Electromagnetic response of topological superconductors
M. Stålhammar, M. Stone, Masatoshi Sato, T. H. Hansson
DOI 10.1103/PhysRevB.103.235427 · Physical Review B
Active bibliographic source — not scientific approval
Bibliographic access preserves source history; it does not approve extracted materials or validate reported claims. Review warnings on each occurrence separately.
Abstract
We resolve several puzzles related to the electromagnetic response of topological superconductors in 3+1 dimensions. In particular we show by an analytical calculation that the interface between a topological and normal superconductor does not exhibit any quantum Hall effect as long as time reversal invariance is preserved. We contrast this with the analogous case of a topological insulator to normal insulator interface. The difference is that in the topological insulator the electromagnetic vector potential couples to a vector current in a theory with a Dirac mass, while in the superconductor a pair of Weyl fermions is gapped by Majorana masses and the electromagnetic vector potential couples to its axial currents.
Similar papers
Topological superconductivity in semiconductor-superconductor-magnetic insulator heterostructures
similarity 0.90A. Maiani et al. · 2020 · arXiv:2011.06547
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Transport across a junction of topological insulators and a superconductor
similarity 0.89Abhiram Soori et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Electrical response of superconductor/ferromagnet/topological-insulator/superconductor junctions to magnetic texture dynamics
similarity 0.89D. S. Rabinovich et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Topological Josephson ϕ0 junctions
similarity 0.89Fabrizio Dolcini et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Unconventional Josephson Effect in Hybrid Superconductor-Topological Insulator Devices
similarity 0.89J. R. Williams et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Spin quantum Hall effect in unconventional superconductors
similarity 0.89T. Senthil et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified