Chemistry Of Superconductor Magnetic Field Strength

Vmedvil

Vmedvil

Registered Member
This is a question for Exchemist mainly but other feel free to answer, what chemically about superconductors determines the maximum Magnetic Field Strength of Superconductors because Superconductors in theory have a zero electrical resistance but in practice have a very small electrical resistance many orders of magnitude lower than normal conductors I wanted to know chemically what determines these factors what about these chemicals allow lower resistance and higher magnetic field strength? Furthermore it is said that Iron Superconductors can reach magnetic field strengths of 120 T which is superconducting while Cuprates can only reach 15 T, so in exacting details what causes this effect which is a function on electrical resistance of the superconductor?

Does that book have a section about superconductors because I understand the physics of magnetism in normal situations. The Problem is when the theoretical and experimental resistance of superconductors doesn't match as they in theory are supposed to have a zero electrical resistance which would yield a infinite magnetic field strength but however in practice you can only achieve a certain amount of magnetism because of the small electrical resistance of the superconductor. Basically, I think I need a chemistry book about superconductors. I need to know the chemical reason to why this small resistance exists rather than the magnetic component as I know the source of the magnetism which is current.

smt359-1-006i.jpg

Limits-of-Superconductivity.jpg

superconductivity-8-638.jpg

But the question is what causes Critical Magnetism Field Density and Critical Current Density chemically? So I guess what is Magnetic field H0 or B0 a function of chemically is the question.
 
Last edited:
Vmedvil said:
This is a question for Exchemist mainly but other feel free to answer, what chemically about superconductors determines the maximum Magnetic Field Strength of Superconductors because Superconductors in theory have a zero electrical resistance but in practice have a very small electrical resistance many orders of magnitude lower than normal conductors I wanted to know chemically what determines these factors what about these chemicals allow lower resistance and higher magnetic field strength? Furthermore it is said that Iron Superconductors can reach magnetic field strengths of 120 T which is superconducting while Cuprates can only reach 15 T, so in exacting details what causes this effect which is a function on electrical resistance of the superconductor?

Does that book have a section about superconductors because I understand the physics of magnetism in normal situations. The Problem is when the theoretical and experimental resistance of superconductors doesn't match as they in theory are supposed to have a zero electrical resistance which would yield a infinite magnetic field strength but however in practice you can only achieve a certain amount of magnetism because of the small electrical resistance of the superconductor. Basically, I think I need a chemistry book about superconductors. I need to know the chemical reason to why this small resistance exists rather than the magnetic component as I know the source of the magnetism which is current.

smt359-1-006i.jpg

Limits-of-Superconductivity.jpg

superconductivity-8-638.jpg

But the question is what causes Critical Magnetism Field Density and Critical Current Density chemically? So I guess what is Magnetic field H0 or B0 a function of chemically is the question.
Click to expand...
This is really a solid state physics question. As a chemist, I don't know much about superconductivity. What I do know is that cooper pairs result from an interaction with the collective vibrational modes (phonons) of the lattice of the conductor. The various excited states of the lattice will be a function of the material, since both the bonding and the mass of the atoms (or ions) will affect it. But don't ask me how exactly it works out for different materials.
 
exchemist said:
This is really a solid state physics question. As a chemist, I don't know much about superconductivity. What I do know is that cooper pairs result from an interaction with the collective vibrational modes (phonons) of the lattice of the conductor. The various excited states of the lattice will be a function of the material, since both the bonding and the mass of the atoms (or ions) will affect it. But don't ask me how exactly it works out for different materials.
Click to expand...

That's fine I just wish you knew because it would really revolutionize making superconductors for particle accelerators and other applications, you could get a nobel prize, exchemist.
 
Vmedvil said:
That's fine I just wish you knew because it would really revolutionize making superconductors for particle accelerators and other applications, you could get a nobel prize, exchemist.
Click to expand...
Plenty of people are working on improved materials for superconductivity.
 
exchemist said:
At my age there are many things I don't "wanna" do, adopting Americanisms being fairly high on my list. :D
Click to expand...
Let me guess you are from the UK and think us American are a bunch of dumb hillbillies compared to you with your queen's English. Just remember when you Europeans were having a hard time with the Nazi's who was it that helped you? If I remember correctly most of Europe was conquered by them, the French Surrendered and the UK was being carpet bombed... However the Americans cleaned that right up didn't we... Maybe my grandfather that fought in WWII shouldn't have helped you and left you to rot?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top