HISTORICAL NOTES Shubnikov: A case of non-recognition in superconductivity research Hari Prasad Sharma and Subir K, Sen Despite the fact that L. V. Shubnikoy made outstanding contribution to the discovery of high field or type-I superconducting alloys in mid-1930s over and above his other important contributions to low temperature physics, he has almost been universally ignored. We describe a short account of his scientific activities in superconductivity research and its socio-political context of the 2nd quarter of the 20th century. We also discuss probable reasons of oblivion of Shubnikov. Instances of non-reeognition and non- citation of earlier important work are not rare. Recently, Sharma and Sen’ have re ported such a case in the history of super- conductivity research, Another spectacular case Is that of the papers by Shubnikov and collaborators published during 1934 1937, Lev Vasil’evich Shubnikev was born ‘on 29 September 1901. He bas heen claimed? as “the founding father of Soviet low-temperature physics’. A list of 48 scientific publications of Shubnikov and collaborators between 1924 and 1937 was given by Alekseevskii? and Bala- bbekyan®. The list may not be an exhaustive ‘one ~ three papers (ane paper" on super conductivity and two short communica tions** on ‘neutron absorption in metals at low temperature") were missing inthe list. Shubnikov was trained in low tempe- ature physies research in the University of Leiden, Holland during 1926-1930 under Wonder Johannes de Haas, His reputation as a good experimentalist was established by his work in Leiden (Shub- aikov-de Haas effect)”. Already during his student days (1922-1926) in Lenin- grad Physico-Technical Institute (LPT) he worked as an assistant to Wan V, Obre- ‘mov and did valuable research work. ‘Work of this period included a method of producing single crystal from molten metal (Obreimoy-Shubnikoy method. ‘He developed ‘an optical metho for study of elastic and residual deformations in crystals” (his thesis work at LPTD, ‘After his return from Leiden in late 1930, Shuboikov joined Ukrainian Phys- {co-Technical Institute (UPTD. Kharkov. His mentor of LPTI days, Obreimov was then UPTI's director. He was establish ing a eryogenic laboratory. Shubsikov joined him and in 1931 was given the charge of seientifie director of this labo- ratory. Shubuikov's wife Ol'ga Niko- laevna Trapeznikova was also a physicist She was one year junior to Shubnikow at 1576 LPTI. Shubnikov was the only student with physies major in his class. He was asked to attend classes with his one year seniors and one year juniors. So, Shub- nikov and Trapeznikova attended classes together and came to know each other. ‘They were married in 1925. Trapezaik- ‘ova accompanied him to Leiden. She was Shuboikov's research collaborator ia the work on thermal and magnetic properties ‘of transition metal chlorides which led to the experimental discovery of antiferro- magnetism. There is no reference of ‘Trapeznikova's participation ia super ‘conductivity research, ‘Shubnikow and collaborators investi- gated in detail the magnetic properties of superconducting metals and alloys. They also studied the special features of de- struction of superconductivity in simple metals, alloys and a tin ring by high cur- rent and magnetic felds in them. Shulb- nikow and collaborators observed® high fleld (now known as type-I) supercon- ductivity in single-phase, single erystal Tead-thallium (PTI) and lead-indium (Pb-In) alloys in 1937, They observed* many of its Features as early as in 1935, This was some twenty-five years before the experiment of Kunzler and collaborators? ‘demonstrating type-ll superconductivity in nicbium-tin (NbsSn) alley. Moreover. Shubikov and collaborators discovered high field superconductivity at a time when low current carrying capacity was upsetting any possible technological ap- plication of supereonductivity. Their con- tribution was almost universally ignored, not only in Europe, but also even in the Soviet Union, He received some atten tion after 1957 when another Russian physicist Abrikosov compared his theory fof type-II superconductivity" with the ‘experimental data of Shubnike’. ‘The work of Shubnikoy was appar- cently well known in Europe before the Second World War via monographs of Ruhemann and Ruheman! and Shoen- here", Martin Rubemann was in Kharkov luring 1932-1938 and! thus was familiar withthe work of Shubnikov and collabo: rators. Shoenberg cited explicitly the ‘work of Shubnikow and collaborators His work was also familiar particularly in Bogland where & number of cryogeni- cists had taken refuge”. I is on record that Dutch low temperature physicists had contact with him. Pyote Leonidevich Kapitza knew about Shubnikov's work and visited UPTI more than once when he was in Cambridge (1921-193), Indeed Kapitza during his Cambridge days was always in touch with the Soviet physies and regularly visited Soviet laboratories 48 consultant In the purging phase, of late-1930s, Shubnikov was arrested” on 6 August 10937 on allegation for ant-slate activities. ‘Within three moaths afer his arrest he had heen sentenced" to “ten years imprison- ‘ment without right to coctespoadence" on 28 October 1937. He died in prison, but there was confusion about the manner and date of his death!*"*, Trapeznikova ‘mentions that after repeated appealing, she received in 1957 a communication from the authorities declaring that Shub- nikow died of heart failure on 8 Nover- her 1945 (as reported by Ranyuk and Freiman").. Rotter" (as) reported. by Ranyuk and Freiman') states that in fact within twelve days of solitary confine- ‘ment Shubnikov was executed by fring squad on 10 November 1937. Finally, Shobnikov!? was exonerated postha ously by the Military Board of the Su preme Coart of Soviet Union on 11 June 1957. Its now accepted within and out side Russia that Shubnikov was killed in November 1937. In 2001, the yer of his bin centenary, a special issue of Russian journal Fizika Nickibe Temperatur (Low Temperature Physics) was devoted to memory of Shubnikoy, which mentions! the yeur of bieth and death of Shubsikow 4s 1901 and 1937 respectively. CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL..91, NO. 11, 10 DECEMBER 2006HISTORICAL NOTES Ina short period between August 1937 and April 1938 many other top-talented scientists were arrested and sentenced in various manners". They included Igor Yevgenyevieh Tamm (one of the first Se viet Nobel Prize winners), lvan V. Obre mov, A. Leupunski, Moissey A. Koretz, Yuri B. Rumer, Lev Davidovich Landau and some others (most of them from Kharkov). Koret” and Rumer were Lan aus students and co-workers. They were arrested’? together with Landau on 28 April 1938. Vladimir A. Fock the well-known theoretical physicist from Leningrad and Alexander Weissherg, an Austrian scientist working at Kharkov were also arrested. There were some German Jewish physicists at Kharkov in- stitute who fled from the Nazi Germany. From different records it is now known that Kapitza tried his best to save and Tree Landau, He was successful. But his- (ory is silent if Kapitza utilized his influ- cence to save any other physicist like Shubnikov. In one letter" to Joseph Sta Jin, Kapitza bracketed Landau's name with Fock'sas the ‘most eminent theorist jn the Soviet Union’. Many of the arrested scientists were released after various terms of rigorous imprisonment (e.g, Koretz spent 20 years inthe prison 10 years in of Gulag, Rumer spent Sharashka ~ a sci institution run like a prison) ‘were east into oblivion. The whole story say never be unearthed and told, ‘The list of scientific publieations* * of Shubnikov revealed three stages of his research activities. The first stage was during 1924-1926 in Leningrad: he pub- lished twa papers in Zeitschrift fur Physik. The second stage was in Leiden during. 1926-1930: it resulted in eight publications with de Heas as collabora- tor, six published in the Proceedings of the Koninklijke Akademie van Weren schappen te Amsterdam and one each in Nature (London) and Physica (Amster damm) The final stage was in Kharkov during 1930-1937. In this period he as to publication until 1934, The cryogenic laboratory at Kharkov was just begin 1. The helium liquefier came from Holland and the system was ready for experiment only in lae-1933. During 1934-1937 he published 41 papers out of which 18 were on superconductivity ‘These papers were published in the i sues ofthe Physikalische Zeitschrift der Sowjetunion in German language, Zhu nnal_Eksperimental’noi 1 Teoreticheskoi Fiziki and Zhurnal Tetinicheskoi Fizik in Russian language. Abridged forms of these papers or portions were also pub- lished in Nature (London) as short com- Berlincourt™* has discussed the work ‘of Shubnikov on superconductivity in some detail and speculated about the ‘ease of non-recognition of his eontriba- tion by later investigators. According to him, Shuboikov did erucial experiments and interpreted them correctly which ‘could favour theories of C, 1. Gorter and H, London and could rule out sponge ‘model of Mendelssohn. But Shubnikov ‘did not mention Gorter, London or Men- delssohi in 1935. He had no scope to do so later. Gorter of London on their part failed 10 take support from his excellent ‘experimental data. Mendelssobn on the ‘other hand maintained the view" that Shubrikov's “series of superb experi ments came to an abrupt end without al= Jowing him time to give an interpretation ‘of his observation’. Berlincourt reported!™ that *Keesom and Desirant (1941) noted the inapplicability of thermodynamics based on complete flux exclusion (of a lype-ll superconductor); they made 90 mention of any possible relation of their results (o the predictions of Shubnikov et «al, 1934)". Theit results were in agree- ‘ment with the predictions of Shubnikov and collaborators ‘The Web of Science (WoS) database now provides citation profile of items published since 1900. The twelve papers And six short communications on super- ‘conductivity by Shubnikov and collabo- rators published between 1934 and 1937 are found to have received meagre cit tion. Altogether 15 citations are associ ated with short communications whereas the longer twelve papers are found to have no citation in WoS. Among these 15 Citations for short communication, 13 are for the paper published in Nature®. How: ‘ever, most of these 13 citations are after 1960 (after the work of Kuozler), Lack of timely recognition is unfortu- nate for healthy progress of selene. Se tence is global; scientists from any part of the globe (in principle) can contribute. However, there is a ‘court of justice’ in scientific matters primarily populated by the peers and authorities in every field of study in seience, Such “courts of justice” ‘occur in scientifically developed centers ia certain core countries. Over the last 200 CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 91, NO. 11, 10 DECEMBER 2006 Yyeurs these were Westem European countries, later on joined by USA and Japan I is difficult to get recognition for scientists beyond these core areas. Even when the scientists from the periphery work in collaboration with the scientists in the ‘core’, or in the establishments of the ‘core’, recognition may not be forth coming, In Shubnikov's time, the Soviet Union ‘was beyond the core area. Although ‘Shubnikov was not unknown to scientists in the core, he was not sufficiently visi: ble. Soon after 1937 the Second World War started. It should also be noted that during the war and for sometime after wards superconductvity was nota favour- able and supported area of research, Shubnikov was forgotten completely in his own country, as he was a condemned person for 20 years from 28 October 1937 to 11 June 1957. During these wo decades, no Soviet scientist was allowed to cite his work. Abrikosow mentioned his work only in late-June of 1957. Some scientists from the periphery, ‘sometimes feel extremely bitter about the neglect and non-reeogtition by the offi- ialdom of science. E. C. G. Sudarshan called this offcialdom or ‘court of justice” as ruled by robber barons”. Al such factors probably contributed to oblivion of Shubnikov for a long time. ‘Attempts should be made to identify any case of omission in recognizing a sign cant contribution as early as possible for bestowing appropriate tokens of recogni- toa, Will it be possible to develop a sytem ‘or mechanism for such identification? 1. Sharma, H. P- and Sen, S.K., Curr Se, 2015, 88, 1875-1876. 2. Alekseovski, NE. Sov USPEKHI, 1982, 28, 509-513, 3. Halabokyan, 0. Sov. Phys: USPEKH 1966, 9, 455-459. 4. Shubalkow, L.V., Khotkevieh, V. 1 Shapolev, Yu. D. and Rjabinin, Yu, N. Zh, Eksp. Teor. Fi, 937.7, 221 5. Fomin, V., Hostermans,F. G., Kursha- tov, I. We, Leipunsh A. L, Shubmikow, 1. and Shushepkin, G, Nature, 1936, 138, 326-327 6, Fomin, V,, Hostermans, F, G., Leipum ski, A. I. Resinow, LB, and Schub- rikow, L. W., Nate, 1936, 138, 80. 7. Schubaikow: L. and de Hass, WJ, Na- ture, 1930, 126, 500, 8, Rabin, J. N. and Shobwikov, L. W., Phys. Zeit. Sove. Union, 1988, 7, 12 are, 1988, 138, $81-582. Phos, 137HISTORICAL NOTES. 9. Kunater 3. B. Buehler B,Hsu, B.S. and Wernick. J. HL. Phys. Rev, Lett, 1961, 6, 89-91 Abrikosov, AA. Sov. Phys. JETP, 1957, 5, 117-1182 Ruhemana, M. and Rubemann, B., Low Temperature Physi. Cambridge Uni- versity Pres. 1937 Shoenberg, D., Superconductivty, Came bridge Unversity Pres, 1938. Matecoa, J- and Waysand. G., The Cold Ware: A History of Supercondactivty Rutgers University Press. New Jersey. 2003 (Pe. feom French by Glashausst, 1 1s. (© "La puoee deo une histoire de la supeaconducivte’, 1994), Rotir HPs Tray 1997, 50, 95-96, Ranyk, ¥, and Frciman, Y., Fike Nie ik Temp. 1992, 18, 51 Lev Vasilievich Shubnikoy (1901— 1937) om the coatennal of his birth. Low Temp, Phys, 2001. 27, 689-690, Goreik, G. Sei Ame, 1997, 277, 72 7 Telincoue, T. G., IEEE Trans, Mag. 1987, MAG, 23, 403-812, Mendelsohn, K., Ree: Mod. Phys, 1968, 36.7 20. Sudarshan, EC. G., Lecture at the Indian Insinute of Science, Bangalore, September 1973, p. 5 Hari Prasad Sharma® is in the Bengal Engineering and Science University. Shibpur, Howrah 711 103, India and Subir K. Sen is in the Department of Library and Information Science, Uni versity of Calcutta, Asutosh Building College Street, Kolkata 700 073, India esmail: sharma_hp@ hotmail.com 1578 dite and published by P. Balaam, Curcent Scicace Association, Bangalore 560 080 “Typeset by WINTECS Typeseiters Ph: 2332 7311, Bangalore $60 021 and Printed at Lotus Printers, Bangalore (Ph 2820 9909) CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL..91, NO. 11, 10 DECEMBER 2006