Are BECs superfluid or vice versa or what?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter moosh4
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Superfluid
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between Bose-Einstein Condensates (BECs) and superfluidity, exploring whether all BECs are superfluid, if all superfluids are BECs, and how these states overlap in different dimensions and conditions. The conversation includes theoretical considerations, definitions, and examples from the literature.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion over the overlap between BECs and superfluidity, questioning if one necessarily implies the other.
  • One participant states that superfluidity can occur without BEC, prompting requests for further details on this claim.
  • Another participant describes superfluidity as characterized by non-classical rotational inertia and mentions that BEC is a macroscopic condensation, noting that in 2D or 1D, superfluid properties can exist without an ordered BEC state.
  • A later reply discusses the existence of microcavity polaritons undergoing BEC, highlighting their unique characteristics, including limited spatial size and nonequilibrium states.
  • Definitions of BEC are provided, including broken U(1) symmetry, off-diagonal long-range order, and the existence of a dominant eigenvalue in the reduced density matrix, with emphasis on the implications of dimensionality on these definitions.
  • One participant suggests that the transition observed in polaritons may be of a Kosterlitz-Thouless nature rather than a traditional BEC, arguing that these transitions are fundamentally different.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the relationship between BECs and superfluidity, with multiple competing views and definitions presented throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the ambiguity in the definitions of BEC, the dependence on dimensional constraints, and the unresolved nature of the relationship between different types of superfluidity and BECs.

moosh4
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I'm a physicist doing a course on condensates, superfluidity and superconductivity and I'm confused as to how these states overlap. Are all BECs necessarily superfluid? Are all superfluids necessarily BECs? The literature is incredibly ambiguous :frown:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Superfluidity is often produced at the same time as BEC. BEC is often produced without superfluidity. Superfluidity is occasionally produced without BEC.
 
genneth said:
Superfluidity is occasionally produced without BEC.
What!? Can you provide some more details for us, as this sounds interesting.
 
Superfluidity is characterised by non-classical rotational inertia, i.e. the existence of vortices of a quantum nature. BEC is a macroscopic condensation. In 2D or 1D, it is not possible have an ordered state such as a BEC; but nevertheless, it is possible to have superfluidic properties.
 
http://www.pnas.org/content/96/14/7760.full
 
genneth said:
In 2D or 1D, it is not possible have an ordered state such as a BEC; but nevertheless, it is possible to have superfluidic properties.

It is widely accepted that microcavity polaritons also undergo Bose-Einstein condensation and form a 2D BEC. However this is quite an unusual BEC as it can only have limited spatial size and is always in a state of nonequilibrium.
 
For completeness, I should mention that there are (at least) three widely used definitions of BEC. The budding physics student should probably not worry too much about the differences, but they do matter.

1. Order via broken U(1) symmetry. Usually signalled by the existence of a non-zero <c>. Downside: can't actually happen in any finite system.
2. Off-diagonal long-range order. The existence of <c*(r) c(0)> as r goes to infinity. Again, not really appropriate for any system where the limit can't actually be taken (most atomic BECs are pretty small).
3. The third is somewhat more technical: the existence of a "macroscopic" eigenvalue to the reduced density matrix <c*(r) c(0)>. Really, it's just saying that there is some eigenstate in the density matrix which is dominant over the others. Usually, the ratio will be something like 1:N where N is the number of particles. One can obviously have more marginal cases (1:100 or less). Neverthless, it actually includes the previous two as special cases.

The first definition is probably the most widely used, usually taught starting from advanced undergraduate level. In that definition, a BEC requires a broken symmetry order, which as a matter of principle is not possible in 2D or 1D because thermal fluctuations would destroy it at any non-zero temperature.

I'm not a polariton expert, but my understanding is that the transition seen is actually of a Kosterlitz-Thouless kind, rather than the usual textbook BEC. I personally do not think these two transitions are the same, essentially because one is topological and one actually involves a more classical symmetry change.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
12K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
9K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K