Why does superfluid helium in a spinning bucket have angular momentum?

AI Thread Summary
When a bucket filled with superfluid Helium-4 is spun, it develops irrotational vortex lines that carry angular momentum, despite starting at rest. The absence of friction between the superfluid and the bucket does not prevent the fluid from acquiring angular momentum; instead, the normal component of the superfluid, which has viscosity, interacts with the bucket wall to initiate rotation. This interaction leads to the formation of vortices in the superfluid, which are quantized due to the coherent nature of the fluid. The circulation of momentum around a closed loop in the superfluid is linked to the phase variation of its wave function, resulting in quantized circulation. This phenomenon illustrates the unique behavior of superfluids compared to classical fluids.
SunSmellsLoud
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Suppose you have a bucket filled with superfluid Helium-4 and you spin it with a large angular velocity Ω, the bucket obviously has angular momentum.

Spinning fast enough, the fluid develops irrotational vortex lines which carry quanta of angular momentum, while leaving the curl of the ∇xv 0, as it should be (with v the microscopic velocity field).

My question is, supposing you start with the bucket at rest, it's obvious that the fluid has no angular momentum, but considering the fact there is no friction between the bucket and the fluid, how does the superfluid get the angular momentum needed to produce vortex lines?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I may be missing something, but since when has the presence of friction been necessary for angular momentum to be present in a body, even one composed of a superfluid?
 
He's asking how does spinning the bucket impart angular momentum to the fluid. If you spin a bucket containing water it is the prescence of viscous /frictional forces that result in the water gaining angular momentum. Is there an analogous situation between the events in the water filled bucket and the superfluid filled bucket?
 
The superfluid consists of a superfluid component as well as a normal component. The normal component starts to rotate because it has nonzero viscocity and nonzero friction against the bucket wall. Then the interaction between the normal component and the superfluid component causes the vortices to appear.
 
I'm an undergrad in physics so don't think I'm a surprised expert. Could you show me the evidence for this phenomenon? It seems pretty interesting...
 
When you calculate the circulation of the momentum around a closed loop, you can show that it is equal to the variation of the phase of the wave function along the loop. Moreover, only the coherent part of the fluid can contribute to this circulation. Since the loop is closed, this implies that this variation is a multiple of 2π. As a result, the circulation of the coherent part of the fluid is quantized. This is by definition the superfluid. The superfluid can totally decouple from the normal fluid.

Find more details about this in this preprint,

http://arxiv.org/abs/1403.5472

Or if you have access to APS journals, the published version of this article is Phys. Rev. B 90, 134503 (2014).

http://journals.aps.org/prb/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevB.90.134503
 
  • Like
Likes Greg Bernhardt
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top