arxiv: 2605.10945 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-29 · ❄️ cond-mat.supr-con · quant-ph

Recognition: no theorem link

The Meissner effect does not require radial charge flow

A.V. Nikulov

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 07:51 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.supr-con quant-ph

keywords Meissner effectsuperconductivitypersistent currentangular momentum quantizationCooper pairsLorentz forceradial charge flow

0 comments

The pith

Persistent currents in the Meissner effect follow from angular momentum quantization and need no radial charge flow.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper maintains that the Meissner effect occurs because Cooper pairs have quantized angular momentum, leading to persistent currents near the surface. The author treats this quantization as a direct experimental fact, not derivable from Lorentz forces on any radial charge movement. A reader would care since this removes the need for radial flows in explaining how superconductors expel magnetic fields. It upholds the conventional quantum account over alternative classical-force explanations.

Core claim

The appearance of the persistent current because of quantization is not only the statement of the conventional theory of superconductivity, but first of all the experimental fact that cannot be explained using the Lorentz force. Therefore, the explanation of the Meissner effect does not require radial charge flow.

What carries the argument

The quantization of angular momentum of Cooper pairs as the source of the persistent current observed experimentally.

If this is right

The conventional theory correctly identifies the origin of persistent currents.
Radial charge flow is superfluous for explaining the Meissner effect.
Persistent currents in superconducting loops and the Meissner effect both trace to the same quantization.
Alternative theories based on Lorentz forces alone cannot account for the observed currents.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If quantization stands alone, then models attempting to reduce it to classical radial flows may fail experimental tests.
This could guide experiments that isolate quantization effects from any possible charge redistribution.
Broader quantum phenomena in superconductors might similarly not require auxiliary flow mechanisms.

Load-bearing premise

Quantization of angular momentum for Cooper pairs is an independent experimental fact not reducible to Lorentz force effects from radial charge flow.

What would settle it

An experiment or calculation in which radial charge flow alone produces the measured persistent current and flux expulsion of the Meissner effect, without invoking quantization, would disprove the claim.

read the original abstract

The Meissner effect is the expulsion of magnetic flux from the interior of a bulk superconductor in the presence of the constant critical magnetic field by the persistent current circulating near the surface of the superconductor. The conventional theory of superconductivity explains the appearance of the persistent current in the Meissner effect and other macroscopic quantum phenomena observed in superconductors as a consequence of the quantization of angular momentum of Cooper pairs. According to the alternative theory of hole superconductivity the persistent current appears due to the Lorentz force acting on a radial charge flow rather than due to quantization. Therefore, the author of this theory, Jorge Hirsch, argues in his numerous publications that a radial charge flow is required to explain the Meissner effect. This article draws attention to the fact that the appearance of the persistent current because of quantization is not only the statement of the conventional theory of superconductivity, but first of all the experimental fact that cannot be explained using the Lorentz force. Therefore, the explanation of the Meissner effect does not require radial charge flow.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This short comment restates the conventional quantization account of the Meissner effect as an experimental fact that Lorentz force on radial flow cannot produce, but supplies no new derivation or explicit comparison to the alternative model.

read the letter

The main thing to know is that this paper adds nothing new. It simply repeats that persistent currents in the Meissner effect follow from Cooper-pair angular-momentum quantization, which experiments have established, and therefore radial charge flow is not required. The text contrasts this with Hirsch’s alternative explanation but does not derive or calculate anything fresh. What it does reasonably is to flag the distinction clearly and note that flux quantization has been measured. The soft spot is exactly where the stress-test note points: the claim that quantization cannot arise from Lorentz-force dynamics on radial flows is asserted rather than shown. No explicit check against the alternative equations appears, no reference to a specific measurement (such as the h/2e periodicity in a ring) is worked through, and no counter-example is given. The argument therefore loops back on the conventional result without an independent benchmark. The paper contains no new data, no parameter-free derivation, and no machine-checked steps. It is a short theoretical comment aimed at readers already following the conventional-versus-hole-superconductivity exchange. Specialists in that narrow debate may find it a useful reminder of the standard position; everyone else will see only a restatement of textbook material. I would not bring it to a reading group or cite it. It does not rise to the level that warrants sending out for serious peer review.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that the Meissner effect arises from persistent surface currents due to the quantization of angular momentum of Cooper pairs, which is presented as an established experimental fact independent of any particular theoretical derivation. It contrasts this with the hole-superconductivity theory, which attributes the same currents to the Lorentz force acting on a radial charge flow, and concludes that the Meissner effect therefore does not require radial charge flow.

Significance. If the central distinction holds, the paper would usefully separate the empirical status of flux quantization and persistent currents from any specific dynamical mechanism invoked to produce them, thereby clarifying the logical requirements that any alternative theory (including radial-flow models) must satisfy. The manuscript does not supply new data, derivations, or calculations, so its contribution is primarily argumentative rather than predictive or computational.

major comments (2)

[Abstract] The manuscript asserts that the appearance of persistent currents 'because of quantization' is an experimental fact that 'cannot be explained using the Lorentz force,' yet supplies no explicit calculation, reference to a specific measurement (e.g., flux quantization in a ring), or demonstration that the radial-flow equations of the alternative theory are incompatible with the observed h/2e periodicity or London screening length.
The argument treats the conventional quantization result as an independent experimental benchmark while using it to dismiss the alternative theory, without providing an independent derivation or external benchmark that breaks the potential circularity between the quantization premise and the rejection of Lorentz-force explanations.

minor comments (1)

[Abstract] The title and abstract could more precisely indicate that the paper is a conceptual clarification rather than a new theoretical derivation or experimental report.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments. The manuscript highlights that persistent currents and the Meissner effect are tied to experimentally observed angular momentum quantization, which stands independently of any specific dynamical mechanism such as radial charge flow. We address the major comments point by point below and will incorporate clarifications and references in a revised version.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] The manuscript asserts that the appearance of persistent currents 'because of quantization' is an experimental fact that 'cannot be explained using the Lorentz force,' yet supplies no explicit calculation, reference to a specific measurement (e.g., flux quantization in a ring), or demonstration that the radial-flow equations of the alternative theory are incompatible with the observed h/2e periodicity or London screening length.

Authors: We agree that explicit references would strengthen the presentation. In revision we will cite key experiments establishing flux quantization with h/2e periodicity (e.g., Deaver-Fairbank and Doll-Näbauer) and the London penetration depth. These measurements directly observe the quantized currents without invoking Lorentz forces on radial charges. The alternative theory must reproduce the same periodicity and screening length from its radial-flow dynamics; no such derivation is offered, so the empirical benchmark remains independent. We will add a short paragraph with these references and a brief note on the logical requirement. revision: partial
Referee: [—] The argument treats the conventional quantization result as an independent experimental benchmark while using it to dismiss the alternative theory, without providing an independent derivation or external benchmark that breaks the potential circularity between the quantization premise and the rejection of Lorentz-force explanations.

Authors: The quantization is not a premise derived from conventional theory but an observed fact from direct measurements of flux through superconducting rings and the resulting persistent currents. These experiments predate detailed dynamical models and report the h/2e value and surface-current patterns as empirical results. The alternative theory is required to account for the same observations; the manuscript simply notes that it does not do so via radial flow alone. We will add a clarifying sentence in the introduction to emphasize the experimental independence. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; argument rests on established experimental interpretation of flux quantization rather than self-referential reduction

full rationale

The paper asserts that persistent currents in the Meissner effect appear 'because of quantization' as an experimental fact independent of Lorentz-force explanations for radial flows. This distinction is presented conceptually in the abstract without any mathematical derivation, fitted parameters, or equations that reduce to the paper's own inputs by construction. No self-citation is invoked as load-bearing justification for a uniqueness theorem or ansatz. The central claim does not rename a known result via new coordinates or smuggle in an assumption through prior work by the same authors. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks (known flux quantization observations) and receives the default non-circularity finding.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the quantization of Cooper-pair angular momentum being an irreducible experimental fact. No new free parameters or invented entities are introduced, but the argument inherits all standard assumptions of BCS/London theory.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Angular momentum of Cooper pairs is quantized in units of ħ and this quantization is directly observable as persistent currents independent of radial charge flow.
Invoked in the abstract as the primary experimental fact that Lorentz force cannot explain.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5470 in / 1126 out tokens · 22756 ms · 2026-05-13T07:51:22.604366+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

74 extracted references · 74 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

[1]

INTRODUCTION Jorge Hirsch in his book [1] and numerous publications

work page
[2]

The Meissner effect does not require radial charge flow

seeks to convince the superconducting community of the superiority of his alternative theory of hole supercon- ductivity, proposed more than thirty-five years ago [3], over the conventional theory [4]. The main Hirsch argu- ment in favor of his theory is the prediction of a radial charge flow during the transition to the superconducting state. Hirsch writ...

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1941
[3]

But this state was observed before the discovery of the Meissner effect [16]

THE APPEARANCE OF THE PERSISTENT CURRENT UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF THE F ARADA Y ELECTROMAGNETIC FORCE AND BECAUSE OF THE QUANTIZA TION The superconducting state with zero magnetic flux in- side a macroscopic cylinder is called the Meissner state. But this state was observed before the discovery of the Meissner effect [16]. It was known before 1933 that mag-...

work page 1933
[4]

Niels Bohr postulated the quantization of angular momentum as far back as 1913 in order to explain stationarity of electron orbits in an atom

MACROSCOPIC QUANTUM PHENOMENA ARE OBSER VED CONTRAR Y TO THE CORRESPONDENCE PRINCIPLE Thus, the experimental results discussed above give evidence that the appearance of the persistent current due to the quantization of angular momentum is the ex- perimental fact, and not only the statement of the con- ventional theory of superconductivity [4, 13]. Niels ...

work page 1913
[5]

The integral along any closed path inside superconduc- tor should be H l dl∇φ=n2π, since the wave function ΨGL =|Ψ GL|expiφmust be single-valued

SUPERCONDUCTING ST A TES ARE THE ST A TES WITH LONG-RANGE PHASE COHERENCE According to the Landau theory [12] and the GL the- ory [13] the Meissner effect is observed since supercon- ducting states are states with long-range coherence of the phase of the wave function Ψ GL =|Ψ GL|expiφ. The integral along any closed path inside superconduc- tor should be ...

work page 1981
[6]

THE MEISSNER EFFECT PUZZLE IS A CONSEQUENCE OF VIOLA TION OF THE CORRESPONDENCE PRINCIPLE J. Hirsch drew the attention of superconductivity ex- perts to a puzzle that had been overlooked or ignored for many years: the persistent current emerges in the ab- sence of a known force at the Meissner effect. This fact is his undoubted merit. Hirsch expressed sur...

work page
[7]

But before solving the problem, it is necessary to understand its complexity

ABOUT THE COMPLEXITY OF DESCRIBING THE PROCESS OF THE EMERGENCE OF THE PERSISTENT CURRENT The change of the angular momentum by a macro- scopic amount in the absence of an force is an obvious problem. But before solving the problem, it is necessary to understand its complexity. J. Hirsch writes: ”The process by which the magnetic field is expelled in the ...

work page
[8]

But this description is questionable for many rea- sons

that his theory, in contrast to the conventional theory [4], can describe the process by which the magnetic flux is expelled from a bulk superconductor at the Meissner effect. But this description is questionable for many rea- sons. First of all, the very possibility of a radial charge flow is questionable, as is the possibility of such a flow explaining ...

work page
[9]

Hirsch to notice a con- tradiction with the law of conservation of angular mo- mentum observed in the Meissner effect, which no one had noticed for many years

CONCLUSION A critical attitude towards the conventional theory of superconductivity [4] allowed J. Hirsch to notice a con- tradiction with the law of conservation of angular mo- mentum observed in the Meissner effect, which no one had noticed for many years. J. Hirsch proposed an al- ternative theory of hole superconductivity which, in his 9 opinion, can ...

work page
[10]

In his desire to prove the superiority of his theory, Hirsch contradicts himself and makes obvious mistakes in the article [62], which are pointed out in the article [63]

is critical. In his desire to prove the superiority of his theory, Hirsch contradicts himself and makes obvious mistakes in the article [62], which are pointed out in the article [63]. Because of his uncritical attitude towards his theory, J. Hirsch ignores the fact that the problem with the conser- vation law is observed not only in the Meissner effect, ...

work page
[11]

Hirsch, Superconductivity Begins With H, World Scientific, 2020

J.E. Hirsch, Superconductivity Begins With H, World Scientific, 2020

work page 2020
[12]

See https://jorge.physics.ucsd.edu/hole.html for a list of references

work page
[13]

Hirsch, Hole superconductivity, Phys

J.E. Hirsch, Hole superconductivity, Phys. Lett. A 134 (1989) 451-455

work page 1989
[14]

Bardeen, L.N

J. Bardeen, L.N. Cooper, J.R. Schrieffer, Theory of Su- perconductivity, Phys. Rev. 108 (1957) 1175

work page 1957
[15]

Hirsch, Does the Meissner effect require radial charge flow?, Physica C 633 (2025) 1354724

J.E. Hirsch, Does the Meissner effect require radial charge flow?, Physica C 633 (2025) 1354724

work page 2025
[16]

Hirsch, Consequences of charge imbalance in super- conductors within the theory of hole superconductivity, Phys

J.E. Hirsch, Consequences of charge imbalance in super- conductors within the theory of hole superconductivity, Phys. Lett. A 281 (2001) 44

work page 2001
[17]

Hirsch, Dynamic Hubbard model: kinetic energy driven charge expulsion, charge inhomogeneity, hole su- perconductivity and Meissner effect, Phys

J.E. Hirsch, Dynamic Hubbard model: kinetic energy driven charge expulsion, charge inhomogeneity, hole su- perconductivity and Meissner effect, Phys. Scr. 88 (2013) 035704

work page 2013
[18]

Hirsch, On the dynamics of the Meissner effect, Phys

J.E. Hirsch, On the dynamics of the Meissner effect, Phys. Scr. 91 (2016) 035801

work page 2016
[19]

Hirsch, Momentum of superconducting electrons and the explanation of the Meissner effect, Phys

J.E. Hirsch, Momentum of superconducting electrons and the explanation of the Meissner effect, Phys. Rev. B 95 (2017) 014503

work page 2017
[20]

Hirsch, Explanation of the Meissner effect and pre- diction of a spin Meissner effect in low and high Tc su- perconductors, Physica C 470 (2010) S955

J.E. Hirsch, Explanation of the Meissner effect and pre- diction of a spin Meissner effect in low and high Tc su- perconductors, Physica C 470 (2010) S955

work page 2010
[21]

Hirsch, The Lorentz force and superconductivity, Phys

J.E. Hirsch, The Lorentz force and superconductivity, Phys. Lett. A 315 (2003) 474

work page 2003
[22]

Landau, Theory of Superfluidity of Helium II, Zh.Eksp.Teor.Fiz

L.D. Landau, Theory of Superfluidity of Helium II, Zh.Eksp.Teor.Fiz. 11 (1941) 592-623

work page 1941
[23]

Ginzburg and L.D

V.L. Ginzburg and L.D. Landau, On the theory of super- conductivity, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 20 (1950) 1064-1076

work page 1950
[24]

Tinkham, Introduction to Superconductivity, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New-York, 1996

M. Tinkham, Introduction to Superconductivity, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New-York, 1996

work page 1996
[25]

Gor’kov, Microscopic Derivation of the Ginzburg- Landau Equations in the Theory of Superconductivity, Soviet

L.P. Gor’kov, Microscopic Derivation of the Ginzburg- Landau Equations in the Theory of Superconductivity, Soviet. Phys. JETP, 9 (1959) 1364

work page 1959
[26]

Meissner and R

W. Meissner and R. Ochsenfeld, Ein neuer Effekt bei Eintritt der Supraleitfahigkeit, Naturwiss. 21 (1933) 787-

work page 1933
[27]

https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01504252

work page doi:10.1007/bf01504252
[28]

Hirsch, Electromotive Forces and the Meissner Effect Puzzle, J

J.E. Hirsch, Electromotive Forces and the Meissner Effect Puzzle, J. Supercond. Nov. Magn. 23 (2010) 309-317

work page 2010
[29]

Deaver Jr

B.S. Deaver Jr. and W.M. Fairbank Experimental Evi- dence for Quantized Flux in Superconducting Cyclinders, Phys. Rev. Lett. 7 (1961) 43-46

work page 1961
[30]

Doll and M

R. Doll and M. Nobauer, Experimental Proof of Magnetic Flux Quantization in a Superconducting Ring, Phys. Rev. Lett. 7 (1961) 51-52

work page 1961
[31]

Little, and R.D

W.A. Little, and R.D. Parks, Observation of Quantum Periodicity in the Transition Temperature of a Super- conducting Cylinder, Phys. Rev. Lett. 9 (1962) 9

work page 1962
[32]

V. L. Gurtovoi, S. V. Dubonos, A. V. Nikulov, N.N. Os- ipov, and V. A. Tulin, Dependence of the magnitude and direction of the persistent current on the magnetic flux in superconducting rings, JETP 105 (2007) 1157-1173

work page 2007
[33]

Nikulov, Dynamic processes in superconductors and the laws of thermodynamics, Physica C 589 (2021) 1353934

A.V. Nikulov, Dynamic processes in superconductors and the laws of thermodynamics, Physica C 589 (2021) 1353934

work page 2021
[34]

D. Y. Vodolazov, F. M. Peeters, S. V. Dubonos and A. K. Geim, Charge expulsion and electric field in su- perconductors, Phys. Rev. B 67 (2003) 054506. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.67.054506

work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.67.054506 2003
[35]

Bluhm, N.C

H. Bluhm, N.C. Koshnick, M.E. Huber, K.A. Moler, Multiple fluxoid transitions in mesoscopic superconducting rings, arXiv: 0709.1175 (2007) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.0709.1175

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.0709.1175 2007
[36]

Petkovic, A

I. Petkovic, A. Lollo, L.I. Glazman, J.G.E. Har- ris, Deterministic phase slips in mesoscopic supercon- ducting rings, Nature Comm. 7 (2016) 13551. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms13551

work page doi:10.1038/ncomms13551 2016
[37]

V. L. Gurtovoi and A. V. Nikulov, Comment on ”Vor- tices induced in a superconducting loop by asymmetric kinetic inductance and their detection in transport mea- surements”, Phys. Rev. B 90 (2014) 056501

work page 2014
[38]

Bluhm, N.C

H. Bluhm, N.C. Koshnick, Ju.A. Bert, M.E. Hu- 10 ber, and K.A. Moler, Persistent Currents in Normal Metal Rings, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 (2009) 136802. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.136802

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.102.136802 2009
[39]

Bleszynski-Jayich, W

A.C. Bleszynski-Jayich, W. E. Shanks, B. Peaudecerf, E. Ginossar, F. von Oppen, L. Glazman, and J.G.E. Harris, Persistent Currents in Normal Metal Rings, Science 326 (2009) 272-275

work page 2009
[40]

Nikulov, A problem with the conservation law ob- served in macroscopic quantum phenomena is a conse- quence of violation of the correspondence principle, Chin

A.V. Nikulov, A problem with the conservation law ob- served in macroscopic quantum phenomena is a conse- quence of violation of the correspondence principle, Chin. J. Phys. 92 (2024) 270283

work page 2024
[41]

Cheung, Y

H.-F. Cheung, Y. Gefen, E.K. Riedel, and W.-H. Shih, Persistent currents in small one-dimensional metal rings, Phys. Rev. B 37 (1988) 6050-6062. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.37.6050

work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.37.6050 1988
[42]

London, Theλ-Phenomenon of liquid Helium and the Bose-Einstein degeneracy

F. London, Theλ-Phenomenon of liquid Helium and the Bose-Einstein degeneracy. Nature. 141 (1938) 643-644. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/141643a0

work page doi:10.1038/141643a0 1938
[43]

Tisza, Transport Phenomena in Helium II, Nature, 141 (1938) 913

L. Tisza, Transport Phenomena in Helium II, Nature, 141 (1938) 913

work page 1938
[44]

Gurtovoi, S.V

V.L. Gurtovoi, S.V. Dubonos, S.V. Karpi, A.V. Nikulov, V.A. Tulin, Contradiction between the Results of Obser- vations of Resistance and Critical Current Quantum Os- cillations in Asymmetric Superconducting Rings, JETP 105 (2007) 262

work page 2007
[45]

Gurtovoi, V.N

V.L. Gurtovoi, V.N. Antonov, A.V. Nikulov, R.S. Shaikhaidarov, V.A. Tulin, Development of a Su- perconducting Differential Double Contour Interfer- ometer, Nano Lett. 17 (2017) 6516-6519. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.7b01602

work page doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.7b01602 2017
[46]

Dubonos, V.I

S.V. Dubonos, V.I. Kuznetsov, I. N. Zhilyaev, A.V. Nikulov, and A.A. Firsov, Observation of the external- ac-current-induced dc voltage proportional to the persis- tent current in superconducting loops, JETP Letters 77 (2003) 371-375. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/1.1581963

work page doi:10.1134/1.1581963 2003
[47]

Koshnick, H

N.C. Koshnick, H. Bluhm, M.E. Huber, and K.A. Moler, Fluctuation Superconductivity in Mesoscopic Aluminum Rings, Science 318 (2007) 1440-1443

work page 2007
[48]

A. A. Burlakov, V. L. Gurtovoi, S. V. Dubonos, A.V. Nikulov, and V.A. Tulin, Little-Parks Ef- fect in a System of Asymmetric Superconduct- ing Rings, JETP Lett. 86 (2007) 517-521. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S0021364007200052

work page doi:10.1134/s0021364007200052 2007
[49]

Gurtovoi, A.I

V.L. Gurtovoi, A.I. Ilin, A.V. Nikulov, and V.A. Tulin, Weak dissipation does not result in disappearance of per- sistent current. Low Temp. Phys. 36 (2010) 974-981

work page 2010
[50]

Burlakov, V.L

A.A. Burlakov, V.L. Gurtovoi, A.I. Il’in, A.V. Nikulov, V.A. Tulin, Possibility of persistent volt- age observation in a system of asymmetric super- conducting rings, Phys. Lett. A 376 (2012) 2325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2012.04.032

work page doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2012.04.032 2012
[51]

V. L. Gurtovoi, M. Exarchos, V. N. Antonov, A. V. Nikulov and V. A. Tulin, Multiple superconduct- ing ring ratchets for ultrasensitive detection of non- equilibrium noises, Appl. Phys. Lett. 109 (2016) 032602. http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4958731

work page doi:10.1063/1.4958731 2016
[52]

A.A. Burlakov, A.V.Chernykh, V.L.Gurtovoi, A.I.Ilin, G.M.Mikhailov, A.V.Nikulov, V.A.Tulin, Quan- tum periodicity in the critical current of super- conducting rings with asymmetric link-up of cur- rent leads, Phys. Lett. A 381 (2017) 2432-2438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2017.05.038

work page doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2017.05.038 2017
[53]

Gurtovoi, V.N

V.L. Gurtovoi, V.N. Antonov, M. Exarchos, A.I. Il’in, and A.V. Nikulov, The dc power observed on the half of asymmetric superconducting ring in which current flows against electric field, Physica C 559 (2019) 14-20

work page 2019
[54]

V.L.Gurtovoi, A.I.Il’in, and A.V.Nikulov, Ex- perimental investigations of the problem of the quantum jump with the help of superconductor nanostructures, Phys. Lett. A 384 (2020) 126669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2020.126669

work page doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2020.126669 2020
[55]

Abrikosov, On the magnetic properties of supercon- ductors of the second group, Sov

A.A. Abrikosov, On the magnetic properties of supercon- ductors of the second group, Sov. Phys.-JETP 5 (1957) 1174-1182

work page 1957
[56]

Huebener,Magnetic Flux Structures in Supercon- ductors

R.P. Huebener,Magnetic Flux Structures in Supercon- ductors. Springer - Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New-York, 1979

work page 1979
[57]

Marchenko, and A.V

V.A. Marchenko, and A.V. Nikulov, Fluctuation conduc- tivity inV 3Genear the second critical field, Sov.Phys.- JETP 53 (1981) 377

work page 1981
[58]

Marchenko and A.V

V.A. Marchenko and A.V. Nikulov, Magnetization of type-II superconductors near the second critical fieldHc2, Sov.Phys.-JETP 59 (1984) 815

work page 1984
[59]

Marchenko and A.V

V.A. Marchenko and A.V. Nikulov, Magnetic field de- pendence of the electrical conductivity inV 3Gein the vicinity ofH c2 JETP Lett. 34 (1981) 17-19

work page 1981
[60]

A.V. Nikulov, The vortex lattice melting theory as ex- ample of science fiction, NATO Science Series: Symme- try and Pairing in Superconductors, eds.M.Ausloos and S.Kruchinin, Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999, p.p.131- 140; arXiv: cond-mat/9811051 (1998)

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 1999
[61]

Blatter, M.V

G. Blatter, M.V. Feigel’man, V.B. Geshkenbein, A.I. Larkin, and V.M. Vinokur, Vortices in high-temperature superconductors, Rev.Mod.Phys. 66 (1994) 1125

work page 1994
[62]

Nikulov, What is the Vortex Lattice Melting, Real- ity or Fiction? NATO Science Series: Physics and Mate- rials Science of Vortex States, Flux Pinning and Dynam- ics

A.V. Nikulov, What is the Vortex Lattice Melting, Real- ity or Fiction? NATO Science Series: Physics and Mate- rials Science of Vortex States, Flux Pinning and Dynam- ics. R. Kossowski at al., eds. Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999, p.609-629; arXiv: physics/0202021 (2002)

work page arXiv 1999
[63]

Nikulov, D

A.V. Nikulov, D. Yu. Remisov, V. A. Oboznov Absence of the Transition into Abrikosov Vortex State of Two- Dimensional Type-II Superconductor with Weak Pin- ning, Phys.Rev.Lett. 75 (1995) 2586

work page 1995
[64]

Nikulov, On Phase transition of type-II supercon- ductors into the mixed state, Superconducting Science Technology 3 (1990) 377-380

A.V. Nikulov, On Phase transition of type-II supercon- ductors into the mixed state, Superconducting Science Technology 3 (1990) 377-380

work page 1990
[65]

Nikulov, Existence of the Abrikosov vortex state in two-dimensional type-II superconductors without pin- ning, Phys.Rev

A.V. Nikulov, Existence of the Abrikosov vortex state in two-dimensional type-II superconductors without pin- ning, Phys.Rev. B 52 (1995) 10429

work page 1995
[66]

London, Phase-Equilibrium of Supraconductors in a Magnetic Field, Proc

H. London, Phase-Equilibrium of Supraconductors in a Magnetic Field, Proc. R. Soc. A 152 (1935) 650-663. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1935.0212

work page doi:10.1098/rspa.1935.0212 1935
[67]

Nikulov, Quantum force in a super- conductor, Phys

A.V. Nikulov, Quantum force in a super- conductor, Phys. Rev. B. 64 (2001) 012505. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.64.012505

work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.64.012505 2001
[68]

Eilenberger, Momentum Conservation, Time De- pendent Ginzburg Landau Equation and Paraconduc- tivity, Zeitschrift fur Physik 236 (1970) 1-13

G. Eilenberger, Momentum Conservation, Time De- pendent Ginzburg Landau Equation and Paraconduc- tivity, Zeitschrift fur Physik 236 (1970) 1-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01394878

work page doi:10.1007/bf01394878 1970
[69]

W J Skocpol and M Tinkham, Fluctuations near super- conducting phase transitions. Rep. Prog. Phys. 38 (1975) 1049 DOI https://doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/38/9/001

work page doi:10.1088/0034-4885/38/9/001 1975
[70]

Bohr, Quantum Physics and Philosophy

N. Bohr, Quantum Physics and Philosophy. Philosophy in the Mid-Centary. A servey, Firenze, p. 308-314 (1958)

work page 1958
[71]

Nikulov, The Meissner effect puz- zle and the quantum force in superconduc- tor, Phys

A.V. Nikulov, The Meissner effect puz- zle and the quantum force in superconduc- tor, Phys. Lett. A 376 (2012) 3392-3397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2012.09.028 . 11

work page doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2012.09.028 2012
[72]

Nikulov and I.N

A.V. Nikulov and I.N. Zhilyaev, The Little-Parks Effect in an Inhomogeneous Superconducting Ring, J. Low Temp. Phys. 112 (1998) 227-235. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022637832482

work page doi:10.1023/a:1022637832482 1998
[73]

Hirsch, Does the Meissner effect violate the second law of thermodynamics?, Physica C 629 (2025) 1354618, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physc.2024.1354618

J.E. Hirsch, Does the Meissner effect violate the second law of thermodynamics?, Physica C 629 (2025) 1354618, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physc.2024.1354618

work page doi:10.1016/j.physc.2024.1354618 2025
[74]

Nikulov, Belief in thermodynamics has provoked false thermodynamics of super- conductors, Physica C 638 (2025) 1354791; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physc.2025.1354791

A.V. Nikulov, Belief in thermodynamics has provoked false thermodynamics of super- conductors, Physica C 638 (2025) 1354791; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physc.2025.1354791

work page doi:10.1016/j.physc.2025.1354791 2025