Gibbs Free Energy in Superconductors

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Gibbs free energy in superconductors, particularly in the context of the Ginzburg-Landau theory and its relation to thermodynamic potentials in the presence of magnetic fields. Participants explore the implications of using Gibbs free energy versus Helmholtz free energy in this specific scenario.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether the Gibbs free energy is minimal in constant temperature and magnetic field, drawing a parallel to its behavior in gases.
  • Another participant references Landau and Lifshitz's extensive discussion on thermodynamic variables in the context of magnetic fields.
  • A clarification is made regarding the relevant thermodynamic variables in magnetism, emphasizing the distinction between B (magnetic flux density) and H (magnetic field strength) and their implications for defining energies and enthalpies.
  • It is noted that the choice between B and H as preferred variables is non-trivial and depends on the specific measurements and the system-surrounding separation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriate thermodynamic potential to use in superconductors and the implications of using Gibbs versus Helmholtz free energy. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives on the topic.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexity of thermodynamics in the presence of magnetic fields, indicating that assumptions about the system and surrounding may influence the choice of variables.

taishizhiqiu
Messages
61
Reaction score
4
When reading some material concerning Ginzburg-Landau theory of superconductors, I got the following sentence:

The appropriate thermodynamic potential for describing a superconductor in an applied magnetic field is the Gibbs free energy ##G## (natural variable ##H##) and not the Helmholtz free energy ##F## (natural variable ##B##).

I don't understand the sentence. In gas, Gibbs free energy is minimal in constant temperature and pressure. Does this sentence mean that in superconductors Gibbs free energy is minimal in constant ##T## and ##H##? I can't make sense out of it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
L&L discuss quite extensively their peferred thermodynamic variables in the case of magnetic fields in previous chapters.
 
DrDu said:
L&L discuss quite extensively their peferred thermodynamic variables in the case of magnetic fields in previous chapters.
You mean Landau and Lifshitz‘s textbook?
 
Sorry, yes, I had erroneously in mind that you had mentioned Landau & Lifshitz. The relevant pair of variables in case of magnetism is not p and V but B and H and you can analogously define energies and enthalpies with different natural variables.
I think that thermodynamics in the presence of fields is quite a non-trivial matter. Much of the distiction whether B or H are to be preferred depend on the measurement you have in mind and on the chosen separation into system and surrounding, especially, which part of the field belongs where.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K