1. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    19 Mar '12 10:34
    http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-03-simulating-strongly-fermions-door-superconductor.html

    Sounds like Nobel level material here.
  2. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    23 Mar '12 16:59
    I didn't realize just how subtle and weird the properties of superconductors are until I saw this video:

    YouTube

    you have to look at the part from 2:51 to 5:17 before you see what I mean.
  3. Germany
    Joined
    27 Oct '08
    Moves
    3081
    26 Mar '12 14:44
    Thanks for the link, I have read the Nature Physics article that is mentioned in the link. Interesting stuff, though I wouldn't immediately say this is Nobel Prize material (and apparently the editor of Nature agreed, otherwise this would be a Nature paper for sure, instead of a Nature Physics article).
  4. Joined
    01 Jun '06
    Moves
    274
    28 Mar '12 19:05
    Originally posted by humy
    I didn't realize just how subtle and weird the properties of superconductors are until I saw this video:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4XEQVnIFmQ

    you have to look at the part from 2:51 to 5:17 before you see what I mean.
    That is proper cool! I had seen a video of this being demoed at some science event and wasn't sure if it was some kind of elaborate spoof. But this really does look real.

    --- Penguin
  5. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    07 Apr '12 10:26
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/03/120329142033.htm

    and

    http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2012/03/a-final-answer-on-how-high-tempe.html

    Don't know how significant that is in helping us to understand how high-temperature superconductors work.
    It basically suggests that phonons have little to do with it.
  6. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    09 Apr '12 10:461 edit
    I have some questions:

    As far as I am aware, all reasonably high-temperture superconductors have at least one heavy chemical element ( and usually a rare one )
    But why?
    Does a high-temperture superconductor generally require a heavy chemical element ( lets here define a “heavy element” as one with an atomic mass greater than that of iron ) or does having a heavy chemical element makes it more likely to work and, if either of those things are so, why so?
    Is there any special reason why a heavy element can increase the maximum temperature of the superconductivity? And, if so, why?

    -I tried Googling this but got nowhere.
  7. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    09 Apr '12 14:40
    Originally posted by humy
    I have some questions:

    As far as I am aware, all reasonably high-temperture superconductors have at least one heavy chemical element ( and usually a rare one )
    But why?
    Does a high-temperture superconductor generally require a heavy chemical element ( lets here define a “heavy element” as one with an atomic mass greater than that of iron ) or does having a ...[text shortened]... emperature of the superconductivity? And, if so, why?

    -I tried Googling this but got nowhere.
    Given that nobody has yet produced a general theory of superconductivity (and duly won the Nobel
    prize for physics) I think the answer to the question for the moment is going to be we don't know.

    However I would speculate that 'heavy' elements are useful as they have lots of loosely bound outer
    electrons which might make forming the frictionless quantum electron fluid needed for superconductivity
    easier.
Back to Top