Persistence of a knotted Abrikosov vortex

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hornbein
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Vortex
Hornbein
Gold Member
Messages
3,411
Reaction score
2,784
Suppose we have a Type II superconductor that contains a knotted Abrikosov vortex. How long can we expect this to persist? I read that the the core of the vortex is not superconducting, so energy would be dissipated. But how about the supercurrent? Once it got started, what would stop it? So I dunno.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The core of a vortex is indeed not superconducting, that is why you can have a magnetic field in there.

This implies that there is also no supercurrent within the vortex.

Nevertheless, the non-SC state within the vortex has a higher energy than the SC state around it, so the system will try to minimize the volume fraction of vortex cores. Vortices either get pinned on defects where SC is weakened anyways (hence less energy lost), and loops, wiggles, etc in vortices get straightened out.

I don't know if and how you can tie a know into a vortex line (I'd appreciate if you could post an image of a bowline :-) ), but I suppose they would shrink and vanish unless strongly pinned.

If you draw a loop around a vortex - antivortex pair (magnetic field pointing up and down, resp.), then the net flux through this loop is zero and hence there is no net supercurrent around the pair. The currents around the two vortices compensate each other.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
From the BCS theory of superconductivity is well known that the superfluid density smoothly decreases with increasing temperature. Annihilated superfluid carriers become normal and lose their momenta on lattice atoms. So if we induce a persistent supercurrent in a ring below Tc and after that slowly increase the temperature, we must observe a decrease in the actual supercurrent, because the density of electron pairs and total supercurrent momentum decrease. However, this supercurrent...
Hi. I have got question as in title. How can idea of instantaneous dipole moment for atoms like, for example hydrogen be consistent with idea of orbitals? At my level of knowledge London dispersion forces are derived taking into account Bohr model of atom. But we know today that this model is not correct. If it would be correct I understand that at each time electron is at some point at radius at some angle and there is dipole moment at this time from nucleus to electron at orbit. But how...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Back
Top