1393/ncr/i2003-10002-210.1393/ncr/i2003-10002-2 ↗
30. 10.1103/PhysRevB.61.727310.1103/PhysRevB.61.7273 ↗
31. 10.1007/BF0142667810.1007/BF01426678 ↗
32. 10.1103/PhysRevB.93.08520310.1103/PhysRevB.93.085203 ↗
33. 10.1103/PhysRevB.95.19520110.1103/PhysRevB.95.195201 ↗
34. 10.1103/PhysRev.102.103010.1103/PhysRev.102.1030 ↗
35. 1998
36. 10.1103/PhysRevB.96.24520210.1103/PhysRevB.96.245202 ↗
37. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.04640110.1103/PhysRevLett.118.046401 ↗
38. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.91.10740110.1103/PhysRevLett.91.107401 ↗
39. 10.1002/pssc.20046033110.1002/pssc.200460331 ↗
40. 10.1103/PhysRevB.70.04520610.1103/PhysRevB.70.045206 ↗
41. 10.1088/1367-2630/aaa39610.1088/1367-2630/aaa396 ↗
42. E. Anderson · 199910.1137/1.9780898719604 ↗
43. 10.1103/PhysRevB.96.03520710.1103/PhysRevB.96.035207 ↗
44. 10.1088/1361-6455/aaa06010.1088/1361-6455/aaa060 ↗
45. 10.1038/nmat462210.1038/nmat4622 ↗
46. A. Abragam · 2012
47. G. Koster · 1963