Science. 1971 Dec 3;174(4013):985-92. doi: 10.1126/science.174.4013.985.
Despite its somewhat naive simplicity, the method of the local molecular field has had undeniable success in satisfactorily explaining a large number of previously known facts and in opening the way for the discovery of new facts. Let us note, however, that all the structures that have been discussed above are collinear structures: on the average (in time) all the atomic magnets pointing in one or the opposite direction are parallel to a single direction. However, the local molecular field method can also be extended to noncollinear structures such as that of helimagnetism, which Yoshimori and Villain discovered independently in an absolutely unexpected manner; one can thus interpret phenomena in a remarkably simple and concrete manner. Nevertheless, the method can hardly be recommended for more complex structures such as the umbrella structure, which requires the decomposition of the principal crystal lattice into a large number of sublattices. Indeed, under these conditions an atom belonging to a given sublattice has only a very small number of neighbors (one or two) in each of the other sublattices, and the molecular field method, which consists in replacing the instantaneous action of an atom by that of an average atom, will be more likely to yield a correct result, the larger the number of atoms to which it is applied. Its correctness probably also increases as the atomic spin becomes larger. Independently of this problem, the method applied to a large number of sublattices completely loses its chief advantage, simplicity. The method also involves more insidious traps. If a judicious choice of parameters is made, the method can lead one to calculate curves and thermal variations of the spontaneous magnetization or paramagnetic susceptibility that coincide remarkably well with the experimental results, for example, to within a few thousandths. Under these conditions, one could expect that the elementary interaction energies deduced from these parameters would correspond to the actual values with the same accuracy. This is not so; errors of 10 to 20 percent and even greater are frequently made in this manner. A certain amount of caution thus becomes imperative. On the other hand, recourse to the local molecular field seems indispensable since more rigorous methods lead to insurmountable complications. Consider for example that the rigorous solution is not yet known for the simplest case, that of a simple cubic lattice with identical atoms of spin 1/2, and interactions reduced to those present between nearest-neighbor atoms. How then should one treat the case of garnets with 160 atoms in the unit cell, spins up to 5/2, and at least six different coupling constants? One must therefore be lenient toward the imperfections of the molecular field methods, considering the simplicity with which the successes recalled in the first few lines of these conclusions were obtained.
尽管局部分子场方法有些天真简单,但它在令人满意地解释大量先前已知的事实和为发现新事实开辟道路方面取得了不可否认的成功。然而,我们应该注意到,上述所有结构都是共线结构:平均(在时间上),所有指向一个或相反方向的原子磁体都平行于一个单一的方向。然而,局部分子场方法也可以扩展到非共线结构,如希磁体,这是吉森和维兰以一种完全出乎意料的方式独立发现的;人们可以以一种非常简单和具体的方式解释现象。然而,该方法几乎不能推荐用于更复杂的结构,如伞状结构,这需要将主晶格分解为大量子晶格。事实上,在这些条件下,属于给定子晶格的原子在每个其他子晶格中只有很少的邻居(一个或两个),而局部分子场方法,即通过用平均原子代替瞬时原子的作用,将更有可能产生正确的结果,所应用的原子数量越大。随着原子自旋的增大,它的正确性可能也会增加。独立于这个问题,该方法应用于大量子晶格完全失去了其主要优势,即简单性。该方法还涉及更阴险的陷阱。如果明智地选择参数,则该方法可以导致计算自发磁化或顺磁磁化率的曲线和热变化,这些曲线和热变化与实验结果非常吻合,例如,在千分之几以内。在这些条件下,人们可能期望从这些参数推断出的基本相互作用能与实际值具有相同的精度。事实并非如此;以这种方式经常会出现 10% 到 20% 甚至更大的误差。因此,需要一定的谨慎。另一方面,由于更严格的方法会导致无法克服的复杂性,因此局部分子场的使用似乎是必不可少的。例如,最简单的情况,即具有相同自旋 1/2 的原子的简单立方晶格,并且相互作用仅限于最近邻原子之间的相互作用,其严格解仍然未知。那么,对于具有 160 个原子的单位晶胞、高达 5/2 的自旋和至少六个不同耦合常数的石榴石,应该如何处理呢?因此,必须对分子场方法的不完美持宽容态度,考虑到在得出这些结论的前几行中所取得的成功的简单性。