Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Superconductors and Gravitomagnetism

  1. Sep 10, 2007 #1
    How/why does a superconductor amplify the effects of gravitomagnetism?
    It must have something to do with a coherent movement of subatomic particles, right?
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 10, 2007 #2


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    Er... what "subatomic particles"?

    You are asking this as if this is a verified phenomenon. It isn't. The Podkletnov effect is still unverified and not accepted as valid. How how does one answer a question asking for the mechanism of something that may not even exist?

  4. Sep 10, 2007 #3
    Are you talking about effects allegedly seen in

    M. Tajmar et al. "Experimental detection of the gravimagnetic London moment"

    which other group failed to reproduce:

    R. D. Graham et al. "Experiment to detect frame dragging in a lead superconductor"
    www.ringlaser.org.nz/papers/SuperFrameDragging2007.pdf [Broken] ?

    Last edited by a moderator: May 3, 2017
  5. Sep 10, 2007 #4
    I was thinking perhaps nuclear spin, or these Cooper pairs I've been hearing about.

    I know it isn't a 'verified phenomenon', but neither are blackholes and gravitational waves, although we are very confident in their existence. This aside, there would still be theories as to why and how this effect might occur. It has been claimed to have been observed more than once.

    Yeah, meopemuk, pretty much, haha.
  6. Sep 10, 2007 #5


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    But that's because they are predicted by an existing mainstream theory--general relativity--which has had many other of its predictions confirmed. I don't think there are any mainstream theories which predict superconductors should affect gravitomagnetism in this way.
  7. Sep 11, 2007 #6
    Okay, valid point. But my question remains. Say that it is possible that superconductors enhance the effects of gravitomagnetism. What are some, or your own, theories associated with this?
    I don't want to debate the phenomenon's credibility.
  8. Sep 11, 2007 #7
    "If God existed, then what's he made up of? It must have something to do with the coherent movement of subatomic particles right?". "I don't want to debate God's credibility".

    Do you see any parallels?

    Asking how something works that we have no conclusive proof or reason to believe that it exists is folly.
  9. Sep 11, 2007 #8
    It's what physicists do.

    I remember reading papers on what the universe would be like if certain physical aspects functioned differently. Completely pointless?
  10. Sep 11, 2007 #9


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    Then would you like to make exact citations to the papers that have made these claims, and then see if they have been verified? If you do not do that, then these are very much empty claims.

    Blackholes and gravitational waves have indirect observational existence. The phenomenon that you are claiming has NONE. One thing you need to understand about condensed matter physics, as opposed to cosmology or GR is that these experiments have tighter degree of requirements for validity, because these are experiments that we can construct very, very accurately, and can manipulate more easily. That is why the values of "e" and "h" are defined based on what is measured out of condensed matter experiments. Thus, the fact that such gravitomagnetic phenomenon hasn't been verified after all these years since the Podkletnov claim (and other similar claims) should ring plenty of warning bells in your head.

    Note further that even in the Podkletnov claim they don't use any old Cooper Pairs. The "physics" being used to explain such effects were done on high-Tc superconductors using the d-wave order parameter, since the experiment was done using YBCO disks. So conventional superconductors with s-wave parameter would not work, or so they claim. This makes it even more dubious.

    This thread and the nature of this question are verging on highly speculative (and even crackpottish tendency) issues. Unless you have some valid citations that you can bring up to sustain this discussion, it doesn't not pass our PF Guidelines requirement.

  11. Sep 11, 2007 #10
    Can this thread please just be deleted or something? I regret starting it.

    Sorry for wasting your time.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook