In the paramagnetic state, as Prof. Blaha says, the atoms still have magnetic 
moments but they are randomly oriented. This arises when the thermal energy is 
sufficient to overcome the spin-spin coupling. I would expect a calculation on 
Gd at 0K to give you a ferromagnetic state with very small spin-spin coupling. 
You can check the coupling by a run with one spin reversed.


I am not convinced you can model a paramagnetic state with a DFT calculation 
and zero moments is not a good model. Your second example reads as though it is 
reporting experimental results on the magnetisation and does not seem to 
provide a model for calculations.


I would also agree with Prof. Blaha about the factors influencing efg. 
Interatomic distance is very important in calculating this.

Elaine A. Moore
The Open University
UK

________________________________
From: Wien <wien-boun...@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at> on behalf of Abderrahmane 
Reggad <jazai...@gmail.com>
Sent: 26 November 2016 21:30
To: wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
Subject: Re: [Wien] Discrepancy in the simulation of the paramagnetic state


Thank you Prof Blaha for your quick answer.

The Ni atom is 3d transition metal . But my question is about the simulation of 
the paramagnetic state. There are many people that considere that the 
paramagnetic state is the non-spin polarierd one and the magnetic moment is 
zero, but you say no and the magnetic moments exist in arbitrary directions and 
my quoting is about that.

I have given 2 examples for that discrepancy with your statement.

Best regards
--
Mr: A.Reggad
Laboratoire de GĂ©nie Physique
Université Ibn Khaldoun - Tiaret
Algerie


_______________________________________________
Wien mailing list
Wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
SEARCH the MAILING-LIST at:  
http://www.mail-archive.com/wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/index.html

Reply via email to