A Stability of persistent currents in superconductors regardless of temperature

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter Stanislav
  • Start date Start date
Stanislav
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
From theories 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 warm up, we must observe a decrease in the actual supercurrent. However, this supercurrent decrease is never observed. Is the superfluid density independent of temperature ?
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 decrease is never observed. Does it mean that the superfluid density is independent of temperature ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Stanislav said:
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 decrease is never observed. Does it mean that the superfluid density is independent of temperature ?
Not an expert here, but how do you know it does not decrease? What size is the ring you are considering?
 
pines-demon said:
Not an expert here, but how do you know it does not decrease? What size is the ring you are considering?
There are always temperature fluctuations in every cryostat, and the SC-density decrease is not very weak, so a current instability would be detectable. However, the current is stable for years. I didn't find in literature any dependence of the supercurrent on temperature. The ring size is like in experiments with persistent supercurrents, macroscopic, a few centimeters.
 
Stanislav said:
There are always temperature fluctuations in every cryostat, and the SC-density decrease is not very weak, so a current instability would be detectable. However, the current is stable for years. I didn't find in literature any dependence of the supercurrent on temperature. The ring size is like in experiments with persistent supercurrents, macroscopic, a few centimeters.
Being naive, London equations (the first macroscopic equations for superconductivity) argue that the current depends on the superconducting density ##n_s## which depends on the temperature.
 
pines-demon said:
Being naive, London equations (the first macroscopic equations for superconductivity) argue that the current depends on the superconducting density ##n_s## which depends on the temperature.
Exactly. Then the question : why is the supercurrent stable in all experiments regardless of temperature variations ? Something is not in line in the story.
 
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...
Back
Top