This is the second article of Ed Publica’s series on the Hall effect, which covers the various manifestations of the Hall effect. You can read the first article here.
The ‘anomalous’ Hall effect
In 1881, just two years after Edwin Hall discovered the eponymous Hall effect, he spotted an anomaly when replicating the effect with ferromagnets.
He had observed a tenfold deflection of electric charges this time around, compared to non-magnetic conductors.
Suspecting the magnetic properties played a role, this avatar of the Hall effect is dubbed the anomalous Hall effect. The word ‘anomalous’ is used owing to the fact that external magnetic field no longer remains as a stringent requirement for the Hall effect; instead, the intrinsic magnetization (for instance, the ferromagnet in the above example) fulfils that criterion.
The physicist Edwin Hall. Credit: Wikimedia
The Hall resistivity in ferromagnets increase steeply under the presence of very weak magnetic fields. However, in stronger magnetic fields, the Hall resistivity doesn’t increase further very much. This saturation is rather strange, for it is in contrast to the classical Hall effect where the Hall resistivity maintains its steady growth.
There are several other effects that play a crucial role in determining the anomalous Hall resistivity, thus making it a complicated phenomenon that physicists lack comprehensive understanding about, in comparison to the various other avatars of the Hall effect.
Quantum avatar(s)
The fact that a simple lab experiment showed how the Hall resistivity can be expressed as an equation that contains merely constants, opened up a a plethora of research to understand the cause of this ‘universality’. For it hinted to the involvement of a very fundamental phenomenon.
In 1980, Klaus von Klitzing discovered the quantum avatar of the Hall effect was detected. He was amidst research at a magnetic facility in Grenoble, France, working to improve electron mobility in metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistors (MOSFET). These are transistors that typically operate at extremely low temperatures and under intense magnetic fields.
von Klitzing observed his sample’s Hall resistivity assuming discretized values. This means the resistivity jumps in steps, by a fixed amount that can be scaled as multiples of an integer number (includes 0 along with whole numbers such as 1,2,3, and so on). This discretization reveals the underlying quantum mechanical behavior that has been unraveled at long last – thus bearing its name – the integer quantum Hall effect. von Klitzing later won the Nobel Prize in Physics for 1985 for this work.
The plot here depicts the transverse and longitudinal Hall resistivity (y-axis) increasing in integer steps as the magnetic field (x-axis) increases. This is due to the integer quantum Hall effect. Credit: Wikimedia
But the quantization isn’t limited to integer multiples. In fact, two years later, the fractional quantum Hall effect was observed in experiments. It was shown there were about 100 fractions, including those that aren’t whole numbers that were now in the formula.
Robert Laughlin, who would later win a share of the 1998 Nobel Prize in Physics, proposed a theory to explain the observations. It boils down to the interaction among electrons, either due to the Coulombic repulsion force or the Pauli exclusion principle.
These interacts would eventually split the degeneracy of these enormously degenerate Landau energy levels. These are quantum states occupied by electrons that complete circular revolutions under the influence of an external magnetic field. Splitting these degeneracies, lead to the opening of an energy gap, for the fractional quantum Hall effect to be observed.
‘Spin’ avatar(s)
Just as there are electric charges in nature, so are there spin currents found in nature. ‘Spin’ is a key property found in quantum particles. Unlike what the name suggests, these quantum particles don’t spin or rotate about any axis passing through them. However, these particles carry an angular momentum as though it does spin.
In 1971, before von Klitzing observed the quantum Hall effect, Mikhail Dyakonov and Vladimir Perel hypothesized the spin Hall effect.
In this avatar of the Hall effect, quantum spins of opposite kinds accumulate at the edges of the sample, orthogonal to the direction in which the charge current passes.
The spin selection can be facilitated by the spin-orbit coupling. This refers to the modified energy levels in an atom when the electron’s motion is under the influence on the magnetic field generated by the nucleus. Strong coupling may be intrinsic to doped semiconductors. The proposal has triggered intense investigation of the phenomenon, with first experimental observations of the spin Hall effect seen in n-doped semiconductors and two-dimensional hole gases.
Quantum spins don’t really look like the depiction above, which is meant to showcase a fact that particles like electrons do have an intrinsic angular momentum nonetheless. Credit: Karthik / Ed Publica
For more than a decade, studies concerning the spin current and its application to novel spintronics (or spin electronics) have received plethora of attention. This is with regard to efficiently generating, manipulating and detecting spin accumulation in a sample material. Some progress has also occurred from the device fabrication perspective via techniques such as spin injection, among others.
A major advantage in dealing with the spin current lies in the non-dissipative (or very less dissipation) nature which arises owing to the time reversal invariance of the spin current. This presents a non-dissipative scenario (unlike the dissipative effects seen with charged currents), thus making it quite advantageous for spin transport phenomena.
Furthermore, a quantized version of the spin Hall effect exists, with mercury telluride and cadmium telluride quantum well superlattices, showcasing this effect. In 2005, a quantum treatment was proposed by Charles Kane and Eugene Mele, in the form of a tight binding toy model of electrons operating in a two-dimensional honeycomb lattice.
In fact, the ‘wonder material’ graphene, which is a two-dimensional honeycomb lattice constituting carbon atoms, does satisfy some key requirements for the quantum spin Hall effect. However, it lacks a large spin-orbit coupling among other requirements.
Nonetheless, graphene’s ability to entertain the quantum spin Hall effect, makes it a prospective candidate to find applications in next-generation spintronic devices.