Scientists at the University of Cambridge have for the first time identified a key component to unravelling the mystery of room temperature superconductivity, according to a paper published in today's edition of the scientific journal Nature.
The quest for room temperature superconductivity has gripped physics researchers since they saw the possibility more than two decades ago. Materials that could potentially transport electricity with zero loss (resistance) at room temperature hold vast potential; some of the possible applications include a magnetically levitated superfast train, efficient magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), lossless power generators, transformers, and transmission lines, powerful supercomputers, etc.
Unfortunately, scientists have been unable to decipher how copper oxide materials superconduct at extremely cold temperatures (such as that of liquid nitrogen), much less design materials that can superconduct at higher temperatures.
Materials that are known to superconduct at the highest temperatures are, unexpectedly, ceramic insulators that behave as magnets before 'doping' (the method of introducing impurities to a semiconductor to modify its electrical properties). Upon doping charge carriers (holes or electrons) into these parent magnetic insulators, they mysteriously begin to superconduct, i.e. the doped carriers form pairs that carry electricity without loss.
The essential conundrum facing researchers in this area has been: how does a magnet that cannot transport electricity transform into a superconductor that is a perfect conductor of electricity? The Cambridge team have made a significant advance in answering this question.
The researchers have discovered where the charge 'hole' carriers that play a significant role in the superconductivity originate within the electronic structure of copper-oxide superconductors. These findings are particularly important for the next step of deciphering the glue that binds the holes together and determining what enables them to superconduct.
Dr Suchitra E. Sebastian, lead author of the study, commented, "An experimental difficulty in the past has been accessing the underlying microscopics of the system once it begins to superconduct. Superconductivity throws a manner of 'veil' over the system, hiding its inner workings from experimental probes. A major advance has been our use of high magnetic fields, which punch holes through the superconducting shroud, known as vortices - regions where superconductivity is destroyed, through which the underlying electronic structure can be probed.
"We have successfully unearthed for the first time in a high temperature superconductor the location in the electronic structure where 'pockets' of doped hole carriers aggregate. Our experiments have thus made an important advance toward understanding how superconducting pairs form out of these hole pockets."
By determining exactly where the doped holes aggregate in the electronic structure of these superconductors, the researchers have been able to advance understanding in two vital areas:
(1) A direct probe revealing the location and size of pockets of holes is an essential step to determining how these particles stick together to superconduct.
(2) Their experiments have successfully accessed the region betwixt magnetism and superconductivity: when the superconducting veil is partially lifted, their experiments suggest the existence of underlying magnetism which shapes the hole pockets. Interplay between magnetism and superconductivity is therefore indicated - leading to the next question to be addressed.
Do these forms of order compete, with magnetism appearing in the vortex regions where superconductivity is killed, as they suggest? Or do they complement each other by some more intricate mechanism? One possibility they suggest for the coexistence of two very different physical phenomena is that the non-superconducting vortex cores may behave in concert, exhibiting collective magnetism while the rest of the material superconducts.
Comments
Superconductivity has bad theories
June 7, 2009 by Anonymous, 22 weeks 13 hours ago
Comment id: 37093
The main trouble in superconductivity is it's false foundation. Nobody can give obvious explanation with clear and simple mathematics why electrons move forever without dissipation.
So we see the result :)))
BCS, BEC, Cooper pairing ---->>> GO HOME!!!
Minich.
http://love.minich.ru
Cuprate super-conductivity and BCS
October 7, 2008 by Anonymous, 1 year 4 weeks ago
Comment id: 32290
Another viewpoint on BCS theory is to consider that the boson has an inherent energy which is lower than the fermi level. It seems reasonable to suggest that the boson will remain stable until there are a pair of available energy states in the fermion density of states(DOS) of energy equal or lower than the boson's. Thus as temperature rises the availability of empty paired states occurs further below the fermi level, until it can provide exit states for the boson's constituents.
The maths of BCS should equate to the fermi-dirac distribution for paired states.
The reason the HTSC fling BCS out the window is because the inherent energy of the boson lies inside a semi-conductor bandgap in the cuprate DOS. Thus the critical field/temp. graph for the cuprates follows BCS for the first 10K or so until there are vacant states at the top of the semi-conductor bandgap (Energy vertical on DOS diagram). After that point the only way for the boson's energy to reach the lowest exit states is by its own thermal energy.
So BCS thermal breakdown may be characterized as lower fermion exit states described by fermi-dirac statistics.
By analogy, HTSC thermal breakdown may be seen as the boson increasing its own thermal energy obeying Bose-Einstein.
Since I'm sticking my neck out here, may I suggest that room-temperature SC will be achieved with single-walled carbon nanotubes with metal inside set at low density in an insulating bulk.
sandy@zymandia.com
Long way to go to reach room-temperature superconductivity
July 9, 2008 by Fred Bortz, 1 year 17 weeks ago
Comment id: 31055
The headline on this is misleading. The fact is that since "high-temperature" superconductivity was discovered in 1986 (critical temperature 35 kelvins at first) and improved on (topping out at about 130 kelvins or a still frigid -143C), no one has been able to come up with a theory to explain the behavior.
This finding looks like an important step on the way to understanding how high-temperature superconductivity is like ordinary superconductivity (explained by "BCS" theory in 1957, or 46 years after its discovery, as an exchange of quanta of vibrational energy between paired electrons--Cooper pairs) and how it differs.
Then even if someone develops a full BCS-like theory, it is unlikely to lead to room temperature superconductivity. That will almost certainly require a new class of materials, and will, I suspect, be discovered by serendipity rather than design.
Perhaps this excerpt from my 20th-century history Physics: Decade by Decade will offer some insight in the reason we still face a long road to room-temperature superconductivity. The book discusses superconductivity in detail in the chapters on the 1910s, the 1950s, and the 1980s (from which the excerpt is drawn).
Fred Bortz -- Science and technology books for young readers (www.fredbortz.com) and Science book reviews (www.scienceshelf.com)
Post new comment