Delay in normal-to-Meissner state

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the delay observed when switching a superconductor between normal and Meissner states under varying magnetic fields. Experimental measurements of this delay are sought, with a particular emphasis on the implications of the London equations and the displacement current in superconductors. The analysis reveals that the London penetration depth, denoted as ##\lambda_L##, increases with frequency, and the derived equations are valid only for frequencies below Debye's frequency, ##\omega_D##. The assumptions made include a temperature of T=0, eliminating normal conducting contributions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of London equations in superconductivity
  • Familiarity with electromagnetic fields and displacement current
  • Knowledge of superconducting current dynamics
  • Concept of London penetration depth and its significance
NEXT STEPS
  • Research experimental measurements of delay in superconductors transitioning between states
  • Study the implications of displacement current in superconductivity
  • Explore the relationship between frequency and London penetration depth
  • Investigate Debye's frequency and its relevance in superconducting materials
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, materials scientists, and engineers working with superconductors, particularly those interested in the dynamics of superconducting transitions and electromagnetic interactions.

goran d
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
If we switch a super-conductor between normal and Meissner states, using varying magnetic field, there has to be some delay from when the field exceeds the critical field to the appearance of Meissner state. Have there been any experimental measurements of this delay? What are the measured values?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The response of a superconductor to an EM field is easiest to derive from the London equations
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_equations,
see the section on "London penetration depth".
However, the implicit assumption of steady state doesn't hold, of course.
Rather we have to take also the displacement current ##\dot{D}=\epsilon \dot{E}## into account and write
##-\nabla^2 B=\mathrm{rot} (j+\epsilon\dot{E})=-\frac{n_se^2}{m}B+\epsilon \,\mathrm{rot} \dot{ E} ##
now, using the first London equation, the displacement current
can also be linked to the superconducting current:
##\frac{ d^2 j_s}{dt^2}=\frac{n_s e^2}{m} \frac{ dE}{dt}##.
So,
##-\nabla^2 B=\mathrm{rot} (j+\dot{E})=-\frac{n_se^2}{m}B+\mathrm{rot} \dot{E} =\frac{n_se^2}{m}B-\epsilon \frac{d^2B}{dt^2} ##.
This equation is best analyzed assuming a periodic time dependence ## B=B_0 \exp(-i\omega t)##.
Then
##\nabla^2 B_0= (\frac{n_s e^2}{m}-\epsilon \omega^2)B_0=\lambda_L^{-2}(\omega)B_0##.
You can see that the penetration depth ##\lambda_L## increases with frequency.
Some remarks are in order:
a) I assumed T=0 so that there is no normal conducting electronic contribution.
b) This expression is only true for not too large frequencies ##\omega##.
 
DrDu said:
b) This expression is only true for not too large frequencies ##\omega##.
The maximum frequency which is still true is for ##\omega_D##, Debye's frequency.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K