BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for researchDiscover
Workspaces
Network
Opportunities
Account
Researcher profile
J. E. Hirsch contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.
Trust snapshot
Actions
Identity and collaboration
Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.
Log in to claimDirect collaboration
Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.
Research graph
Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.
BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.
Published work
In Ref. [1], arXiv:2511.03384, Markos and Hlubina argue that "contrary to the expectations of Hirsch" [2] the conventional theory of superconductivity correctly describes the dynamics of the Meissner effect. Here I point out the flaws in their arguments that render them invalid, and propose an experiment to shed further light on these issues.
The Meissner effect, magnetic field expulsion, is a hallmark of superconductivity. Associated with it, superconductors exclude applied magnetic fields. Recently Minkov et al. presented experimental results reportedly showing "definitive evidence of the Meissner effect" in sulfur hydride and lanthanum hydride under high pressure [1], and more recently Eremets et al. argued that "the arguments against superconductivity (in hydrides) can be either refuted or explained" [2]. Instead, we show here that the evidence presented in those papers does not support the case for superconductivity in these materials. Together with experimental evidence discussed in earlier papers, we argue that this strongly suggests that hydrides under pressure are not high-temperature superconductors.
Capitani and coworkers [1] reported that infrared optical reflectance measurements provided evidence for a superconducting transition in sulfur hydride [2] under 150 GPa pressure, and that the transition is driven by the electron-phonon interaction. Here we argue that the measured data did not provide evidence that the system undergoes a transition to a superconducting state, nor do the data support any role of phonons in driving a transition. Rather, the data are consistent with the system remaining in the normal state down to temperature 50K, the lowest temperature measured in the experiment. This calls into further question [3,4] the generally accepted view [5] that sulfur hydride under pressure is a high temperature superconductor.
Superconducting transitions in the absence of magnetic field should be non-hysteretic. Here we address the fact that the drops in electrical resistance that have been interpreted as evidence of superconductivity in several hydrides under high pressure (so-called "superhydrides") show hysteresis. We argue that the experimental evidence shows that the observed hysteresis cannot be attributed to experimental artifacts but is intrinsic to the samples. Assuming that the drops in resistance signal a thermodynamic phase transition, we argue that the presence of intrinsic thermal hysteresis indicates that these are first order transitions, whereas for standard superconductors the transition in the absence of applied magnetic field is always second order. We conclude that this is another feature that qualitatively distinguishes superhydrides from standard superconductors, in addition to the ones that have been pointed out earlier [1,2], $assuming$ these materials are superconductors. Alternatively and more likely, whether or not the drops in resistance signal a thermodynamic phase transition, our analysis indicates that superhydrides are not superconductors.
In a process where the temperature of a type I superconductor in a magnetic field changes, the conventional theory of superconductivity predicts that Joule heat is generated and that the final state is independent of the speed of the process. I show that these two predictions cannot be simultaneously reconciled with the laws of thermodynamics. I propose a resolution of this paradox.
Joule heating is a non-equilibrium dissipative process that occurs in a normal metal when an electric current flows, in an amount proportional to the metal's resistance. When it is induced by eddy currents resulting from a change in magnetic flux, it is also proportional to the rate at which the magnetic flux changes. Here we show that in the phase transformation between normal and superconducting states of a metal in a magnetic field, the total amount of Joule heating is determined by the thermodynamic properties of the system and is independent of the resistivity of the normal metal. We also show that Joule heating only occurs in the normal region of the material. The conventional theory of superconductivity however predicts that Joule heating occurs also in the superconducting region within a London penetration depth of the phase boundary. This implies that there is a problem with the conventional theory of superconductivity.
A magnetic field H is expelled from the interior of a metal becoming superconducting. Everybody thinks the phenomenon is perfectly well understood, particularly scientists with the highest H-index think that. I don't. I will explain why I believe that without Holes, conceptualized by Heisenberg in 1931 fifty years after Hall had first detected them in some metals, neither magnetic field expulsion nor anything else about superconductivity can be understood. I have been a Heretic in the field of superconductivity for over 30 years, and believe that Hans' little story about the emperor perfectly captures the essence of the situation. Here is (a highly condensed version of) the wHole story.
In the usual description of electrons in metals and superconductors, the single electron states are assumed to satisfy Bloch's theorem. This is because the electron-ion interaction is privileged over the electron-electron interaction. However the theory of hole superconductivity proposes that in the transition to superconductivity carriers `undress' from the electron-ion interaction. I propose here a new basis set to describe electrons in the superconducting state that does not satisfy Bloch's theorem but instead is designed to optimize the electron-electron interaction. The new basis set favors a superconducting state where a spin current exists and where states near the bottom of the band become partially occupied, as predicted by the theory of hole superconductivity.
The role of electron-electron interactions is analyzed for Rashba-like and spin-split systems within a tight-binding single-band Hubbard model with on-site and all nearest-neighbor matrix elements of the Coulomb interaction. By Rashba-like systems we refer to the Dresselhaus and Rashba spin-orbit coupled phases; spin-split systems have spin-up and spin-down Fermi surfaces shifted relative to each other. Both systems break parity but preserve time-reversal symmetry. They belong to a class of symmetry-breaking ground states that satisfy: (i) electron crystal momentum is a good quantum number (ii) these states have no net magnetic moment and (iii) their distribution of `polarized spin' in momentum space breaks the lattice symmetry. In this class, the relevant Coulomb matrix elements are found to be nearest-neighbor exchange $J$, pair-hopping $J'$ and nearest-neighbor repulsion $V$. These ground states lower their energy most effectively through $J$, hence we name them Class $J$ states. The competing effects of $V-J'$ on the direct and exchange energies determine the relative stability of Class $J$ states. We show that the spin-split and Rashba-like phases are the most favored ground states within Class $J$ because they have the minimum anisotropy in `polarized spin'. On a square lattice we find that the spin-split phase is always favored for near-empty bands; above a critical filling, we predict a transition from the paramagnetic to the Rashba-like phase at $ J_{c1}$ and a second transition to the spin-split state at $J_{c2}>J_{c1}$. An energetic comparison with ferromagnetism highlights the importance of the role of $V$ in the stability of Class $J$ states. We discuss the relevance of our results to (i) the $α$ and $β$ phases proposed by Wu and Zhang in the Fermi Liquid formalism and (ii) experimental observations of spin-orbit splitting in \emph{Au}(111) surface states.
It is proposed that superconductors possess a hidden `hole core' buried deep in the Fermi sea. The proposed hole core is a small region of the Brillouin zone (usually at the center of the zone) where the lowest energy states in the normal state reside. We propose that in the superconducting state these energy states become {\it singly occupied} with electrons of a definite spin helicity. In other words, that holes of a definite spin helicity condense from the top to the bottom of the band in the transition to superconductivity, and electrons of that spin helicity `float' on top of the hole core, thus becoming highly mobile. The hole core has radius $q_0=1/2λ_L$, with $λ_L$ the London penetration depth, and the electrons expelled from the hole core give an excess negative charge density within a London penetration depth of the real space surface of the superconductor. The hole core explains the development of a spin current in the transition to superconductivity (Spin Meissner effect) and the associated negative charge expulsion from the interior of metals in the transition to superconductivity, effects we have proposed in earlier work to exist in all superconductors and to be at the root of the Meissner effect.
The symmetry properties of the Cooper pairing problem for multi-component ultra-cold dipolar molecular systems are investigated. The dipolar anisotropy provides a natural and robust mechanism for both triplet and singlet Cooper pairing to first order in the interaction strength. With a purely dipolar interaction, the triplet $p_z$-like polar pairing is the most dominant. A short-range attractive interaction can enhance the singlet pairing to be nearly degenerate with the triplet pairing. We point out that these two pairing channels can mix by developing a relative phase of $\pm\fracπ{2}$, thus spontaneously breaking time-reversal symmetry. We also suggest the possibility of such mixing of triplet and singlet pairing in other systems.
At zero temperature, two-site dynamical mean field theory is applied to the Dynamic Hubbard model. The Dynamic Hubbard model describes the orbital relaxation that occurs when two electrons occupy the same site, by using a two-level boson field at each site. At finite boson frequency, the appearance of a Mott gap is found to be enhanced even though it shows a metallic phase with the same bare on-site interaction $U$ in the conventional Hubbard model. The lack of electron-hole symmetry is highlighted through the quasi-particle weight and the single particle density of states at different fillings, which qualitatively differentiates the dynamic Hubbard model from other conventional Hubbard-like models.
In paper III of this series (arXiv:0901.3612) we proposed a scenario of superconductivity driven by hole "undressing" that involved a complete redistribution of the occupation of single particle energy levels: the holes near the top of the band were proposed to all condense to the bottom of the band. Here we consider a less drastic redistribution involving electrons with a definite spin chirality and show that it is in fact energetically favored by the Coulomb exchange matrix element $J$ over the scenario proposed earlier. It is shown that spin splitting with chiral states reduces the Coulomb repulsion and hence that the Coulomb repulsion promotes spin splitting. Superconductors are proposed to possess a spin-split hole `core' at the bottom of the electronic conduction band in addition to a spin-split Fermi surface. The new scenario leads naturally to the existence of a spin current in the superconducting state and is consistent with the Spin Meissner effect and negative charge expulsion discussed earlier within the theory of hole superconductivity.
In a voltaic cell, positive (negative) ions flow from the low (high) potential electrode to the high (low) potential electrode, driven by an `electromotive force' which points in opposite direction and overcomes the electric force. Similarly in a superconductor charge flows in direction opposite to that dictated by the Faraday electric field as the magnetic field is expelled in the Meissner effect. The puzzle is the same in both cases: what drives electric charges against electromagnetic forces? I propose that the answer is also the same in both cases: kinetic energy lowering, or `quantum pressure'.
I argue that the conventional BCS-London theory of superconductivity does not explain the most fundamental property of superconductors, the Meissner effect: how is the Meissner current generated, and how is it able to defy Faraday's law? How is its mechanical angular momentum compensated? I propose that superconductivity is impossible unless the metal expels charge from its interior towards the surface in the transition to superconductivity. As a consequence, superconductors in their ground state are predicted to possess a macroscopic electric field in their interior, as well as excess negative charge and a macroscopic spin current near the surface. The system is driven normal when the applied magnetic field is strong enough to bring the spin current to a stop. High temperature superconductivity occurs in systems that have too much negative charge.
In recent work, we discussed the difference between electrons and holes in energy band in solids from a many-particle point of view, originating in the electron-electron interaction[1], and from a single particle point of view, originating in the electron-ion interaction[2]. We proposed that superconductivity in solids only occurs when the Fermi level is close to the top of a band (hole carriers), that it originates in `undressing' of carriers from $both$ the electron-electron and the electron-ion interaction, and that as a consequence holes in the normal state behave like electrons in the superconducting state[3]. However, the connection between both undressing effects was left unclear, as was left unclear how the transformation from hole behavior to electron behavior occurs. Here we clarify these questions by showing that the same electron-electron interaction physics that promotes pairing of hole carriers and undressing of carriers from the electron-electron interaction leads to undressing of carriers from the electron-ion interaction and transforms the behavior of carriers from hole-like to electron-like. Furthermore this phenomenon is connected with the expulsion of negative charge that we predict to occur in superconductors. These unexpected connections support the validity of our theoretical framework, the theory of hole superconductivity, to explain superconductivity in solids.
We predict that simple metals and early transition metals that become superconducting under high pressures will show a change in sign of their Hall coefficient from negative to positive under pressure. If verified, this will strongly suggest that hole carriers play a fundamental role in `conventional' superconductivity, as predicted by the theory of hole superconductivity.