The origin of the Meissner effect in new and old superconductors
J. E. Hirsch
arXiv:1201.0139 · DOI 10.1088/0031-8949/85/03/035704 · 2011-12-30 · Physica Scripta
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
It is generally believed that superconducting materials are divided into two classes: `conventional' and `unconventional'. Conventional superconductors (the elements and thousands of compounds including $MgB_2$) are described by conventional London-BCS-Eliashberg electron-phonon theory. There is no general agreement as to what mechanism or mechanisms describe `unconventional' superconductors such as the heavy fermions, organics, cuprate and pnictide families. However all superconductors, whether `conventional' or `unconventional', exhibit the Meissner effect. I argue that there is a single mechanism of superconductivity for all materials, that explains the Meissner effect and differs from the conventional mechanism in several fundamental aspects: it says that superconductivity is driven by lowering of kinetic rather than potential energy of the charge carriers, it requires conduction by holes rather than electrons in the normal state, and it predicts a non-homogeneous rigid charge distribution and an electric field in the interior of superconductors. Furthermore I argue that neither the conventional mechanism nor any of the other proposed unconventional mechanisms can explain the Meissner effect. Superconductivity in materials is discussed in the light of these concepts, some experimental predictions, connections to Dirac's theory, and connections to the superfluidity of $^4He$.
Source-reported materials — not catalogue approval
| Formula | Reported Tc (K) | Pressure (GPa) | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | 83 | Pressure not reported | unknown |
Similar papers
Why holes are not like electrons. IV. Hole undressing and spin current in the superconducting state
similarity 0.93J. E. Hirsch · 2010 · arXiv:1002.2688
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Correcting 100 years of misunderstanding: electric fields in superconductors, hole superconductivity, and the Meissner effect
similarity 0.93J. E. Hirsch · 2012 · arXiv:1202.1851
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Charge expulsion, Spin Meissner effect, and charge inhomogeneity in superconductors
similarity 0.92J. E. Hirsch · 2008 · arXiv:0810.5127
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Hole core in superconductors and the origin of the Spin Meissner effect
similarity 0.91Hirsch, J. E. · 2010 · arXiv:1006.2347
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Meissner effect, Spin Meissner effect and charge expulsion in superconductors
similarity 0.91J. E. Hirsch · 2011 · arXiv:1106.5311
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
The missing angular momentum of superconductors
similarity 0.90J. E. Hirsch · 2008 · arXiv:0803.2054
Source status unknown — claims are unverified