# Local Time-Reversal Symmetry Breaking in 𝑑_{𝑥²-𝑦²} Superconductors

## Abstract

We show that an isolated impurity in a spin singlet $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ superconductor generates a $`d_{xy}`$ order parameter with locally broken time-reversal symmetry. The origin of this effect is a coupling between the $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ and the $`d_{xy}`$ order parameter induced by spin-orbit scattering off the impurity. The signature of locally broken time-reversal symmetry is an induced orbital charge current near the impurity, which generates a localized magnetic field in the vicinity of the impurity. We present a microscopic theory for the impurity induced $`d_{xy}`$ component, discuss its spatial structure as well as the pattern of induced current and local magnetic field near the localized impurity spin.

There is now strong evidence to support the identification of the superconducting state of many of the high T<sub>c</sub> cuprates with a spin-singlet pairing amplitude having “d-wave” orbital symmetry, or more precisely $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ symmetry. This phase preserves time-reversal ($`𝒯`$) symmetry, but changes sign under reflection along the  and \[$`\overline{1}`$10\] mirror planes, as well as $`\pi /2`$-rotations in a tetragonal crystal. As a consequence $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ pairing correlations are particularly sensitive to scattering of quasiparticles on the Fermi surface. In this article we show that an isolated impurity in a spin singlet $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ superconductor generates a complex $`d_{xy}`$ order parameter (OP) with locally broken $`𝒯`$ symmetry; the signature of this effect is an induced orbital charge current near the impurity and a localized magnetic field in the vicinity of the impurity.

Atomic scale impurities, or defects, scatter conduction electrons which leads to local suppression of the superconducting OP (pair-breaking) near the impurity. The mechanism responsible for pair-breaking is the formation of quasiparticle states near the Fermi level which are bound to the impurity by Andreev scattering. The corresponding reduction in the spectral weight of the pair condensate is responsible for pair-breaking. The existence of quasiparticle states near the Fermi level can also lead to local Fermi-surface instabilities and mixing of order parameters with different symmetry. Low temperature phase transitions associated with a secondary OP may provide new information on the mechanism(s) for pairing in unconventional superconductors, while impurity-induced mixing of the $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ OP with an OP of different symmetry can provide direct information on the atomic structure of the impurity.

Recent transport experiments report evidence for low temperature phases associated with a secondary OP at surfaces ($`T_s8\text{K}`$). This was interpreted in terms of a surface phase transition to a $`d_{x^2y^2}+is`$ state with spontaneously broken $`𝒯`$-symmetry. Bulk transport measurements on $`\mathrm{Bi}_2\mathrm{Sr}_2\mathrm{CaCu}_2\mathrm{O}_{8+\delta }`$ (Bi-2212) show a pronounced drop in the thermal conductivity at $`T^{}150\mathrm{mK}T_c80\mathrm{K}`$ in Ni doped Bi-2212. This anomaly was interpreted as the signature of a second superconducting phase with a fully gapped quasiparticle spectrum and a mixed symmetry OP of the form $`d_{x^2y^2}+id_{xy}`$. This phase was proposed to arise from a coupling of the orbital momentum of the conduction electron with the spin of the magnetic impurity, $`_{\text{so}}=𝑑𝐫\psi _\alpha ^{}(𝐫)v(r)𝐋_{\text{orbit}}𝐒_{\text{imp}}\psi _\alpha (𝐫)`$. Measurements of the spin-orbit coupling energy for Ni<sup>2+</sup> ions indicate that it is a few percent of the nonmagnetic and exchange channels. In this model the $`id_{xy}`$ OP is induced at a temperature above the second phase transition, $`T^{}<TT_c`$; the low temperature transition is argued to be ordering of the impurity-induced “patches” of the local $`d_{x^2y^2}\pm id_{xy}`$ order. Above $`T^{}`$ patches with randomly fluctuating internal phase destroy the long range order, $`d_{xy}=0`$, but preserve $`|d_{xy}|^20`$. Thus, the local structure associated with $`d_{x^2y^2}\pm id_{xy}`$ symmetry near a magnetic impurity should be observable at temperatures well above $`T^{}`$. The electronic and magnetic structure near an impurity located near the surface of a superconductor can now be studied with atomic resolution at low temperature by scanning tunneling microscopy (STM), opening a new window for local probes.

In this article we investigate theoretically the local structure of the OP and the current distribution in the neighborhood of an atomic impurity within the $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ model for the high T<sub>c</sub> cuprates. We present new analytical and numerical results for the local $`d_{x^2y^2}\pm id_{xy}`$ OP that develops near a magnetic impurity, which has attracted new theoretical interests. Our approach follows closely the theory developed in the late 70’s for ions in superfluid <sup>3</sup>He, and later adapted to study the properties of impurities in heavy fermion superconductors. The theory of impurity scattering in superconductors can be formulated to quasiclassical accuracy as an expansion in $`\sigma /\xi _0`$, where $`\sigma `$ is the (linear in 2D) cross-section of the impurity for scattering of normal-state quasiparticles at the Fermi surface, and $`\xi _0=v_f/\pi \mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ is the superconducting coherence length. This ratio is typically very small in low T<sub>c</sub> superconductors and in superfluid <sup>3</sup>He, but may be as big as $`0.2`$ for strong scatterers in high T<sub>c</sub> superconductors.

We start from Eilenberger’s transport equation, for the matrix propagator in particle-hole/spin space, $`\widehat{g}(𝐩_f,𝐫;ϵ_n)`$. The diagonal element of the propagator determines the local density of states and local equilibrium current distribution, and the off-diagonal elements are the components of the local pair amplitude. Quasiparticle scattering off an isolated impurity is included through a source term on the r.h.s of the Eilenberger equation. The transport equation can be linearized to leading order in $`\sigma /\xi _0`$ for distances $`r\sigma `$ from the impurity. In this limit the Fourier transform of the linearized transport equation reduces to,

$`[iϵ_n\widehat{\tau }_3\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_b\widehat{\sigma }_{\text{imp}},\delta \widehat{g}]+𝐪𝐯_f\delta \widehat{g}=[\widehat{t}+\delta \widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}+\delta \widehat{\sigma }_{\text{imp}},\widehat{g}_b].`$ (1)   
The bulk propagator, $`\widehat{g}_b(𝐩_f;ϵ_n)=\pi [i\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_n\widehat{\tau }_3\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_b(𝐩_f)]/E`$, order parameter, $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_b(𝐩_f)=\mathrm{\Delta }_b(𝐩_f)\widehat{\tau }_1i\sigma _2`$, impurity scattering self-energy, $`\widehat{\sigma }_{\text{imp}}`$, and in-plane Fermi velocity, $`𝐯_f`$, are inputs to the linear response equations. The energy denominator is given by $`E=(|\mathrm{\Delta }_b(𝐩_f)|^2+\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_n^2)^{1/2}`$, where $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_n=ϵ_n+\frac{i}{4}\mathrm{Tr}\widehat{\tau }_3\widehat{\sigma }_{\text{imp}}(ϵ_n)`$ is the renormalized Matsubara frequency. The $`\widehat{t}`$ matrix for the isolated impurity, as well as the induced OP, $`\delta \widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}=[\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_1\widehat{\tau }_1+\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_2\widehat{\tau }_2]i\sigma _2`$, and self-energy, $`\delta \widehat{\sigma }_{\text{imp}}`$, enter the r.h.s. of Eq. (1) as source terms. Here $`\widehat{\tau }_i`$ and $`\sigma _i`$ are Pauli matrices in particle-hole and spin space, respectively. The $`\widehat{t}`$ matrix for the isolated impurity is given by

$`\widehat{t}(𝐩_f,𝐩_f^{};ϵ_n)`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{v}(𝐩_f,𝐩_f^{})+N_f{\displaystyle d^2𝐩_f^{\prime \prime }\widehat{v}(𝐩_f,𝐩_f^{\prime \prime })}`$ (3)   
$`\times \widehat{g}_b(𝐩_f^{\prime \prime };ϵ_n)\widehat{t}(𝐩_f^{\prime \prime },𝐩_f^{};ϵ_n),`$   
where $`N_f`$ is the 2D density of states at the Fermi energy per spin, and $`\widehat{v}(𝐩_f,𝐩_f^{})`$ is the impurity potential, which is evaluated in the forward scattering limit in Eq. (1); $`𝐩_f^{}=𝐩_f`$. We separate $`\widehat{v}`$ into channels for nonmagnetic ($`u`$), spin-spin exchange ($`𝐦=J𝐒_{\text{imp}}`$), and spin-orbit scattering ($`𝐮_{\mathrm{so}}`$) between the orbital momentum of the quasiparticle and the impurity spin, $`𝐒_{\text{imp}}`$, as well as the self-coupling ($`𝐰_{\mathrm{so}}`$) to the quasiparticle spin, $`\widehat{𝐒}`$, 

$`\widehat{v}(𝐩_f,𝐩_f^{})`$ $`=`$ $`u(𝐩_f,𝐩_f^{})+𝐦(𝐩_f,𝐩_f^{})\widehat{𝐒}+`$ (5)   
$`i[𝐮_{\mathrm{so}}(𝐩_f,𝐩_f^{})𝐒_{\text{imp}}+𝐰_{\mathrm{so}}(𝐩_f,𝐩_f^{})\widehat{𝐒}]\widehat{\tau }_3.`$   
The induced OP is self-consistently determined from the gap equation,

$$\delta \widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}(𝐩_f,𝐪)=N_fT\underset{ϵ_n}{}d^2𝐩_f^{}V(𝐩_f,𝐩_f^{})\widehat{f}(𝐩_f^{},𝐪;ϵ_n),$$
(6)   
where $`V(𝐩_f,𝐩_f^{})`$ is the pairing interaction and $`\widehat{f}=[\delta f_1\widehat{\tau }_1+\delta f_2\widehat{\tau }_2]i\sigma _2`$ is the induced off-diagonal pair amplitude. We resolve the pairing interaction into the dominant attractive $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ channel, and a secondary pairing channel with $`d_{xy}`$ symmetry, $`V(𝐩_f,𝐩_f^{})=V_1\eta _1(\varphi )\eta _1(\varphi ^{})+V_2\eta _2(\varphi )\eta _2(\varphi ^{})`$, where the eigenfunctions are $`\eta _1(\varphi )=\mathrm{cos}2\varphi `$ and $`\eta _2(\varphi )=\mathrm{sin}2\varphi `$ for the two channels, respectively. The dominant, attractive interaction is $`V_1V_{x^2y^2}`$, and the subdominant interaction, $`V_2V_{xy}`$, may be either attractive or repulsive. We neglect the $`s`$-wave pairing channel in order to simplify the analysis, and we restrict our discussion to the regime in which the subdominant interaction, $`V_{xy}`$, is repulsive or too weak to nucleate a bulk $`d_{xy}`$ OP.

Numerical calculations of the OP and current distribution were carried out for an isolated impurity at $`𝐫=0`$, with the $`\widehat{t}`$ matrix source term of the form $`\widehat{t}(𝐩_f,𝐩_f;ϵ_n)\delta (𝐫)`$ in real space. We modeled the position of the impurity to quasiclassical accuracy by replacing the delta function by a smooth function, $`\delta _{r_0}(𝐫)=\frac{1}{\pi r_0^2}\mathrm{exp}(r^2/r_0^2)`$, of atomic width $`r_0=0.1\xi _0`$. This model guarantees a smooth cutoff in $`𝐪`$-space and faster convergence of the Fourier integrals. For the computation reported here we also chose a subdominant pairing interaction corresponding to a bare subdominant transition temperature of $`T_{c2}/T_{c1}=0.1`$, which is well below the threshold for bulk nucleation of a $`d_{xy}`$ order parameter.

The physical solution to the linearized transport equation (1) is,

$$\delta \widehat{g}(𝐩_f,𝐪;ϵ_n)=\frac{E\widehat{g}_b+\pi Q}{2\pi (E^2+Q^2)}[\widehat{t}+\delta \widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}+\delta \widehat{\sigma }_{\text{imp}},\widehat{g}_b],$$
(7)   
where $`Q=\frac{1}{2}𝐪𝐯_f`$. The induced charge current is also determined by the $`\widehat{t}`$ matrix and induced OP,

$$\delta 𝐣(𝐪)=N_fT\underset{ϵ_n}{}d^2𝐩_f𝐯_f\frac{2i\pi eQ\mathrm{\Delta }_1}{E(E^2+Q^2)}\left(t_2+\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_2\right),$$
(8)   
where $`t_2`$ is the $`\widehat{\tau }_2`$ component of $`\widehat{t}`$.

We evaluate the $`\widehat{t}`$ matrix in second-order Born approximation, which is adequate for weak scattering. More importantly, the Born approximation generates the relevant coupling between the $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ and $`d_{xy}`$ order parameters. We also assume that the impurity potential is short-ranged, so we retain only the scattering amplitudes for the $`s`$-wave and $`p`$-wave channels, i.e., $`u(𝐩_f,𝐩_f^{})u_0+u_1𝐩_f𝐩_f^{}`$, and $`𝐦(𝐩_f,𝐩_f^{})(J_0+J_1𝐩_f𝐩_f^{})𝐒_{\text{imp}}`$. For the spin-orbit terms we approximate, $`𝐮_{\mathrm{so}}(𝐩_f,𝐩_f^{})(\lambda _0+\lambda _1𝐩_f𝐩_f^{})𝐩_f\times 𝐩_f^{}`$, and $`𝐰_{\mathrm{so}}(𝐩_f,𝐩_f^{})(w_0+w_1𝐩_f𝐩_f^{})𝐩_f\times 𝐩_f^{}`$. The $`\widehat{t}`$ matrix then has the general form $`\widehat{t}=\left[t_1\eta _1\widehat{\tau }_1+t_2\eta _2\widehat{\tau }_2\right]i\sigma _2+\left[t_3+𝐭\widehat{𝐒}\right]\widehat{\tau }_3`$. The important interference term is given by

$$t_2(ϵ_n)=\pi S_zN_f\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^2\frac{d\varphi }{2\pi }\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_1\eta _1^2(\varphi )}{\sqrt{|\mathrm{\Delta }_1\eta _1(\varphi )|^2+\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_n^2}},$$
(9)   
with the spin-orbit parameter $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^2=u_0\lambda _1+u_1\lambda _0+J_0w_1+J_1w_0`$, and the impurity spin $`S_z`$. The $`t_2`$ term generates a correction to the off-diagonal propagator with $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ (B$`_{\text{1g}}`$) symmetry and induces the $`id_{xy}`$ (B<sub>2g</sub>) OP near the impurity.

The corrections to the bulk OP, $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_i`$, with $`i=1,2`$, do not belong to a single representation, i.e., $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_i(\varphi ,𝐪)\sim ̸\eta _i(\varphi )`$. In particular, $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_2(\varphi ,𝐪)`$ has mixed $`d_{xy}`$ and $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ symmetry, $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_2(\varphi ,𝐪)=\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{21}(𝐪)\eta _1(\varphi )+\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{22}(𝐪)\eta _2(\varphi )`$. These amplitudes also determine the current distribution (8), and satisfy the coupled equations

$`\left[1/V_1𝒦_{11}(𝐪)\right]\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{21}(𝐪)𝒦_{12}\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{22}(𝐪)`$ $`=`$ $`𝒜_1(𝐪),`$ (10)   
$`\left[1/V_2𝒦_{22}(𝐪)\right]\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{22}(𝐪)𝒦_{12}\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{21}(𝐪)`$ $`=`$ $`𝒜_2(𝐪),`$ (11)   
where $`𝒦_{ij}(𝐪)=\pi T_{ϵ_n}\frac{d\varphi }{2\pi }\eta _i(\varphi )\eta _j(\varphi )E/[E^2+Q^2]`$, and $`𝒜_i(𝐪)=\pi T_{ϵ_n}t_2(ϵ_n)\frac{d\varphi }{2\pi }\eta _i(\varphi )\eta _2(\varphi )E/[E^2+Q^2]`$. The solutions to these equations have, in addition to inversion symmetry, the mirror reflections $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{2i}(q_1,q_2)=()^i\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{2i}(q_1,q_2)=()^i\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{2i}(q_2,q_1)`$. The induced $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{22}`$ OP component with B$`_{\text{2g}}`$ symmetry is finite for $`𝐪=0`$, while the induced $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{21}`$ component with B$`_{\text{1g}}`$ symmetry vanishes for $`𝐪=0`$ and along the diagonals and principle axes. The Fourier transformation of $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{21}(𝐪)`$ also vanishes, i.e., $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{21}(𝐫)=0`$; thus only the induced component with B$`_{\text{2g}}`$ symmetry survives. The contour plot of $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_2(𝐫)`$ in Fig. 1 shows a four-fold pattern characteristic of the $`d_{xy}`$ amplitude with maxima located at approximately $`0.3\xi _0`$ along the nodal directions of the $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ OP.

Bulk impurity scattering is pair-breaking for any unconventional OP including the induced $`d_{xy}`$ amplitude. Figure 2 shows both the temperature dependence of the induced $`d_{xy}`$ OP and the pair-breaking suppression of $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{22}(𝐪=0)`$ by bulk impurity scattering. Note that the $`d_{xy}`$ OP develops below $`T_c`$ and that it is suppressed by bulk scattering on the same scale as the bulk $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ OP. Fig. 2(b) shows the increase in the induced $`d_{xy}`$ amplitude with increasing (attractive) pairing interaction in the $`B_{2g}`$ channel ($`T_{c2}/T_{c1}`$); the divergence at $`T_{c2}/T_{c1}>0.37`$ corresponds to a bulk instability for $`d_{x^2y^2}\pm id_{xy}`$ pairing. For a repulsive pairing interaction $`V_2<0`$ we find a cutoff dependent result for the induced OP, $`0.44\xi _0^2/\mathrm{log}(\omega _c/\mathrm{\Delta }_1)<\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{22}(q=0)<0`$, at $`T=0`$. We parameterized the interference term in the scattering amplitude by the coupling energy $`=\pi S_zN_f\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^2/\xi _0^2`$,

The existence of a $`\pm id_{xy}`$ OP implies that the equilibrium superconducting state breaks $`𝒯`$ symmetry locally near the impurity, in addition to broken  and  reflection symmetries. The signature of the $`d_{x^2y^2}\pm id_{xy}`$ state is the equilibrium charge current and magnetic field distribution near the impurity. From the $`\widehat{t}`$ matrix in Eq. (3) and the induced $`d_{xy}`$ OP we obtain

$`\delta 𝐣(𝐪)=i\pi eN_fT{\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_n}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\varphi }{2\pi }𝐯_f(\varphi )𝐯_f(\varphi )𝐪\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_1\eta _1(\varphi )}{E(E^2+Q^2)}}`$ (12)   
$`\times \left(\left(t_2(ϵ_n)+\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{22}(𝐪)\right)\eta _2(\varphi )+\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_{21}(𝐪)\eta _1(\varphi )\right).`$ (13)   
It is straightforward to show that the current density obeys the symmetry relations: $`\delta 𝐣(𝐪)=\delta 𝐣(𝐪)`$, and $`\delta j_i(q_1,q_2)=()^{i+1}\delta j_i(q_1,q_2)`$, $`\delta j_1(q_1,q_2)=\delta j_2(q_2,q_1)`$. From these relations one might expect a simple circulation pattern for the induced charge current; however, as Figs. 1 and 3 show, the current density exhibits the superposition of a very small circulating current loop and four counter circulating currents around the nodal directions, which are anchored to the local maxima of the induced $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_2(𝐫)`$ OP. This pattern is qualitatively similar to the current distribution predicted for a vortex with $`d+is`$ symmetry, however, there is no circulation at large distances from the impurity. The complex flow pattern that is observed near the impurity is also observed for mesoscopic superconductors with surfaces that are normal to the $`110`$ direction, and reflects the strong nonlocality of the current response shown in Eq. (12).

The spatial pattern of current generates a four-fold magnetic field distribution which we calculated from the current distribution using the Biot-Savart law, $`B_z(𝐫)=\frac{1}{c}d^2𝐫^{}|𝐫^{}𝐫|^3(𝐫^{}𝐫)\times \delta 𝐣(𝐫^{})`$. The field distribution in Fig. 1 shows 8 sectors of flux threading in and out of the plane. As a result the net magnetic flux through the superconducting plane is zero. This fact was checked numerically. The magnetic flux was calculated for squares of area $`L^2`$ and shown to vanish in the limit $`L\mathrm{}`$. This is a general result, at least at the quasiclassical level, provided that scattering by the impurity does not generate a coupling of the current to a soft mode of the OP. However, particle-hole asymmetry corrections to the quasiclassical theory may lead to a net moment from the impurity-induced orbital currents.

The magnitudes of the induced $`id_{xy}`$ OP and magnetic field near an impurity depend on parameters characterizing the interaction between quasiparticles and the magnetic impurity. Not much is known about these interactions. Thus, measurements of the induced OP or magnetic field near an impurity can provide direct information about the coupling of the quasiparticle orbital momentum to the impurity moment. We can express the impurity induced OP, current density and magnetic field in terms of a few key material parameters of the impurity. We scale the induced OP in units of the coupling energy, $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_2^{(n)}(𝐫)=\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_2(𝐫)/`$. From Eq. (12) we obtain the scale of the current and field: $`\delta 𝐣^{(n)}(𝐫)=\delta 𝐣(𝐫)/(c)`$, $`B_z^{(n)}(𝐫)=B_z(𝐫)/`$, with $`=\frac{e}{c}N_fv_f=\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }_0}{4\pi \lambda ^2}\frac{d}{\pi \mathrm{}v_f}`$. Figure 3 shows the spatial variations of the scaled OP, current density and field profile along the $`110`$ and $`010`$ directions at low temperature.

We estimate the magnitude of the induced OP and magnetic field for Ni impurities in Bi-2212 as follows: The coupling parameter for Ni<sup>2+</sup> ions is estimated from the spin-orbit coupling energy for free Ni<sup>2+</sup> ions, $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^2(30\mathrm{meV}a_0^2)^2`$. The in-plane penetration depth of $`\lambda 200\mathrm{nm}`$, the interlayer spacing, $`d1.5\mathrm{nm}`$, the in-plane lattice constant, $`a_05.4\mathrm{\AA }`$, and the Fermi velocity, $`v_f100\mathrm{k}\mathrm{m}/\mathrm{s}`$, provide a determination of the density of states per Cu-O bilayer, $`N_f=c^2d/(4\pi e^2v_f^2\lambda ^2)`$. This gives an estimated energy scale for the induced $`d_{xy}`$ gap of $`0.1\mathrm{meV}`$, and a magnetic field scale of order $`1\mu \mathrm{T}`$. An induced $`d_{xy}`$ gap of order $`0.1\mathrm{meV}1\mathrm{K}`$, is the right order of magnitude to account for a $`d_{x^2y^2}\pm id_{xy}`$ phase order transition at lower temperature, $`T^{}150\mathrm{mK}`$, as observed in 0.6% and 1.5% Ni doped Bi-2212.

In conclusion, we have shown that spin-orbit scattering induces a $`d_{x^2y^2}+id_{xy}`$ state, which locally breaks $`𝒯`$ symmetry in the vicinity of a magnetic impurity. The induced OP develops below $`T_c`$ and survives bulk impurity scattering so long as the bulk $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ OP does. The signature of the spontaneously broken $`𝒯`$ symmetry manifests itself as a complex pattern of circulating charge currents near the local maxima of the $`d_{xy}`$ OP located along the $`110`$ and $`\overline{1}10`$ directions. We estimated the magnitude of the induced $`d_{xy}`$ gap to be $`1\mathrm{K}`$, which should be observable in low temperature STM measurements of the tunneling density of states.

We thank R. Movshovich, D. Rainer and J.R. Schrieffer for discussions. The work of MJG and AVB was supported by the Los Alamos National Laboratory under the auspices of the US Department of Energy. JAS acknowledges support by the STCS through NSF DMR-91-20000.