MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019412992 · doi:10.1103/physrevc.76.015801

Novel mechanism for type I superconductivity in neutron stars

2007· article· en· W2019412992 on OpenAlexaff
James Charbonneau, Ariel Zhitnitsky

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review C · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsSuperconductivityNeutron starCondensed matter physicsSuperfluidityLambdaType (biology)Type-II superconductorCooper pairLondon penetration depthVortexMagnetic fieldQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We suggest a mechanism that may resolve a conflict between the precession of a neutron star and the widely accepted idea that protons in the bulk of the neutron star form a type II superconductor. We will show that if there is a persistent, nondissipating current running along the magnetic flux tubes the force between magnetic flux tubes may be attractive, resulting in a type I, rather than a type II, superconductor. If this is the case, the conflict between the observed precession and the canonical estimation of the Landau-Ginzburg parameter $\ensuremath{\kappa}>1/\sqrt{2}$ (which suggests type-II behavior) will automatically be resolved. We calculate the interaction between two vortices, each carrying a current $j$, and demonstrate that when $j>\frac{\ensuremath{\hbar}c}{2q\ensuremath{\lambda}}$, where $q$ is the charge of the Cooper pair and \ensuremath{\lambda} is the Meissner penetration depth, a superconductor is always type-I, even when the cannonical Landau-Ginzburg parameter \ensuremath{\kappa} indicates type II behavior. If this condition is met, the magnetic field is completely expelled from the superconducting regions of the neutron star. This leads to the formation of the intermediate state, where alternating domains of superconducting matter and normal matter coexist. We further argue that even when the induced current is small $j<\frac{\ensuremath{\hbar}c}{2q\ensuremath{\lambda}}$ the vortex Abrikosov lattice will nevertheless be destroyed due to the helical instability studied previously in many condensed matter systems. This would also resolve the apparent contradiction with the precession of the neutron stars. We also discuss some instances where anomalous induced currents may play a crucial role, such as in neutron star kicks, pulsar glitches, the toroidal magnetic field and the magnetic helicity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.377 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review CSame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207