Tunneling Density of States-Experiment

  • J. M. Rowell
Chapter

Abstract

In Chapter 19 of this volume Giaever showed how tunneling has been used to understand the properties of superconductors and measure the energy gap. In Chapter 21 Schrieffer presents a very elegant picture of what happens in the tunneling experiment when we take an electron from one metal and inject it into a superconductor where it can exist as a quasiparticle above or below the Fermi momentum k F . In this case of metal-to-superconductor tunneling, at 0°K the derivative of the tunneling characteristic in the superconducting state (dI/dV) S , divided by that in the normal state, (dI/dV) N , is simply N(E)/N(0), where N(E) is the density of excited allowed states in the superconductor and N(0) that in the normal metal. In this chapter I further discuss the development of the tunneling technique as a tool in the study of superconductivity, and I want to make the following three claims and try to substantiate them:
  1. 1.

    Tunneling is by far our most sensitive probe of the superconducting state.

     
  2. 2.

    Using tunneling we believe we have confirmed that the present theory of superconductivity is accurate to a few per cent, i.e., if we know a number of properties of the normal metal, then we can calculate the superconducting properties (T c , H c versus T, Δ 0, the tunneling characteristic, etc.) to an accuracy of a few per cent. Unfortunately, our knowledge of these required normal-metal properties is generally not as extensive as that of the superconducting properties.

     
  3. 3.

    Superconductivity, via an analysis of tunneling data, can tell us the normal-state properties mentioned in 2.

     

Keywords

Superconducting State Phonon Spectrum Superconducting Property Normal Metal Phonon Density 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    P. W. Anderson, in: Proceedings VII International Conference on Low Temperature Physics, Toronto, 1960, Univ. of Toronto Press, 1961, p. 298.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    I. Giaever, Ibid,p. 327.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    I. Giaever, H. R. Hart, and K. Megerle, Phys. Rev. 126: 941 (1962).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. Morel and P. W. Anderson, Phys. Rev. 125: 1263 (1962).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. C. Swihart, IBM J. Res. Develop. 6: 14 (1962).MATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    G. J. Culler, B. D. Fried, R. W. Huff, and J. R. Schrieffer, Phys. Rev. Letters 8: 399 (1962).ADSMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. M. Rowell, A. G. Chynoweth, and D. E. Thomas, Phys. Rev. Letters 9: 59 (1962).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. E. Thomas and J. M. Rowell, Rev. Sci. Instr. 36: 1301 (1965).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    B. N. Brockhouse, T. Arase, G. Caglioti, K. R. Rao, and A. D. B. Woods, Phys. Rev. 128: 1099 (1962).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. R. Schrieffer, D. J. Scalapino, and J. W. Wilkins, Phys. Rev. Letters 10: 336 (1963).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    D. J. Scalapino, J. R. Schrieffer, and J. W. Wilkins, Phys. Rev. 148: 263 (1966).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    D. J. Scalapino and P. W. Anderson, Phys. Rev. 133: A291 (1964).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. C. Swihart, D. J. Scalapino, and Y. Wada, Phys. Rev. Letters 14: 106 (1965).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    J. M. Rowell and L. Kopf, Phys. Rev. 137:907 (1965); J. G. Adler, J. S. Rogers, and S. B. Woods, Can. J. Phys. 43: 557 (1965).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    W. L. McMillan and J. M. Rowell, Phys. Rev. Letters 14: 108 (1965).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    W. L. McMillan and J. M. Rowell, in: Treatise on Superconductivity ( R. D. Parks, ed.), Marcel Dekker, New York, 1968.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    R. F. Gasparovic, B. N. Taylor, and R. E. Eck, Solid State Commun. 4: 59 (1966).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    C. K. Campbell, R. C. Dynes, and D. G. Walmsley, Can. J. Phys. 44:2601 (1966); C. K. Cambell and D. G. Walmsley, Can. J. Phys. 45: 159 (1967).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    A. C. Thorsen, T. Wolfram, and L. E. Valby, Phys. Letters 25A: 548 (1967).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    P. Kumbhare, P. M. Tedrow, and D. M. Lee, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 12: 77 (1967).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    H. J. Levinstein, private communication.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    J. G. Adler and J. E. Jackson, Rev. Sci. Inst. 37: 1049 (1966).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    S. Bermon and D. M. Ginsberg, Phys. Rev. 135: A306 (1964).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press 1969

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. M. Rowell
    • 1
  1. 1.Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc.Murray HillUSA

Personalised recommendations