[HN Gopher] The origin of the strong form of superconductivity
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The origin of the strong form of superconductivity
        
       Author : nsoonhui
       Score  : 124 points
       Date   : 2022-09-22 12:18 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.quantamagazine.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.quantamagazine.org)
        
       | mikewarot wrote:
       | It's like ties in a railroad track, if you find a stride that
       | matches an integer multiple of the tie distance you can run like
       | it was normal ground.
       | 
       | The natural "stride" of an electron might be more than 2.6
       | nanometers. It could be they swing side to side a bit if the
       | distance isn't quite right.
       | 
       | Some experimentation is now in order.
       | 
       | 2.6 Nanometers is about 5 atoms of silicon between peaks.
       | 
       | I'm trying to find out the size of the cell created between
       | sheets of graphene at the "magic angle" of 1.56 degrees.
       | 
       | It may be that you simply need to _construct_ the right geometry
       | between nodes to get superconductivity.
       | 
       | Regardless of the underlying quantum mechanics, there's a large
       | opening for experimental physics here. Are there edge effects,
       | what about grain boundaries, etc.
        
         | upsidesinclude wrote:
         | Electrons don't have legs, but the concept might.
         | 
         | How does the electron wavelength compare to the incidence of
         | the geometry?
         | 
         | Gamma = h bar/ momentum
         | 
         | Where, m = m*v
         | 
         | In a DC circuit the momentum can be held fairly stable once in
         | a state of superconductance, but v is increasing up to the
         | breakover point. Which in turn is decreasing wavelength. Bit of
         | a trouble for a static 'circuit'.
         | 
         | None of that is quantum anything, but it gets you thinking.
        
           | mikewarot wrote:
           | Electrons normally flow very slowly in a conductor, at about
           | a snail's crawl. For a superconductor, I _suspect_ this is
           | not the case... the quantity of electrons through a channel
           | will go up, but the velocity is probably stable.
        
         | tomxor wrote:
         | That's an interesting idea, it sounds a lot like nanotechnology
         | that exploits various quantum effects.
         | 
         | My extremely layman understanding notices the currently known
         | high temperature super conductors are crystalline, structure
         | seems to matter, but whether a nanoscale structure above this
         | could possibly have any significant effect? It would be nice to
         | get the opinion of someone less vaguely educated on the subject
         | :)
        
       | durranh wrote:
       | It's stories like these that keep me interested in physics
        
         | sportstuff wrote:
         | You may be interested in Physics of Pranayama(Breath). I hope
         | someone would write up or research, Physics of Cancer. Physics
         | is everywhere and all the time.
        
         | RobertoG wrote:
         | You can stop being interested in physics, but physics never
         | stop being interested in you! ;-)
        
           | whatshisface wrote:
           | Or impartially disinterested in you, as the case may be.
        
       | z2h-a6n wrote:
       | As a physicist studying cuprates, I would caution that many of
       | the strongest claims in the Quanta article are basically
       | clickbait, especially the title of the article, and the notion
       | that this experiment has solved the problem "to nearly everyone's
       | satisfaction".
       | 
       | The actual experiment and resulting paper [0] on the other hand
       | are very good work, and may very well be right, but a substantial
       | amount more work will be needed to determine how much of the
       | rather unusual phenomenology of the cuprates is well-explained by
       | superexchange interactions. I guess even more work will be needed
       | to convince the majority of the field that this the right model
       | for the cuprates, as opposed to any of the very many other models
       | that have been proposed and studied in the past few decades. In
       | particular:
       | 
       | - High temperature superconductivity is not the only strange
       | thing about the cuprates. The normal state (i.e. above the
       | superconducting transition temperature) also has some rather
       | unusual properties that are the subject of much of the current
       | research. Some of these properties can probably be explained as
       | arising from superexchange interactions, but I expect not all of
       | them can.
       | 
       | - BSCCO is one of quite a large family of cuprate compounds. In
       | this case, it was almost certainly chosen because it cleaves
       | easily, producing nice surfaces which are necessary for this type
       | of experiment. On the other hand, it is quite structurally
       | complicated, and in some sense "messy" compared to many of the
       | other commonly-studied compounds. This is actually taken
       | advantage of for the experiment discussed here, but it would be
       | interesting (if possible) to see if a similar result can be
       | replicated in any of the other cuprates.
       | 
       | Anyway, this is quite an interesting experiment, but I'm somewhat
       | dissapointed in the Quanta article for such sensationalistic
       | reporting. I suppose that's to be expected for a popular science
       | article.
       | 
       | [0] https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2207449119
        
         | dav_Oz wrote:
         | Thanks for your insight.
         | 
         | Most people reading sci-pop articles are by now hopefully used
         | to sensationalism.
         | 
         | But I think in this case (which can be equally bad) the
         | journalist only spoke to codensed matter physicists biased
         | towards or having a stake in the superexchange explanation,
         | normally one would at least incorporate one skeptical position
         | (such as yours, even if it's a minority one) in yet unsettled
         | cases rather than just letting decency speak out of the
         | scientists themselves:
         | 
         | > _But Yazdani and other researchers caution that there's still
         | a chance, however remote, that glue strength and ease of
         | hopping move in lockstep for some other reason, and that the
         | field is falling into the classic correlation-equals-causation
         | trap. For Yazdani, the real way to prove a causal relationship
         | will be to harness superexchange to engineer some flashy new
         | superconductors._
        
       | dmitrybrant wrote:
       | I assume this is already being done, but I've had the following
       | idea kicking around for a while:
       | 
       | Create a simulation, down to the quantum states, of a lattice of
       | molecules at a certain simulated temperature (say, room
       | temperature), and induce a simulated current through the lattice,
       | and see if it superconducts. Proceed by iterating through
       | billions of permutations of compounds in the simulated lattice,
       | until the simulation finds a room-temperature superconductor.
       | 
       | Assuming this is feasible, does anyone know of organizations that
       | are doing this?
        
         | contravariant wrote:
         | You can probably find a few condensed matter groups that are
         | doing computational simulations, but I think full quantum
         | mechanical simulations on that scale are computationally
         | intractable so they'll have to use approximations of some sort.
         | This is why quantum computers are predicted to exceed the
         | computational power of classical computers.
         | 
         | Besides it's been fairly recent that simulations for
         | _classical_ thermodynamics with a decent number of particles
         | became somewhat feasible. And even then it often uses lots of
         | approximations as well as statistical tricks to get decent
         | results for sizeable systems. For quantum mechanics quite a few
         | tricks to explore the state-space stop working because the
         | state-space is unimaginably huge, so I 'm not even sure how to
         | begin to do similar simulations, but I reckon they'll be
         | _disastrously_ slow for all but the simplest of systems.
         | 
         | The level of detail you need for a simulation that allows you
         | to see cooper pairs come into existence is downright insane,
         | you might be better of trying to predict next years weather.
        
         | melonrusk wrote:
         | As others have pointed out, the computations are currently
         | infeasable. The rest of the plan works though, it would just
         | need to be done with actual atoms.
        
         | routeroff wrote:
         | That is essentially the idea of Random Structure Searching [0],
         | but the precision of quantum simulation (better known as ab
         | initio) for solids is not perfect and very time consuming.
         | 
         | [0]
         | https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0953-8984/23/5/05...
        
         | mkhorton wrote:
         | Not for superconductivity specifically, but for a broad range
         | of properties of crystals, this is what the Materials
         | Project[0] does.
         | 
         | Materials Project is funded by the US Department of Energy and
         | uses supercomputing to simulate hundreds of thousands of
         | different crystal structures on the quantum mechanical level to
         | try and find those which have useful properties for practical
         | applications.
         | 
         | This line of research is broadly called "materials discovery",
         | "materials design" (often "high throughput") or even "materials
         | genomics" depending on who you ask. These terms are provided in
         | case anyone wants to search and read more about it.
         | 
         | [0] https://materialsproject.org
        
         | fsh wrote:
         | The computational complexity of brute-force simulating many-
         | body quantum systems scales exponentially in the number of
         | particles. There is no supercomputer on earth that can simulate
         | a realistic solid.
        
           | aqme28 wrote:
           | And you can't get out of this problem by just simulating e.g.
           | two or three particles. That small of a system can't simulate
           | things like temperature in a meaningful way.
        
           | pouulet wrote:
           | This made me think about this nice little TV show:
           | https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8134186/
        
           | ncmncm wrote:
           | It is anyway a lot easier to simulate a solid that has no
           | defects. But many properties found that way turn up in
           | defect-ridden, real materials too.
           | 
           | A truly periodic substrate lets you wrap it in a closed
           | universe just big enough for what you hope to make live in
           | it.
        
           | routeroff wrote:
           | It is a very active domain, with lots and lots of techniques
           | to do some clever approximations. Brute forcing is not
           | feasible, even for the simplest systems.
        
         | helpm33 wrote:
         | I don't know the state of the art but I think that we can't
         | even predict the static crystal structure of simple substances
         | ---e.g. when iron is BCC vs FCC. The first-principles
         | simulation of dynamic properties of large quantum many body
         | systems is just not feasible. It is possible that this may
         | change dramatically when quantum computers arrive---currently
         | we describe quantum systems by modeling them with discrete,
         | classical computers, and quantum computers might turn out to
         | model the relevant quantum processes directly.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-09-22 23:01 UTC)