Reply to Comment on "Superfluid stability in the BEC-BCS crossover" by Sheehy and Radzihovsky
C. -H. Pao, S. -T. Wu, S. -K. Yip
arXiv:cond-mat/0608501 · 2006-08-23 · arXiv: Superconductivity
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
The reason behind the discrepancy between the phase diagrams of our earlier work [1] and the comment of Sheehy and Radzihovsky [2] is discussed. We show that, in contrast to what is claimed in [2], the requirement of positive susceptibility is sufficient to rule out states that are local maximum of the free energy (as a function of the order parameter $Δ$
Similar papers
Comment on "Superfluid stability in the BEC-BCS crossover"
similarity 0.88Daniel E. Sheehy & Leo Radzihovsky · 2006 · arXiv:cond-mat/0608172
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Superfluid stability in BEC-BCS crossover
similarity 0.88C. -H. Pao et al. · 2005 · arXiv:cond-mat/0506437
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Finite Temperature Phase Diagram of a Two-Component Fermi Gas with Density Imbalance
similarity 0.87Lianyi He et al. · 2006 · arXiv:cond-mat/0606322
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
P-wave Pairing in Two-Component Fermi Systems with Unequal Population near Feshbach Resonance
similarity 0.87R. Liao et al. · 2007 · arXiv:0711.4594
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
BCS-BEC crossover in an asymmetric two-component Fermi gas
similarity 0.86Xia-Ji Liu & Hui Hu · 2006 · arXiv:cond-mat/0603011
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
BEC-BCS crossover, phase transitions and phase separation in polarized resonantly-paired superfluids
similarity 0.86Daniel E. Sheehy & Leo Radzihovsky · 2006 · arXiv:cond-mat/0607803
Source status unknown — claims are unverified