This
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Superconductivity was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on April 8, 2013, and April 8, 2016. | |||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Clearly, the simple s-wave superconducting state does not break the local gauge invariance (it is still there in the superconducting phase) or any other symmetry for that matter. Therefore, I find the sentence "The existence of these "universal" properties is rooted in the nature of the broken symmetry of the superconductor and the emergence of off-diagonal long range order." a bit confusing. Maybe it can be modified to "The existence of these "universal" properties is rooted in the formation of a condensate of charged particles and the emergence of off-diagonal long range order"?
About this part of the article, right at the start: "... below which the resistance drops abruptly to zero. An electric current through a loop of superconducting wire can persist indefinitely with no power source ..." Well first of all the first source is down.
Then: As I understand it, the band gap is a dynamic balance. So there are continuously forming Cooper pairs and breaking apart. Every time a Cooper pair forms, it takes around 1 meV. That ain't much, naturally, but it is something... so wouldn't that energy change its form, ie not be part of the equation anymore, so that an electric current through a loop of superconducting wire should not persist indefinitely, but continuously "lose" an insanely small amount of energy, until nothing is left, unless you could create a superconductor at 0 Kelvin, which is proven to be impossible to reach?
I feel like zero resistance would somewhat break the laws of nature as it is the case with zero Kelvin. Maybe someone can clarify. -- Leo Navis ( talk) 19:39, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
There is no magic here: The supercurrent flows in the ground state of the superconductor, so it cannot decay (it is the lowest energy state). Brienanni ( talk) 10:12, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Added the citations below to the sentence in question:
-- Chetvorno TALK 21:06, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
paper just went public. not sure how this is treated in wiki. but massive change Jazi Zilber ( talk) 10:45, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
The lead sentence says
The Elementary properties section describes it as a "thermodynamic phase" so I'm wondering if this should be in the introduction. Or, since Type I and II are different phases, maybe it should be described as "Superconductivity is a class of thermodynamic phases observed in certain materials in which electrical resistance vanishes and magnetic flux fields are expelled from the material" Also should the word "cryogenic" be in the lead paragraph, to indicate for general readers that existing superconductors require cryogenic temperatures? I'm not a physicist so I'm just bringing this up for discussion. -- Chetvorno TALK 23:13, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
This
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Superconductivity was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on April 8, 2013, and April 8, 2016. | |||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Clearly, the simple s-wave superconducting state does not break the local gauge invariance (it is still there in the superconducting phase) or any other symmetry for that matter. Therefore, I find the sentence "The existence of these "universal" properties is rooted in the nature of the broken symmetry of the superconductor and the emergence of off-diagonal long range order." a bit confusing. Maybe it can be modified to "The existence of these "universal" properties is rooted in the formation of a condensate of charged particles and the emergence of off-diagonal long range order"?
About this part of the article, right at the start: "... below which the resistance drops abruptly to zero. An electric current through a loop of superconducting wire can persist indefinitely with no power source ..." Well first of all the first source is down.
Then: As I understand it, the band gap is a dynamic balance. So there are continuously forming Cooper pairs and breaking apart. Every time a Cooper pair forms, it takes around 1 meV. That ain't much, naturally, but it is something... so wouldn't that energy change its form, ie not be part of the equation anymore, so that an electric current through a loop of superconducting wire should not persist indefinitely, but continuously "lose" an insanely small amount of energy, until nothing is left, unless you could create a superconductor at 0 Kelvin, which is proven to be impossible to reach?
I feel like zero resistance would somewhat break the laws of nature as it is the case with zero Kelvin. Maybe someone can clarify. -- Leo Navis ( talk) 19:39, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
There is no magic here: The supercurrent flows in the ground state of the superconductor, so it cannot decay (it is the lowest energy state). Brienanni ( talk) 10:12, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Added the citations below to the sentence in question:
-- Chetvorno TALK 21:06, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
paper just went public. not sure how this is treated in wiki. but massive change Jazi Zilber ( talk) 10:45, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
The lead sentence says
The Elementary properties section describes it as a "thermodynamic phase" so I'm wondering if this should be in the introduction. Or, since Type I and II are different phases, maybe it should be described as "Superconductivity is a class of thermodynamic phases observed in certain materials in which electrical resistance vanishes and magnetic flux fields are expelled from the material" Also should the word "cryogenic" be in the lead paragraph, to indicate for general readers that existing superconductors require cryogenic temperatures? I'm not a physicist so I'm just bringing this up for discussion. -- Chetvorno TALK 23:13, 7 August 2023 (UTC)