<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:creator>T. Pankey Jr.</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>1960</dc:date>
  <dc:description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;The bulk&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;magnetic susceptibilities&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;of single&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;gallium&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;crystals and&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;polycrystalline&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;gallium&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;spheres were&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;measured&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;at 25°C. The following&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;anisotropic&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;diamagnetic&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;susceptibilities&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;were found:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;i&gt;a&lt;/i&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;axis (−0.119±0.001)×10&lt;/span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;−6&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;emu/g,&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;i&gt;b&lt;/i&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;axis (−0.416±0.002)×10&lt;/span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;−6&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;emu/g, and&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;i&gt;c&lt;/i&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;axis (−0.229±0.001) emu/g. The&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;susceptibility&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;of the&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;polycrystalline&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;spheres, assumed to be the average value for the bulk&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;susceptibility&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;of&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;gallium,&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;was (−0.257±0.003)×10&lt;/span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;−6&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;emu/g at 25°C, and (−0.299±0.003)×10&lt;/span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;−6&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;emu/g at −196°C. The&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;susceptibility&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;of liquid&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;gallium&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;was (0.0031±0.001)×10&lt;/span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;−6&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;emu/g at 30°C and 100°C. Rotational diagrams of the&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;susceptibilities&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;in the three orthogonal planes of the unit cell were not sinusoidal. The&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;anisotropy&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;in the&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;single crystals&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;was presumably caused by the partial overlap of&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;Brillouin&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;zone boundaries by the Fermi‐energy&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;surface.&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;The large change in&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;susceptibility&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;associated with the change in state was attributed to the absence of effective mass influence in the liquid state.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.1063/1.1735451</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>AIP Publishing</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>Anisotropy of the magnetic susceptibility of gallium</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>