Reply to “Comment on ‘X-ray resonant scattering studies of orbital and charge ordering in<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Pr</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mi>−</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ca</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MnO</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math>’ ”
この論文をさがす
説明
The interpretation given in our recent x-ray scattering study of Pr{sub 1-x}Ca{sub x}MnO{sub 3} in terms of charge and orbital ordering is questioned in the preceding Comment by Garcia and Subias. They argue that anisotropy of the charge distribution induced by local distortions gives rise to the so-called charge order reflections. In this Reply we suggest that the two different pictures are reconcilable.
収録刊行物
-
- Physical Review B
-
Physical Review B 68 2003-09-26
American Physical Society (APS)