Fate of the Hebel-Slichter peak in superconductors with strong antiferromagnetic fluctuations
D. C. Cavanagh, B. J. Powell
DOI 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.3.013241 · Physical Review Research
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 show that magnetic fluctuations can destroy the Hebel-Slichter peak in conventional superconductors. The Hebel-Slichter peak has previously been expected to survive even in the presence of strong electronic interactions. However, we show that antiferromagnetic fluctuations suppress the peak at q=0 in the imaginary part of the magnetic susceptibility χ+−″q,ω, which causes the Hebel-Slichter peak. This is of general interest as in many materials superconductivity is found near a magnetically ordered phase, and the absence of a Hebel-Slichter peak is taken as evidence of unconventional superconductivity in these systems. For example, no Hebel-Slichter peak is observed in the κ−(BEDT−TTF)2X organic superconductors but heat capacity measurements have been taken to indicate s-wave superconductivity. Similarly, experiments indicate nodeless superconductivity in many iron pnictide superconductors which exhibit no peak in the relaxation rate. If antiferromagnetic fluctuations destroy the putative Hebel-Slichter peak in organic superconductors, then the peak should be restored by applying a pressure, which is known to suppress antiferromagnetic correlations in these materials.
Source-reported materials — not catalogue approval
| Formula | Reported Tc (K) | Pressure (GPa) | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| κ-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu[N(CN)2]Br Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure unresolved | unknown |
| κ-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu[N(CN)2]Cl Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure not reported | unknown |
Similar papers
Magnetothermal instability in the organic layered superconductor κ−(BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2
similarity 0.94T. Konoike et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Dynamical Order and Superconductivity in a Frustrated Many-Body System
similarity 0.94J. Tindall et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Superconductivity and Mott Physics in Organic Charge Transfer Materials
similarity 0.94Henri Menke et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
High-resolution photoemission study of metallic, insulating, and superconducting BEDT-TTF salts
similarity 0.93A. Sekiyama et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Interlayer magnetoresistance in the organic superconductor κ−(BEDT−TTF)2Cu[N(CN)2]Br near the superconducting transition
similarity 0.93F. Zuo et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Superconducting fluctuation corrections to ultrasound attenuation in layered superconductors
similarity 0.93M. S. Mar’enko et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified