ZPE_Logo
  
Search        
  Create an account Home  ·  Topics  ·  Downloads  ·  Your Account  ·  Submit News  ·  Top 10  
Mission Statement

Modules
· Home
· Forum
· LATEST COMMENTS
· Special Sections
· SUPPORT ZPEnergy
· Advertising
· AvantGo
· Books
· Downloads
· Events
· Feedback
· Link to us
· Private Messages
· Search
· Stories Archive
· Submit News
· Surveys
· Top 10
· Topics
· Web Links
· Your Account

Who's Online
There are currently, 166 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.

You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here

Events

Hot Links
Aetherometry

American Antigravity

Closeminded Science

EarthTech

ECW E-Cat World

Innoplaza

Integrity Research Institute

New Energy Movement

New Energy Times

Panacea-BOCAF

RexResearch

Science Hobbyist

T. Bearden Mirror Site

USPTO

Want to Know

Other Info-Sources
NE News Sites
AER_Network
E-Cat World
NexusNewsfeed ZPE
NE Discussion Groups
Energetic Forum
EMediaPress
Energy Science Forum
Free_Energy FB Group
The KeelyNet Blog
OverUnity Research
Sarfatti_Physics
Tesla Science Foundation (FB)
Vortex (old Interact)
Magazine Sites
Electrifying Times (FB)
ExtraOrdinary Technology
IE Magazine
New Energy Times

Interesting Links

Click Here for the DISCLOSURE PROJECT
SciTech Daily Review
NEXUS Magazine

BCS theory of superconductivity: the world's largest Madoff scheme?
Posted on Monday, July 06, 2009 @ 20:45:30 UTC by vlad

Science by J. E. Hirsch

The time-tested BCS theory of superconductivity is generally accepted to be the correct theory of conventional superconductivity by physicists and, by extension, by the world at large. In a different realm of human activity, until very recently Bernard Madoff's time-tested investment operation was generally accepted as true and legitimate in the financial world. Madoff's Ponzi scheme, where old investors were being paid off by funds contributed by new investors, was fundamentally flawed, yet was able to thrive for decades because of many vested interests. `Red flags' suggesting its illegitimacy were ignored. Here I suggest that the same is true of BCS theory. There are an increasing number of `red flags' that strongly suggest the possibility that BCS theory may be fundamentally flawed.


For example, an ever-growing number of superconductors are being classified as `unconventional', not described by the conventional BCS theory and each requiring a different physical mechanism. In addition, I argue that BCS theory is unable to explain the Meissner effect, $the$ most fundamental property of superconductors. There are several other phenomena in superconductors for which BCS theory provides no explanation, and BCS theory has proven unable to predict any new superconducting compounds. From one day to the next, Madoff's edifice came crashing down and a staggering 50 billion dollars evaporated, and I suggest that this may also be the fate of BCS theory. I outline an alternative theory to conventional BCS theory proposed to apply to all superconductors, `conventional' as well as `unconventional', that offers an explanation for the Meissner effect as well as for other puzzles and provides clear guidelines in the search for new high temperature superconductors.

Source: http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/0901.4099v1
(Thx to Jack Sarfatti for the link)

 
Login
Nickname

Password

Security Code: Security Code
Type Security Code

Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.

Related Links
· More about Science
· News by vlad


Most read story about Science:
100 miles on 4 ounces of water?


Article Rating
Average Score: 0
Votes: 0

Please take a second and vote for this article:

Excellent
Very Good
Good
Regular
Bad


Options

 Printer Friendly Printer Friendly


"BCS theory of superconductivity: the world's largest Madoff scheme?" | Login/Create an Account | 4 comments | Search Discussion
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register

Re: BCS theory of superconductivity: the world's largest Madoff scheme? (Score: 1)
by Koen on Tuesday, July 07, 2009 @ 02:33:42 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://no.nl/tesla
I just read the paper, it mentions an interesting 'alternative' theory for superconductivity: see
http://physics.ucsd.edu/~jorge/hole.html

So superconductivity is not an electron-phonon interaction, but a 'hole-pairing' mechanism.

You see,  an electric current in a conductor  is not only an electron current,  it is also a (much slower)  hole current.
Then, what is a hole current?  Imagine the conductor atoms sometimes miss an electron, such that the atom has a positive charge.  This missing electron is called a 'hole'.  A moving hole means that a free conduction electron has to fill in a hole in one atom (it gets trapped),  while another electron has to leave (go into conduction band) a neighboring atom.
Holes move much slower than the free electrons in conduction.

So superconductivity means there is a mechanism for 'holes' to move much faster:  hole-pairing.  This means that electrons get trapped and get freed in pairs as well.  Question is: why do 'hole-pairs'  move more easily? Is it easier for electrons to bond (with atoms) or to get free  in pairs?


The ZPE  is not specifically mentioned within this context, but this alternative model of superconductivity might speed up the quest for room-temperature superconductivity.



Superconductivity: Which one of these is not like the other? (Score: 1)
by vlad on Tuesday, July 14, 2009 @ 22:08:47 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com

Superconductivity appears to rely on very different mechanisms in two varieties of iron-based superconductors. The insight comes from research groups that are making bold statements about the correct description of superconductivity in iron-based compounds in two papers about to be published in journals of the American Physical Society.

The 2008 discovery of high-temperature superconductivity [www.physorg.com] in iron-based compounds has led to a flood of research in the past year. As the literature mounts on these materials, which superconduct at temperatures as high as 55 K, two key questions are emerging: Is the origin of superconductivity in all of the iron-based compounds the same and are these materials similar to the copper oxide-based high-temperature superconductors (commonly known as cuprates), which physicists have studied for nearly twenty years but are still unable to explain with a complete theory?...

More: http://www.physorg.com/news166680373.html [www.physorg.com]




For Future Superconductors, A Little Bit Of Lithium May Do Hydrogen A Lot Of Good (Score: 1)
by vlad on Monday, October 19, 2009 @ 22:32:59 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com
ScienceDaily (Oct. 8, 2009) — Scientists have a long and unsuccessful history of attempting to convert hydrogen to a metal by squeezing it under incredibly high and steady pressures...

Fill article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091006093437.htm [www.sciencedaily.com]



Re: BCS theory of superconductivity: the world's largest Madoff scheme? (Score: 1)
by Sean14 on Thursday, May 31, 2012 @ 20:51:31 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message)
Superconductivity [www.nanogallery.info] is like any other physical phenomenon. Sometimes it can be understood using simple theory, sometimes it requires a more complicated theory. Atoms can be understood using Newton equations in some situations. Yet, if you want to understand nuclear decay or the light absorption and emission, then you need to use Heisenberg's quantum mechanics. Bardeen theory of superconductivity is good for simple metals and alloys. New materials, such as high-Tc, are too complicated to be fully described by the Bardeen theory. New theory is needed, and some young Heisenberg might invent it in the near future.




 

All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2002-2016 by ZPEnergy. Disclaimer: No content, on or affiliated with ZPEnergy should be construed as or relied upon as investment advice. While every effort is made to ensure that the information contained on ZPEnergy is correct, the operators of ZPEnergy make no warranties as to its accuracy. In all respects visitors should seek independent verification and investment advice.
Keywords: ZPE, ZPF, Zero Point Energy, Zero Point Fluctuations, ZPEnergy, New Energy Technology, Small Scale Implementation, Energy Storage Technology, Space-Energy, Space Energy, Natural Potential, Investors, Investing, Vacuum Energy, Electromagnetic, Over Unity, Overunity, Over-Unity, Free Energy, Free-Energy, Ether, Aether, Cold Fusion, Cold-Fusion, Fuel Cell, Quantum Mechanics, Van der Waals, Casimir, Advanced Physics, Vibrations, Advanced Energy Conversion, Rotational Magnetics, Vortex Mechanics, Rotational Electromagnetics, Earth Electromagnetics, Gyroscopes, Gyroscopic Effects

PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.