Interlayer tunneling models of cuprate superconductivity: Implications of a recent experiment

Science

Volumn 274, Issue 5287, 1996, Pages 587-589

  Leggett, A J ^a  

^a United States of America   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONDUCTANCE; ELECTRON; ENERGY; HIGH TEMPERATURE PROCEDURES; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; PHYSICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY;

EID: 0029802354     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.274.5287.587     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. J. Wheatley, T. Hsu, P. W. Anderson, Nature 333, 121 (1988).
2. P. W. Anderson, Physica C 185, 11 (1991); Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 660 (1991); Science 256, 1526 (1992).
3. P. W. Anderson, Physica C 185, 11 (1991); Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 660 (1991); Science 256, 1526 (1992).
4. P. W. Anderson, Physica C 185, 11 (1991); Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 660 (1991); Science 256, 1526 (1992).
5. S. Chakravarty, A. Sudbø, P. W. Anderson, S. Strong, Science 261, 337 (1993).
6. P. W. Anderson, ibid. 268, 1154 (1995).
7. B. D. Josephson, Phys. Lett. 1, 241 (1962).
8. V. Ambegaokar and A. Baratoff, Phys. Rev. Lett. 10, 49 (1963); erratum, ibid. 11, 104 (1963).
9. D. van der Marel, J. Schützmann, H. S. Somal, J. W. van der Eb, Proceedings of the 10th Anniversary Workshop on Physics, Materials and Applications, Houston, March 1996 (World Scientific, Rivers Edge, NJ, in press).
10. 1 (0) itself should not be measured by a dc technique].
11. 1 is constant across the ab plane.
12. It may be objected that (the analog of) Eq. 5 is spectacularly violated for the standard [Ambegaokar-Baratoff (6)] model of a single Josephson junction (which at first sight corresponds to the special case of the above calculation for n = 2) because it is a standard result that the Josephson coupling energy (the "superfluid density" up to a factor) is a small fraction of the total tunneling energy, whereas the quantity α is of order unity. However, to analyze this model along the above lines, one must consider the junction itself as being in series with whatever mechanism is responsible for "dephasing" the electrons in the bulk superconductors, as well as the effect of (non)conservation of the transverse momentum. Thus, it is not (or at least not obviously) a counterexample to the theorem (3).
13. 1 for TI-2201 in the literature. I estimate it at 0.02 eV.
14. B. S. Shastry and B. Sutherland. Phys. Lett. 65, 243 (1990).
15. This work was supported by the NSF Science and Technology Center for High Temperature Superconductivity through grant NSF-DMR-91-20000 to the University of Illinois. I acknowledge helpful discussions and correspondence with D. Bonn, L. Cooper, J. Loram, R. J. Radtke, S. Sachdev, M. Salamon, F. Zuo, and, in particular, D. Loss and D. van der Marel; I also thank the last-named for permission to quote the results of (7) in advance of its publication. Finally, I am grateful to R. Martin for a critical reading of the manuscript.