Timeline for Why isn't superconductivity destroyed by the Goldstone modes?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 31, 2019 at 14:27 | comment | added | camel | "The spectrum of the BCS hamiltonian has a gap whether you couple to external EM field or not" I don't think this is true. You have to break U(1) and without EM field there will always be a goldstone mode. It also contradicts the answers on this question : physics.stackexchange.com/questions/294618/… "The BCS excitation spectrum is completely wrong" | |
| Mar 30, 2019 at 22:20 | comment | added | d_b | I think you might be conflating the superconducting gap to excited states of single particles and excited pairs with the gap in the photon spectrum that develops because of the Higgs mechanism. The spectrum of the BCS hamiltonian has a gap whether you couple to external EM field or not, whereas you only observe the photon gap by applying a field. | |
| Mar 30, 2019 at 13:28 | comment | added | camel | I can just write down an effective theory for a superconductor with only electron-electron interactons (due to em) and electron-phonen interactions. This is precisely the starting point in the original bcs paper and no higgs mechanism was even mentioned. Starting from this hamiltonian you apparantly already have superconductivity, and I want to understand why. | |
| Mar 29, 2019 at 19:20 | answer | added | mike stone | timeline score: 1 | |
| Mar 29, 2019 at 19:06 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 4 characters in body; edited tags; edited title
|
| Mar 29, 2019 at 18:42 | comment | added | d_b | "as long as you don't couple to the electromagnetic field" ... superconductors are coupled to the EM field by definition | |
| Mar 29, 2019 at 17:45 | history | asked | camel | CC BY-SA 4.0 |