Transcript Document

Charge-transfer effects in Raman
Scattering of Individual Molecules
Gilad Haran
Chemical Physics Department
Weizmann Institute of Science
FRISNO, EIN-BOKEK, February 2004
Surface-Enhanced Raman Scattering
Electromagnetic Enhancement
on a nanosphere
 metal dielectric function
 m medium dielectric function
5
0
Re(
Esurface
3

E0
  2 m
-5
-10
-15
300
350
400
450
Wavelength (nm)
500
The ‘Chemical’ (Charge Transfer) Mechanism
A new charge transfer band is formed when a
molecule is adsorbed on a metal surface
Metal levels
Vacuum
level

Molecular levels
LUMO
EF
HOMO
Avouris and Demuth., 1981
Substrates supporting
Single-molecule SERS
200
100
0
0
100
200
nm
Colloids
Silver islands
Electromagnetic Enhancement
The local field can be huge!
G=1011
G=1012
From Xu et al., PRE 2000
EL ( ) 4
G
EI ( ) 4
E L, I
-local, incident field
Exploring smSERS in dimers
ly cedod
HS
S
S
S
S
SH
Oligo-thiophene
dodecy l
POSTER BY TALI DADOSH, Tuesday
10 –
50
nm
SERS of Rhodamine 6G
Hildebrandt and Stockburger,
1984
•Very large cross-section
•Involvement of halide ions
Frequency (cm-1)
Weiss & Haran, JPC B (2001) 105, 12348
Single-molecule Raman spectrometer
532 nm laser
Spectrograph+CCD camera
microscope
scanning stage
SERS spectrum of a single molecule
Frequency (cm-1)
Fluctuations in total intensity of
a series of molecules
Time (seconds)
Fluctuations in total intensity
SERS spectrum of a single molecule
Frequency (cm-1)
Time (seconds)
Spectral fluctuations in one molecule
Raman shift (cm-1)
Similar behavior seen in crystal violet molecules
The EM selection rule
E>>E
E
O
C O CH2CH3
CH3
CH3
CH3CH2NH
O
NH CH2CH3
+
Cl
E
How many equilibrium orientations? ~1-2
But in R6G- semi-continuous fluctuations!
Also – no correlation between different parts of
spectrum
Resonance Raman-Charge Transfer
Resonance Raman transition
within this band is responsible
for surface enhancement (RRCT).
s1
s0
Pyridine on electrodes, Arenas et al.,
1996
774 cm-1
C-C stretches (A term
Raman scattering?)
614 cm-1
1650 cm-1
Bend vibrations
Frequency (cm-1)
Polarized Raman measurements
Raman scattered light
parallel
polarizing prism
perpendicular
x

I parallel  I perpendicular
I parallel  I perpendicular
POSTER BY TIMUR SHEGAI, Monday
Probing the Raman Scattering Tensor
In resonance-enhanced scattering involving a
non-degenerate electronic excitation – a single-element tensor
11 0
 

0
0


I parallel  I perpendicular

 cos(2 )
intensity, a.u.

I parallel  I perpendicular
750
vertical
horizontal
614
773
600
1650
450
300
150
0
0
400
800
1200 1600 2000
Raman shift, cm
-1
, polarization function
614 cm-1
773 cm-1
0.2
1650 cm-1
total intensity
0.0
-0.2
-0.4
0
20
40
60
time, s
80
100
Angular dependence of 
0.75
0.50
0.25
0  40
0
0 = 10
0.00
0.8
0
20
40
60 80
, degree
0  10
100 120
, polarization function
, polarization function
-1
614 cm
-1
773 cm
-1
1650 cm
-1
614 cm
-1
773 cm
-1
1650 cm
0.4
0.0
-0.4
0
0 = 40
0
20
40
60
, degree
80
100
number of molecules
Distribution of 0
3.6
2.7
1.8
0.9
0.0
0
10
20
30
40
0
The low-frequency bands have a different tensor
than that of high-frequency bands
A CT band in R6G?
773 cm-1
Hildebrandt & Stockburger, 1984
Metal levels
Vacuum
level

Molecular levels
LUMO
ECT    ELUMO  Evac
HOMO
On resonance:
EF
ECT  Elaser
Smoluchowski’s smoothing effect
Wandelt, 1987
The local work function can
vary along the surface.
Methods to measure:
•Photoemission of adsorbed
xenon (PAX)
•STM
Possible causes for local work function changes
at an adsorbed molecule
•Motion of silver adatoms / surface features
•Diffusion of the adsorbed molecule
Slowing down of fluctuations in glycerola viscosity effect

C( )   I (t )  I (t   )  I (t )

2

1
in water
in glycerol
0.8
C(t)
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
10
20
30
40
50
Time (sec)
Haran, Israel J. Chem. 2004
Laser power effect on whole-spectrum
correlation functions

C( )   I (t )  I (t   )  I (t )

2

2
0 W/cm
6
18
48
100
1.00
Correlation
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0
10
20
30
40
Time (seconds)
50
Dependence of correlation times on laser power
0.3
-1
Rate (sec )
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.0
0
25
50
75
2
Power (W/cm )
100
Are we heating the system (colloid + molecule)?
water
Q
T ~

 0.1K
4cR
R
Q - amount of heat/unit time
 - density of silver
c – specific heat of silver
 - heat diffusivity in water
Assuming: illumination intensity 100W/cm2
absorption cross section 10-10 cm2
Possible effect of EM field on
the adatom diffusion constant?
• Ds~10 Å2/sec
• Depends
exponentially on
electrode potential
• A linear dependence
expected for
oscillating fields
From Hirai et al., Appl. Surf. Sci.
1998
Possible role for surface roughness relaxation?
The relaxation time depends on surface tension and surface
diffusion
 g  DS 
1
- surface tension
DS- diffusion
coefficient
Can  or DS can depend on the
electromagnetic field?
PROBABLY NOT!
Lukatsky, Haran & Safran, PRE (2003) 67, 062402
Photodissociation can lead to sampling of
different surface areas
CT!
local
 local
'
Quantifying fluctuations by using
ratios between Raman band intensities
I614cm-1/ I1650cm-1
Ratio
2
1
0
0
200
400
600
Time (Seconds)
800
1000
Distribution of ratio values
R=I614cm-1/I1650cm-1
Probability
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.25
0.50
R/Rmax
0.75
1.00
Probability function for local work function
fluctuations
P (E )  (2 )
2 1 / 2
exp(
 (2 )
2 1 / 2
P(E )  P( R)
( E  E0 ) 2
exp(
2 2
(  0 ) 2
2 2
)
)
Distribution of ratio values
R=I614cm-1/I1650cm-1

Probability
0.06
E0
0.04
Assuming E0  0.15eV
  0.06ev
0.02
0.00
0.00
 0.42  0.01
0.25
0.50
R/Rmax
0.75
1.00
Haran, Israel J. Chem. 2004
Conclusions
•
SERS fluctuations are due to modulation of charge
transfer.
•
This modulation is due to lateral motion of
molecules and sampling of different local work
functions.
•
Lateral diffusion is facilitated by light.
•
Analysis of spectral fluctuations leads to better
understanding of molecule-surface interactions
involved in SERS.
Thanks to:
Amir Weiss
Timur Shegai
Dima Lukatsky
Sam Safran
Yamit Sharaabi
Tali Dadosh
Paulina Płochocka
Israel Bar-Joseph
Timur
Yamit