BCS theory of superconductivity and eternal supercurrents?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the BCS theory of superconductivity, particularly the apparent contradiction between theoretical predictions regarding supercurrent persistence and experimental observations of long-lasting supercurrents. Participants explore the implications of temperature fluctuations on Cooper pair dynamics and the longevity of supercurrents in various materials.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Experimental/applied

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the BCS theory suggests Cooper pair density is temperature-dependent, leading to the expectation that supercurrents should dissipate due to thermal fluctuations.
  • Others propose that experimental evidence shows supercurrents can persist for years, challenging the BCS predictions and suggesting that pair annihilation does not occur as expected.
  • A participant emphasizes the need for mathematical calculations to compare theoretical predictions of supercurrent duration with experimental data.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the claim that supercurrents remain constant, citing specific temperature fluctuations and questioning the time frame for significant thermal excursions.
  • One participant presents an experimental scenario involving temperature cycling of mercury, arguing that BCS theory predicts a decrease in supercurrent due to pair recombination, which has not been observed.
  • Another participant critiques the nature of the discussion, suggesting that it has devolved into a cycle of unsubstantiated claims and rebuttals.
  • A later post highlights a perceived theoretical gap in conventional theories regarding the recombination of pairs in supercurrents, indicating a broader concern about the implications for established scientific understanding.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the implications of BCS theory on supercurrent behavior, with no consensus reached on the validity of the theoretical predictions versus experimental observations.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the discussion involves complex interactions between temperature, Cooper pair dynamics, and supercurrent persistence, with unresolved assumptions about the effects of thermal fluctuations and the conditions under which supercurrents operate.

StanislavD
Messages
14
Reaction score
6
TL;DR
The BCS theory of superconductivity assumes creation and annihilation of Cooper pairs due to temperature fluctuations below Tc. This recombination process should unavoidably destroy an initial supercurrent. However, in experiments the supercurrent is insensitive to temperature fluctuations and exists forever. How to solve the contradiction of theory/experiment?
In the BCS theory the Cooper pair density depends on temperature, meaning that pairs can be created/annihilated by temperature variations. Obviously, momenta of annihilated pairs dissipate on the atom lattice, so an initial supercurrent dissipates. On the other hand, in some experiments a supercurrent, once excited, runs for many years despite any temperature fluctuations below Tc, indicating that any pair annihilation doesn’t take place. How to solve the contradiction of theory/experiment?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
StanislavD said:
How to solve the contradiction of theory/experiment?
With math. Calculate how long you expect the supercurrent to persist and compare with data.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: hutchphd and Lord Jestocost
The solution is available. In BCS the supercurrent must somehow decrease because of thermal fluctuations (slowly or fast – depends on cryostat quality, however it is about microseconds, not about hours). In experiments – the supercurrent is constant for years, probably forever, independent of any thermal variations (even macroscopically large ones). This fact doesn't need a further math.
 
I find this hard to believe. I certainly would have preferred a calculation to a description of 1.

Consider mercury in liquid helium - and I am doing myself no favors by picking this pair, as opposed to say, niobium. Tc = 4.2K and T=4.15K. Temperature fluctuations are of order T/√N where N is the number of participants: around Avagadro's number. So you have sub-nanokelvin level fluctuations. It takes a billion standard deviation excursion for thermal fluctuations to cross Tc.

I don't see microseconds as having enough time to have an excursion this large.
 
Another experiment. We vary T of mercury up/down, say from 3K to 2K and back. A supercurrent is excited before the first T-circle. According to BCS every T-circle destroys a not negligible fraction of pairs at warming, and creates the same fraction of pairs at cooling. The electromotive-force (EMF) is no longer available, so broken pairs lose the supercurrent momentum; newly created pairs did not experience any EMF. Hence, the supercurrent must decrease at every T-circle. However, never observed the supercurrent decreases below Tc. Thus, the pair recombination (assumed in BCS) is not available.
 
StanislavD said:
Another experiment
This isn't an experiment. But anyway, the game of you make an undefended claim and I shoot it down and then we do it again is more fun for you than for me.
 
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
Unfortunately, it is not fun for me. Since years nobody could explain me the paradox of recombining pairs in the supercurrent. And few people recognize the issue as a real theoretical default of conventional theories; too uncomfortable situation for renowned institutions.
 
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: weirdoguy
Thread closed temporarily for Moderation...
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50 and StanislavD
Thread will remain closed; the question has been asked and answered.

Also, here is a helpful PM that was sent to me to pass on to the OP:
Lord Jestocost said:
"The ability of a superconductor to carry a dissipationless current, that is, a current under zero applied voltage, disappears if the superconductor is shaped into a thin cylinder or a thin wire, or, in other words, if the superconductor is quasi-onedimensional (see Figure 1.1). This is because if the diameter of the superconductor is small, the rate of strong thermal fluctuations, which bring short segments of the wire into the normal state, is essentially greater than zero at finite temperatures.

Such fluctuations, first predicted by William Little in 1967 [17] and called Little’s phase slips (LPS), occur stochastically at random spots on a superconducting wire and interrupt the dissipationless flow of the condensate.
"

From: Superconductivity in Nanowires: Fabrication and Quantum Transport by Alexey Bezryadin
 
  • Informative
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: StanislavD and hutchphd

Similar threads

Replies
77
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K