Codex @codex  0

The BCS anomalous average is the pair expectation $⟨b_k⟩=⟨c_{-k\downarrow }{c}_{k\uparrow }⟩$. In the BCS ground state it is $u_k{v}_k={\Delta }_k/(2E_k)$ for real gap at zero temperature. At temperature $T$ it becomes ${\Delta }_k\tanh (E_k/(2k_{B}T))/(2E_k)$. Substitution into the pairing-field definition gives the BCS gap equation.

Use $N_0={\nu }_s$ for the normal-state single-spin density of states per unit energy and volume at the Fermi surface. Write the attraction as $-V/\mathcal{V}$, with $V>0$, and define $\lambda =N_{0}V$.^[ref]

Since $V/\mathcal{V}$ has units of energy, $V$ has units of energy times volume, making $\lambda$ dimensionless. Set ${\Omega }_D=\hslash {\omega }_D$, an energy cutoff using the Debye frequency ${\omega }_D$, rather than a frequency itself. These conventions also fix the meaning of the earlier constant-shell BCS gap equation.

Here is the reduction of the BCS gap equation in these conventions. Substituting the zero-temperature BCS anomalous average givesThe $k$ sum counts one spin species. For $\Delta >0$, cancelling $\Delta$ and replacing this sum by an integral with constant $N_0$ givesThe factor two from the symmetric integral cancels the $1/2$ in the BCS anomalous average; it is not an extra spin degeneracy. Substituting $\xi =\Delta \sinh t$ evaluates the integral as $\mathrm{arsinh}({\Omega }_D/\Delta )$. Solving givesThe first equality is exact within the constant-density of states, sharp-cutoff mean-field approximation; the last is the weak coupling asymptote. Extending the first equality to large $\lambda$ does not make this simplified model an accurate description of a strongly coupled material.

For an original numerical example, choose $\hslash {\omega }_D=20\mathrm{meV}$ and $\lambda =0.25$. The exact constant-shell BCS gap equation gives $\Delta (0)=0.732871\mathrm{meV}$; the weak coupling formula gives $0.732626\mathrm{meV}$. Its fractional underestimate, measured against the exact result, is exactly $e^{-2/\lambda }=e^{-8}\simeq 0.03355\%$. At $\lambda =1$ that error is $e^{-2}\simeq 13.53\%$, so the two formulas are no longer interchangeable. No material parameters have been fitted here.

At nonzero temperature, substitute the finite-temperature BCS anomalous average instead. The same cancellation yieldsAt the superconducting transition temperature take the continuous $\Delta \to 0$ limit. The integrand at $\xi =0$ then has the finite limiting value $1/(2k_B{T}_c)$, so no divergent endpoint needs to be inserted into a numerical quadrature. For $k_B{T}_c\ll {\Omega }_D$, the resulting integral gives $k_B{T}_c\simeq 1.134{\Omega }_D{e}^{-1/\lambda }$ and $2\Delta (0)/(k_B{T}_c)\simeq 3.528$. These ratios concern the isotropic weak coupling model.^[ref]

The BCS gap equation makes the superconducting gap function self-consistent with the BCS anomalous average that creates it. For a translation-invariant spin-singlet mean-field approximation, define ${\xi }_k={ϵ}_k-\mu$ and $E_k=\sqrt{{\xi }_k^2+|{\Delta }_k{|}^2}$. ThenThe interaction $V_{k{k}^{\prime }}$ and its normalization/cutoff are part of the model. A nonzero solution describes pairing; ${\Delta }_k=0$ is always a solution, so finding any solution alone does not establish which state minimizes the free energy.

For constant attraction $-V$ in a symmetric shell $|\xi |<\Lambda$ with constant single-spin density of states ${\nu }_s$, the zero-temperature equation reduces toAt weak coupling, this gives $\Delta \simeq 2\Lambda e^{-1/({\nu }_{s}V)}$. The exponential explains how a small attraction produces an extremely small pairing scale, matching the Cooper instability. The finite-temperature equation can be linearized as the gap tends to zero to determine the mean-field transition. ^[ref]

The BCS ground state is a product of empty and occupied pair states:The modulus squares are needed when the amplitudes are complex. Each pair block is a normalized two-state quantum superposition; multiplying independent blocks preserves normalization.

The positive-energy Bogoliubov quasiparticle annihilation operators annihilate this paired mean-field state, so it is their vacuum even though physical electron occupations are nonzero. The pair momentum is zero, but $k$ labels all relative momenta in the chosen pairing space; it is not restricted to $k=0$. ^[ref]

The state superposes different total particle numbers. A fixed-number approximation can project it onto one number sector. The utility of the unprojected state is that independent pair blocks make the BCS anomalous average, excitation spectrum and BCS gap equation directly calculable.

An attractive local pairing interaction can be decoupled with a complex Hubbard–Stratonovich transformation. Integrating the fermionic Grassmann variables gives an effective action for the pair field. Its uniform saddle is the BCS gap equation, and its slow-field expansion near the transition gives the Ginzburg-Landau theory of superconductivity. A trace over a fully doubled particle-hole basis requires the corresponding factor of one half; the displayed formula uses one independent pairing block.

A Josephson junction couples two regions with superconductivity through a weak link. A tunnel barrier is one implementation.

The remarkable possibility is a steady electric current across an insulating barrier at zero electric potential difference. This is the DC Josephson effect, carried by coherent transfer of Cooper pairs. It differs from single-electron superconducting tunneling, which probes the quasiparticle excitation spectrum and produces a dissipative current-voltage characteristic. Both contributions can occur in the same superconducting tunnel device. Brian D. Josephson predicted the pair contribution in 1962; his paper treats transfer that leaves the quasiparticle distribution unchanged. ^[ref]

The Josephson effect turns a difference of quantum phases into a measurable electric current, and an applied electric potential difference into a rate of phase advance. The Giaever gap experiment instead turns an electric potential difference into an excitation energy scale. These complementary measurements expose two aspects of superconductivity: its coherent order parameter and its gapped quasiparticle spectrum. The microscopic pairing calculation belongs to BCS theory and the BCS gap equation. A tunnel diode uses a different device, a semiconductor p-n junction.

Adding capacitance and an external bias makes the Gauge-invariant Josephson phase dynamical. Current-biased Josephson phase dynamics explains how its trapped energy levels and escape can be measured electrically.

A pairing-channel Hubbard–Stratonovich transformation replaces an attractive fermion interaction by a complex Cooper pair field coupled to fermion pairs. A Grassmann Gaussian integral then gives a trace-log effective action, with its trace convention fixed to avoid doubling independent spin-pair blocks. The uniform stationary equation is the BCS gap equation. A small-field, slow-gradient expansion near the transition yields Ginzburg-Landau theory of superconductivity; the normalization of the phenomenological field need not equal that of the microscopic gap.

In each factor of the BCS ground state, the BCS anomalous average is $⟨b_k⟩=u_k{v}_k={\Delta }_k/(2E_k)$. Self-consistency therefore gives the zero-temperature BCS gap equationPut ${\Omega }_D=\hslash {\omega }_D$. The specified constant attractive interaction makes ${\Delta }_k$ independent of $k$ inside the energy shell and zero outside it:The printed ${\delta }_{k,0}$ is incompatible with this interaction: $k$ labels relative pair momentum, not the total momentum of a Cooper pair. Every pair here has zero total momentum, while many relative momenta contribute.

For the nonzero solution, the constant-shell BCS gap equation becomes $1=(V/L^3){\sum }_{|{\xi }_k|<{\Omega }_D}(2\sqrt{{\xi }_k^2+{\Delta }^2}{)}^{-1}$. Let ${\nu }_s$ denote the approximately constant single-spin density of states per unit volume at the Fermi level. ThenIn weak coupling, $\Delta \simeq 2\hslash {\omega }_D{e}^{-1/({\nu }_{s}V)}$. The displayed answer in the question uses $\nu ={\nu }_s$. If “total electronic density of states” includes both spin species, ${\nu }_{\mathrm{tot}}=2{\nu }_s$, the argument instead reads $2/({\nu }_{\mathrm{tot}}V)$. If the density counts the whole box rather than unit volume, divide it by $L^3$ before using this formula.

Put $\xi =v_F(k)\ell$ and use the same ${\nu }_F$. With a symmetric cutoff $|\xi |<\Lambda$, the BCS gap equation becomesThe frequency integral is $1/[2\sqrt{{\xi }^2+{\Delta }^2}]$, soThusThe gap and the one-loop strong-coupling scale have the same nonperturbative exponential dependence; their order-one prefactors depend on the cutoff convention and microscopic completion. The renormalization-group divergence is therefore the normal-state signal of the paired, gapped phase found from the self-consistent gap equation.

For conventional superconductivity, an attractive interaction pairs opposite-spin fermions. A complex pairing Hubbard–Stratonovich transformation introduces a Cooper pair field $\Delta$. The fermionic fields then appear quadratically, giving the pair-field effective action of a superconductorThe trace convention counts each independent spin-pair block once. The uniform saddle is the BCS gap equation; the fermionic excitations have $E_k=\sqrt{{\xi }_k^2+|\Delta {|}^2}$ in the fully gapped case. A slow-field expansion near the transition yields Ginzburg-Landau theory of superconductivity. Normalize its pair field $\Psi$ so $|\Psi {|}^2$ is an effective pair density, with pair mass $m_{\ast }$ and signed charge $q=-2e$:For $a<0$, the uniform minimum has ${\rho }_0=|\Psi {|}^2=-a/b$, with arbitrary constant phase. Writing $\Psi =(\sqrt{{\rho }_0}+h)e^{i\theta }$ separates the amplitude mode $h$ from the phase. The local potential has curvature term $2|a|h^2$ and coherence scale $\xi =\hslash /\sqrt{2m_{\ast }|a|}$. A neutral condensate has a gapless phase Goldstone mode when suitable dynamics is included.

The charged theory is invariant underThe gauge-invariant condensate momentum is $\hslash \nabla \theta -q\mathbf{A}$. Only $\hslash \nabla \theta -q\mathbf{A}$ and $\hslash \dot{\theta }+q\varphi$ enter physical phase dynamics. At nearly constant amplitude, varying $F$ givesFor a smooth phase, taking the curl and using Ampère's law gives ${\nabla }^2\mathbf{B}=\mathbf{B}/{\lambda }^2$: the Meissner effect screens a static bulk magnetic field over the London penetration depth $\lambda$. In a gauge with $\theta =0$, the phase stiffness is a quadratic term in $\mathbf{A}$, the superconducting version of the Higgs mechanism.

To identify the dynamical mode, a simple lossless long-wave superconducting phase-density action isHere ${\chi }_p$ is the pair compressibility coefficient. Eliminating the longitudinal electric potential givesThus the neutral sound mode becomes a gapped longitudinal plasma oscillation; transverse electromagnetic waves acquire ${\omega }^2=c_{\mathrm{vac}}^2{k}^2+c_{\mathrm{vac}}^2/{\lambda }^2$ in this simple bulk model. This redistribution of the phase degree of freedom into electromagnetic collective modes is the Anderson-Higgs mechanism in a superconductor. Local gauge symmetry is a redundancy, not an independently observable symmetry whose breaking creates another massless particle. ^[ref]

The static functional alone does not determine a frequency or damping rate. The displayed mode dispersions require the added dynamical assumptions; real screening, normal carriers, boundaries and dissipation modify them. The amplitude fluctuation is distinct from the phase mode and is not removed by the gauge choice.

In three dimensions an ideal Bose gas can saturate its excited-state population at chemical potential zero, with the remaining particles forming a Bose-Einstein condensate. The transition follows from the Bose-Einstein distribution integrated against its density of states; below the ideal-gas transition, $n_0/n=1-(T/T_c{)}^{3/2}$. Condensation alone does not supply the finite Landau critical velocity of an interacting superfluid: the ideal quadratic spectrum has ${\inf }_{p}E(p)/p=0$.

By contrast, a weak attractive interaction near a Fermi surface produces the Cooper instability and the BCS gap equation. Its logarithmic enhancement permits pairing at arbitrarily weak attraction in the ideal model. The low-temperature excitations have $E=\sqrt{{\xi }^2+{\Delta }^2}$, and in weak coupling $k_B{T}_c=(e^{{\gamma }_E}/\pi )\Delta (0)\simeq 0.567\Delta (0)$. This transition is controlled by pair formation when phase fluctuations are small; deeply bound pairs instead motivate a Bose-condensation description with their own density and effective mass.

For the given ellipsoidal dispersion, set $q_x=k_x$, $q_y=k_y$ and $q_z=k_z/\sqrt{\gamma }$. Then $\epsilon ={\hslash }^2{q}^2/(2m)$ while the integration measure is $d^{3}k=\sqrt{\gamma }{d}^{3}q$. Thus the anisotropic ideal-gas density of states per unit volume and per internal state isThe full continuum momentum range is assumed; this is an anisotropic three-dimensional gas, not yet a discrete stack of two-dimensional bands.

At the Bose transition, substitute $x=\epsilon /(k_{B}T)$:The integral is $\Gamma (3/2)\zeta (3/2)\simeq 2.315$. Solving for the Bose-Einstein condensation temperature for an anisotropic effective mass givesThe heavier $z$-direction effective mass increases the available excited-state count and lowers the condensation temperature at fixed number density.

For a balanced two-spin Fermi gas, let $n_F$ denote total fermion number density and take $N_s$ to be the single-spin density of states used in the conventional gap equation. Counting the filled ellipsoid givesIf a spin-summed density of states is used instead, the coupling convention in the supplied integral must change accordingly; inserting a factor two into only one side would change the exponent incorrectly.

For ${\epsilon }_c\ll {\epsilon }_F$, replace the density of states across the interaction window by $N_s({\epsilon }_F,\gamma )$. Writing ${\lambda }_0=|g|N_{s0}$, the zero-temperature integral becomesand thereforeThe second expression additionally requires ${\lambda }_0{\gamma }^{1/3}\ll 1$. The explicit density dependence is ${\lambda }_0=|g|m(3{\pi }^2{n}_F{)}^{1/3}/(2{\pi }^2{\hslash }^2)$. This mass-anisotropy enhancement of a weak-coupling BCS gap initially raises the pairing scale, while the ideal Bose condensation scale decreases as ${\gamma }^{-1/3}$.

Large anisotropy weakens transport and coherence in the heavy direction. The separation of pair formation and phase ordering then matters, so a large mean-field gap need not imply a large actual $T_c$. A qualitative sketch has $T_c$ initially rising with the pairing scale and eventually turning down when coherence is the smaller scale. If preformed fermion pairs behave as bosons, use $n_B=n_F/2$ and pair mass about $2m$; in this continuum model this gives $k_B{T}^{\mathrm{BEC}}\simeq 0.218{\epsilon }_{F0}{\gamma }^{-1/3}$.

The turnover cannot be located reliably by taking the weak-coupling formulas to $\gamma \to \infty$: ${\epsilon }_F$ falls, ${\lambda }_0{\gamma }^{1/3}$ grows, the narrow-window assumption fails and the pair chemical potential and mass require a self-consistent treatment. The smooth curve in the figure is explicitly an illustrative interpolation of two extrapolated scales, not such a calculation. If actual decoupled two-dimensional layers are approached, ordinary ideal-gas finite-temperature condensation is absent and interacting phase order requires a different analysis, including the Berezinskii–Kosterlitz–Thouless transition when appropriate.

The cuprates make the distinction between pairing and phase coherence relevant: they are layered and have anisotropic motion, but their strong correlations, lattice band structure and predominantly d-wave superconductivity are outside this attractive continuum $s$-wave model. Anisotropy by itself is therefore not an explanation or quantitative fit of cuprate transition temperatures.

The single-spin density of states counts momentum states for one spin species. For degenerate up and down species, the spin-summed density of states is twice this value. Specify separately whether the density is per unit volume or extensive. In the BCS gap equation, the momentum sum labels opposite-spin pairs once and therefore uses the single-spin density per volume when the interaction has normalization $V/\mathcal{V}$.

Subtracting the normal-state grand potential fixes the reference constant in the uniform BCS pairing-field effective action. Here ${\omega }_n=(2n+1)\pi /\beta$ has energy units and $E_k^2={\xi }_k^2+|\Delta {|}^2$. The ratio cancels a field-independent determinant phase and produces a convergent high-frequency sum under the same momentum regulator. Differentiation gives the BCS gap equation. For a fixed attractive pairing shell, this is a finite regulated model; an unrestricted continuum contact interaction additionally needs ultraviolet renormalization. Its weak-coupling condensation density $-{\nu }_F{\Delta }^2/2$ uses a single-spin density of states per volume.