COEXISTENCE BETWEEN SUPERCONDUCTIVITY AND MAGNETISM IN

ELECTRON DOPED BARIUM IRON ARSENIDE ( ( ) ).

MADDA WALABU UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF NATURAL AND COMPUTITIONAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS

BY: - GEBEYO AGERO

A RESEARCH THESIS SUBMITED TO DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS COLLEGE OF

NATURAL AND COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCE IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF
THE REQUIRMENT OF DEGREE OF MASTERS IN PHYSICS

November 2022 G.C

Bale -Robe, Ethiopia
 Approval Sheet

Madda Walabu University

School Of Natural and Computational Science

As member the board of examiners of the master’s thesis open defense, we, certify that we
have read and evaluated the thesis prepared by the student Gebeyo Agero Gnemo under a title
Coexistence between Superconductivity and Magnetism in Electron Doped Barium Iron
Arsenide ( ( ) ) and made recommended that it can be accepted as fulfilling
the thesis requirements for the degree of Masters of science in physics with the specialization in
solid state.

____________________ _________ _____________

External examiner Signature Date

___________________ ____________ ______________

Internal Examiner 1 Signature Date

___________________ ____________ ______________

Internal Examiner 2 Signature Date

Certification of the thesis

Here by certify that all the corrections and recommendations suggested by board of examiners
are incorporated into the final thesis.

___________________ ________ ______________

Name of designate Signature Date

Final Approval of the thesis

Final approval and acceptance of the thesis is contingent upon the submission of its final copy of
the council of Graduate Studies (CGC) through candidate’s College Graduates committee (CGC)

___________________ _______ ______________

Head CGC Signature Date

Remark

 To be filled in our copies. Each copy is given to SGS, Registrar and Alumni Directorate,
Department and College/School.
Declaration

This Msc thesis has been submitted to Madda Walabu University Department of Physics

as my original work, with the approval of my supervisor.

Name: Gebeyo Agero

Signature___________________

This Msc thesis has been submitted for examination with my approval as a University

advisor.

Name: Adem Beriso (Assist Professor)

Signature:______________________

Place and date of submission:

Madda Walabu University

Department of Physics
November, 2022
 Acknowledgements
First of all, I would like to almighty God the one who helps me from the starting of my
work to till. Next, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my instructor and
advisor Adem Beriso (Ass.professor) for his consistent advice, supervision, suggestions,
friendly encouragement, proof reading of my thesis, giving me valuable comments and
fatherhood approach throughout my work. And also I am highly beholden to my parents
who support me ideally and financially to be successful me, to develop me, to teach me
and to let me come this stage. Finally, I would like to forward my thanks to the Physics
department for their facilitator and knowledge streamers for MSc program.

Gebeyo Agero
Robe Bale, Ethiopia

i
 Table of Contents
Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................. i
List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... iv
List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... v
List of Abbreviations and Acronyms ................................................................................. vi
Abstract ............................................................................................................................. vii
CHAPTER ONE ................................................................................................................. 1
1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background of the study ........................................................................................... 1
1.2. Objectives of the study ............................................................................................. 4
1.2.1. General objective ............................................................................................... 4
1.2.2. Specific objective .............................................................................................. 4
CHAPTER TWO ................................................................................................................ 5
2. Literature review ............................................................................................................. 5
2.1. History of superconductivity .................................................................................... 5
2.2. Fundamental properties of superconductivity .......................................................... 5
2.2.1. Zero electrical resistance (perfect conductivity) ............................................... 5
2.2.2. Meissner effect or perfect diamagnetism ( ) ........................................... 6
2.2.3. The London equations ....................................................................................... 9
2.2.4. BCS theory ...................................................................................................... 13
2.3. Types of superconductors....................................................................................... 17
2.3.1. Type – I superconductor .................................................................................. 18
2.3.2. Type – II superconductors ............................................................................... 18
2.4. Iron based superconductors .................................................................................... 19
2.5. The 122 FebSCs family and physical properties of BaFe2As2 ............................... 20
2.6. Crystal and electronic structure of 122 family iron based superconductors. ......... 22
2.7. Phase diagram of Ba(Fe1-xCox) 2As2) ....................................................................... 24
2.8. Electron doped in barium iron arsenide (BaFe2As2) .............................................. 26
2.9. Magnetic order in iron based superconductors ...................................................... 27
2.10. Spin density wave in iron based superconductors ................................................ 28
2.11. Superconductivity and magnetism ....................................................................... 29
CHAPTER THREE .......................................................................................................... 30

ii
3. Methodology ................................................................................................................. 30
3.1. Free energy ............................................................................................................. 30
3.2. Mean field Hamiltonian ......................................................................................... 30
3.3. The Mean field approximation ............................................................................... 32
3.4. The Model of Hamiltonian ..................................................................................... 33
3.5. Pure superconducting state ..................................................................................... 35
3.6. Free energy in superconductivity and computing the SDW gap equation ............. 36
3.7. Calculating critical transitional temperature ( ) and superconducting order
parameter .................................................................................................................. 37
3.8. Pure magnetic state................................................................................................. 41
3.9. Calculating magnetic transition temperature and magnetic order parameter
........................................................................................................................................ 41
CHAPTER FOUR ............................................................................................................. 47
4. Results and discussion .................................................................................................. 47
CHAPTER FIVE .............................................................................................................. 52
5. Conclusion and recommendation .................................................................................. 52
5.1. Conclusion.............................................................................................................. 52
5.2. Recommendation .................................................................................................... 52
References ......................................................................................................................... 54

iii
 List of Tables
Table Page

Table 2.1: Summary of the maximum transition temperatures at ambient pressure for
various iron based superconductors [60]. ......................................................................... 24
Table 4.1: Numerical values of ( ) using equation (3.31). .......................................... 49
Table 4.2: Numerical value of ( ) using equation (3.40) ........................................... 50
Table 4.3: Numerical values of temperature, ( ) and ( ). .................................... 51

iv
 List of Figures
Figure Page

Figure 2.1: Resistance in ohms of a specimen of mercury versus absolute temperature.

This plot by Kamerlingh Onnes marked the discovery of superconductivity [19]. 6

Figure 2.2: A comparison of the response of a perfect conductor and a superconductor to

an applied magnetic field [19]. ........................................................................................... 9
Figure 2.3: London penetration depth inside superconductor [25]. ................................. 13
Figure 2.4: a) an electron flies a way polarizing positive ions in its surrounding area to
create an attractive potential for a second electron following the first electron. b) The
electron of pair has equal and opposite magnitude momentum and one spin up and other
spin down .......................................................................................................................... 15
Figure 2.5: Phase diagrams for type-I (a) and type-II (b) superconductors [20]. ............ 19
Figure 2.6: The lattice structure of 122 BaFe2As2 [38]. ................................................... 21
Figure 2.7: Schematic crystal structure of: (a) LaFeAsO, (b) BaFe2As2 (c) LiFeAs (d)
FeSe................................................................................................................................... 23
Figure 2.8: Temperature verses cobalt concentration and electron doped barium iron
arsenide phase diagram [56, 57]. ...................................................................................... 25
Figure 4.3: Temperature verses superconducting and magnetic order parameters of pure
superconductor. ............................................................................... 51

v
 List of Abbreviations and Acronyms

BCS Barden, Cooper and Schrieffer

Critical temperature or superconducting transition temperature

FebSCs Iron based superconductors

Critical magnetic field

AFM Anti Ferromagnetism

SDW Spin density wave

SC Superconductor

Sc Superconductivity

ARPES Angle Resolution Photo Emission Spectroscopy

FS Fermi Surface

BZ Brillouin zone

Magnetic transition temperature

NMR Nuclear Magnetic Resonance

( ) Superconducting order

( ) Magnetic order parameter

vi
 Abstract
The focus area of this thesis is studying the low temperature phase diagram of electron
doped barium iron arsenic superconductor. The aim of the study is to explore the low
temperature magnetic phase diagram and superconducting state by analyzing
interrelationship between magnetism and superconductivity in electron doped barium
iron arsenic superconductor. The method employed is model Hamiltonian. Although the
direct BCS Hamiltonian is effective even for unconventional superconductors, the
electron phonon coupling is too weak in iron based superconductors to produce high
transition temperature as are observed experimentally. Therefore, our equation of
Hamiltonian needs some modification for unconventional superconductors‟ case and we
did it. Furthermore, by applying the Free energy expansion method we have studied the
correlation between magnetism and superconductivity mathematically. From the results
of these mathematics we have drawn different phase diagrams for instance, critical
transition temperature versus superconducting order parameter, etc. We have got the final
result as the coexistence of superconductivity and magnetism in Ba(Fe1-xCox)2As2.

vii
 CHAPTER ONE
1. Introduction

1.1 Background of the study

Superconductivity ( ) is an electrical resistance of exactly zero which occurs in certain
materials below a characteristic temperature or it is a quantum phenomenon which
manifests in macroscopic scale and characterized by zero electrical resistance observed in
certain materials when cooled below a critical temperature, Tc known as superconducting
transition temperature (usually extremely low). It was discovered in Leiden University by
Dutch physicist Heike Kamerlingh Onnes 1911, when a so called “Blue boy”, who was
studying materials at extremely low temperatures. When measuring the conductivity of
mercury, with his recently discovered liquid helium, the resistance abruptly dropped to
zero below a temperature of 4.2k [1].

Superconductivity is also characterized by a phenomenon called the Meissner effect, the

ejection of any sufficiently weak magnetic field from the interior of the SC as it
transitions into the superconducting state. The occurrence of the Meissner effect indicates
that Sc cannot be understood simply as the idealization of “perfect conductivity” in
classical physics [2]. The magnetic properties exhibited by SCs are as dramatic as their
electrical properties. The magnetic properties cannot be accounted for by the assumption
that a SC is a normal conductor with zero electrical resistance [3].

In studying the electrical resistance of mercury at low temperatures, Kamerlingh Onnes

found that, at about 4.2K and in a range of 0.01K, the electrical resistance sharply
dropped by several orders of magnitude to non-measurable values; cooling the metal
below this Tc apparently led to a new resistanceless state, referred to as the
superconducting state. The resistanceless state is actually a state of really zero resistivity
(for continuous currents much smaller than a critical current value, temperatures much
smaller than Tc and in zero external fields) [4].

Even though Sc was discovered in 1911, the proper description of its origin had left until
a microscopic theory was established by John Bardeen, Leon Neil Cooper and John

1
Robert Schrieffer (BCS) in 1957 concerning the mechanism of SCs, which is known as
the BCS theory [4, 5]. The fundamental work of BCS has transformed an endless list of
peculiar effect and conjectures into a logical consistent theoretical framework. Since
1911, Sc has been found in more than 25 metallic elements and in more than one
thousand alloys. The element with the highest transition temperature is niobium with Tc=
9.25K. From 1972 to 1986 the alloy Nb3Ge kept the record of highest Tc with Tc =
23.3K. The run to the achievement of materials with the highest Tc has been sharply
accelerated from 1986 after the discovery by Bednorz and Müller of the superconducting
properties of La-based cuprates, with Tc in excess of 30K [6].

In 1933, Meissner and Orchsenfeld discovered that SCs expelled applied magnetic fields,
which has come to be known as the Meissner effect [7]. In 1950, the phenomenological
Ginzburg-Landau theory of Sc was devised by Landau and Ginzburg. This theory, which
combined Landua‟s theory of second-order phase transition with a Schördinger-like wave
equation, had great success in explaining the macroscopic properties of SCs. In
particular, Abrikosov showed that Ginzburg-Landau theory predicts the division of SCs
into two categories now referred to as type I and type II [8].

The complete microscopic theory of Sc was finally proposed in 1957 by Bardeen, Cooper
and Schrieffer. Independently, the SC phenomenon was explained by Nikolay
Bogolyubov. This BCS theory explained the superconducting current as a superfluid of
Cooper pairs, pairs of electrons interacting through the exchanging of phonons [9].

The most recent "family" of SCs to be discovered is the "pnictide" SCs. The first report
of Sc in an iron pnictide was F-doped LaOFeP below 5k in 2006. After two years, on 23rd
February, 2008, group of Tokyo of technology published paper in Journal of the
American society (JACS), in which they reported that the fluorine doped LaO1-xFxFeAs
SCs below a Tc at 26k gave birth to what many have already christened the iron age of
HTSc [10].

The nature of FebSCs surprises everyone (who knows them) by bringing together two
incompatible phenomena, Sc and magnetism, into coexistence [11]. The knowledge of

2
superconducting mechanism in FebSCs is very crucial to analyze the lattice structure,
magnetic ordering, spin fluctuations and pairing mechanism of SCs [12].

The experimental activities and theoretical suggestions indicate that the correlation effect
among the lattice structure, magnetism, spin fluctuation and Sc are important for
understanding of the properties and the pairing mechanism of the superconductivity [13].
One of these ternary superconductors is the „122‟ iron arsenide unconventional SCs [14].
The nature of FebSCs surprises everyone by bringing together two incompatible
phenomena, superconductivity and magnetism into coexistence [11].

Since superconductivity and magnetism [15] are closely related, this thesis is aimed to
study the coexistence between Sc and magnetism in electron doped barium iron arsenic
SC and the study is constructed into five chapters as explained below. The first chapter
introduces the general truth and the foundation of the phenomenon. The second chapter
concerns on the superconducting overview and the third chapter concerns on the
methodologies to solve the thesis problem. The fourth chapter engages with the results
and discussion and the fifth chapter deals with conclusion of the thesis work.

Statement of the problem

The knowledge of superconducting mechanism in FebSCs is very crucial to analyze the
lattice structure, magnetic ordering, spin fluctuations and pairing mechanism of SCs.

The experimental activities and theoretical suggestions indicate that the correlation effect
among the lattice structure, magnetism, spin fluctuation and Sc are important for
understanding of the properties and the pairing mechanism of the superconductivity

The nature of FebSCs surprises everyone by bringing together two incompatible

phenomena, superconductivity and magnetism into coexistence.

Since superconductivity and magnetism are closely related, this thesis is aimed to study
the coexistence between Sc and magnetism in electron doped barium iron arsenic SC

3
 1.2. Objectives of the study

1.2.1. General objective

The general objective of this study is:

 To study the coexistence between superconductivity and magnetism in electron doped

(cobalt doped) barium iron arsenide (Ba(Fe1-xCox)2As2) at low temperature.

1.2.2. Specific objective

The specific objectives of this study are:

 To derive the mathematical expression for the superconducting critical

temperature (Tc),

 To express superconducting order parameter (∆c), the magnetic order parameter

(∆m) and the transition temperature of spin density wave.

 To study the features of the physical properties of the interrelation between

superconductivity and magnetism in electron doped barium iron arsenic
superconductor based on theoretical investigation.

4
 CHAPTER TWO
2. Literature review

2.1. History of superconductivity

The era of low-temperature physics began in 1908 when the Dutch physicist Heike
Kamerlingh Onnes first liquefied helium, which boils at 4.2K at standard pressure. They
then decided to study mercury because very pure samples could easily be prepared by
distillation. Much to their surprise, the resistance of the mercury sample dropped sharply
at 4.15K to an unmeasurably small value. Soon after the discovery by Kamerlingh Onnes,
many other elemental metals were found to exhibit zero resistance when their
temperatures were lowered below a certain characteristic temperature of the material,
called the critical temperature (Tc) [1].

The next important step in understanding Sc occurred in 1933, when Meissner and
Ochsenfeld discovered that SCs expelled applied magnetic fields, a phenomenon which
has come to be known as the Meissner effect. In 1935, F. and H. London showed that the
Meissner effect was a consequence of the minimization of the electromagnetic free
energy carried by superconducting current [16].

In 1950, the phenomenological Ginzburg-Landau theory of superconductivity was

devised by Landau and Ginzburg. Also in 1950, Maxwell and Reynolds et al. found that
the Tc of a SC depends on the isotopic mass of the constituent element. In 1959, Lev
Gor'kov showed that the BCS theory reduced to the Ginzburg-Landau theory close to the
Tc [16, 17].

2.2. Fundamental properties of superconductivity

2.2.1. Zero electrical resistance (perfect conductivity)

The most important property of a SC is the zero electrical resistance in the SC state first
discovered by H. Kamerlingh Onnes in mercury [18]. In ideal cases, the resistivity (ρ) of
any pure metal should decrease to zero smoothly as the temperature approaches the
absolute zero. In Practice however, ρ can never become zero, first due to unattainably of

5
absolute zero and secondly, because of presence of other scattering centers, besides the
lattice vibration such as the impurity and lattice defects in real materials. The material
which loses the resistance at particular temperature above 0K (at 0K the material losing
its resistance is known as perfect/ideal conductor) is termed as SC and the temperature at
which this phenomenon of disappearance of resistance occurs is known as critical
(transition) temperature Tc. This state of zero resistance in material above 0 K is believed
to be due the formation of cooper pairs in the material [4].

In 1908, H. Kamerlingh Onnes become the first person who succeeded in liquefying
helium. Three years later, when he investigated the low temperature electrical resistance
of mercury, he found that the resistivity of mercury abruptly dropped to zero as
temperature was lowered below 4.21K, shown in figure 2.1. The SC has finite resistivity
above the transition temperature Tc, it is in the normal state, and the resistivity quickly
decreases to zero below Tc, it is in the superconducting state [19].

Figure 2.1: Resistance in ohms of a specimen of mercury versus absolute temperature.

This plot by Kamerlingh Onnes marked the discovery of superconductivity [19].

2.2.2. Meissner effect or perfect diamagnetism ( )

The second defining characteristics of a SC are much less obvious than its zero electrical
resistance. It was over 20 years after the discovery of superconductivity that W.Meissner
and R.Ochsenfeld discovered that a SC is cooled below the Tc under an applied magnetic

6
field is excluded from the bulk of the SC, so that throughout its interior, excluding
by superconducting screening currents at the surface. This property of the
superconducting state is known as the Meissner effect [19].

The Meissner effect is the property of a SC that once the transition from the normal state
to the superconducting state occurs, external magnetic fields cannot penetrate it. It has
implications for making high speed, magnetically-levitated trains and for making
powerful, small, superconducting magnets for Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR).
When a superconductor is placed in a weak magnetic field B, and cooled below its Tc, the
magnetic field is ejected. The Meissner effect does not cause the field to be completely
ejected but instead of the field penetrates the superconductor but only to a very small
distance, characterized by a parameter , called the London penetration depth, decaying
exponentially to zero within the bulk of material. For most SCs, the London penetration
depth is an order of 100nm [2].

Meissner and Ochsenfeld (1933) found that if a SC is cooled in a magnetic field to below
the transition temperature, then at the transition the lines of induction B are pushed out.
The Meissner effect shows that a bulk SC behaves as if inside the specimen [3].
According to Lenz‟s law a current would be generated, which would oppose the flux, and
eject any magnetic field from the SCs. For the case, when magnetic field is expelled from
the SCs [20], we can write

( ) (2.1)

where M is the magnetization produced due to the applied field H and is the
permeability of free space (vacuum). If B=0 for the case SC (when the specimen is
brought to a state where its condition for Sc is satisfied, the flux ejection makes B inside
the specimen is zero), equation (2.1) is reduced to

( )

(2.2a)

7
Then, the magnetic susceptibility ( ) becomes

(2.2b)

Since susceptibility is found to be negative so material is diamagnetic, this is known as

the Meissner effect. Such a condition, in which the magnetization cancels the external
intensity exactly, is termed as perfect diamagnetism. This is an important result which
cannot be derived from the simple definition of Sc as a state of zero resistivity. Since the
resistivity of the SC tends to zero while the current density J is held finite from Ohm‟s
law,

(2.3)

where E is the electric field and is the resistivity.

For superconductors, the resistivity is zero ( ). Then, from equation (2.3)

(2.4)

According to the Maxwell‟s equations, the relation between electric and magnetic field is

(2.5)

When a weak magnetic field is applied to a perfect conductor above its Tc, since the
resistivity is not zero in the normal state, the magnetic induction B inside the perfect
conductor is not zero. Then the perfect conductor is cooled below Tc. The zero resistivity
below Tc leads to a constant B. A perfect diamagnetic repels both poles of a magnet and
it is these magnetic forces which overcome the gravitational force of attraction [19].

When a SC is cooled blow the Tc, the flux density expelled out from its interior. This
effect has shown by Meissner and Ochsenfeld in 1933. The expulsion of the magnetic
flux from the SC is known as the Meissner effect [21].

8
 (a) (b)

Figure 2.2: A comparison of the response of a perfect conductor and a superconductor to

an applied magnetic field [19].

2.2.3. The London equations

F. London and H. London first examined in a quantitative way the fundamental that a
metal in the superconducting state permits no magnetic field in its interior. Their analysis
starts with the two-fluid model of Gorter and Casimir [16]. The only crucial assumption
( )
of this model that we shall use is that in a SC at temperature , only a fraction

of the total number of conduction electron are capable of participating in a supercurrent.

The quantity ns(T) is known as the density of superconducting electrons. It approaches
the full electronic density n as T falls well below Tc, but it drops to zero as T rises to Tc.
The remaining fractions of electrons are assumed to constitute a “normal fluid” of density
n – ns that cannot carry an electric current without normal dissipation. The normal current
and the supercurrent are assumed to flow in parallel; since the latter flows with no
resistance whatever, it will carry the entire current induced by any small stationary
electric field, and the normal electrons will remain quite inert [22].

9
After the discovery of the Meissner effect, the London equations developed by two
Brother Fritz and Heinz London put forward a simple but useful description of the
electrodynamics of Sc. London equation can correctly predict magnetic field penetration
into superconducting material, but cannot give a microscopic picture. They used two-
fluid model to describe , such as the density of normal ( ) and superconducting state
( ) [23, 24].

The total charge carrier density or density of electron (n) can be written as:

(2.6)

In normal state and at T = 0, .

From the electrodynamics, for a perfect conductor electric field, E, inside it becomes zero
and given by the Formula

(2.7a)

(2.7b)

This equation (equ. (2.7b) is true for normal currents.

The current density of superconducting electron is

(2.8)

where is velocity and is the current density of the super electrons.

Differentiating both sides of this equation with respect to time gives

(2.9)

Plugging equation (2.9) into equation (2.7b) gives

10
 (2.10)

This is known as the first London equation, which is account for the zero resistivity.

By rearranging this equation or equation (2.10), the electric field is

(2.11)

Taking curl of equation (2.11), we have

( ) (2.12)

Using the relation of the Maxwell‟s equation( ), gives

( ) (2.13)

The magnetic field and current density that can exist in ideal conductor are determined by
the above equation with Maxwell‟s equation

(2.14)

Assume that the rate of time variation is so that the displacement current can be
neglected. Integrating equation (2.14) and equating the constant of integration to zero, we
obtain

(2.15)

This is known as the second London equation, which is account for the Meissner effect.

Taking the curl of equation (2.13), we obtain

( ) (2.16a)

And since , we further obtain

11
 (2.16b)

Substituting equation (2.16b) into equation (2.15), gives

(2.17a)

where , hence

( ) (2.17b)

This is known as the London penetration depth, which measures the penetration of
magnetic field. The penetration depth [24] was found to dependent on temperature (T) as

( ) ( )* + (2.18)

where ( ) is the penetration depth at .

When a magnetic field is applied to a superconductor, it decays exponentially. Then the

solution of equation (2.17a) is

⁄
( ) ( ) (2.19)

where ( ) is the magnetic field applied at the surface at and is the distance from
the surface. The length called the London penetration depth. For estimating the order
of magnitude of London penetration depth, we put in equation (2.17b) m equal to the
electron and taking ns as the atomic density (i.e. we assume that each atom contributes
one superconducting electron). The value of is considerably greater near Tc where ns
approaches to zero. Magnetic exactly describe the Meissner effect. This equation
predicts currents and field in SCs can exist only within a layer of thickness of the
surface and magnetic field decay in SC exponentially, where is known as the London
penetration depth [25].

12
Figure 2.3: London penetration depth inside superconductor [25].

2.2.4. BCS theory

The actual nature and origin of the superconducting state were first explained by John
Bardeen, Leon N. Cooper, and J. Robert Schrieffer in 1957 which is known as the BCS
theory [12]. The BCS theory is a microscopic theory of Sc. The central feature of the
BCS theory is that the formation of bound two electrons state in the SC are able to form a
bound pair called a Cooper pairs if they somehow experience an attractive interaction
between them. The interaction between a Cooper pair is transient each electron in the pair
goes on to form a Cooper pair with other electrons, and this process continues with the
newly formed Cooper pair so that each electron goes on to form a Cooper pair with other
electrons [26].

BCS theory is based on the interaction between a pair of electron to form a giant quantum
state. The passage of electron causes nearby ions to move inward toward the electron,
resulting in a slight increase in the concentration of positive charge in this region. When
the second electron to form the Cooper pair), approaching before the ions have had a
chance to return to their equilibrium positions, it will be attracted to the distorted
(positively charged) region. It can be said that the attractive force between two Cooper
electrons is an electron-lattice-electron interaction (phonon mediated). A Cooper pair in a
SC consists of two electrons having opposite momenta and spin. Cooper pairs are formed
in a shell of width of order kBTc around the FS. Their radius is small as compared to the
average distance between electrons hence between electrons forming cooper pairs there

13
are billions of coopers. The very essential feature of BCS theory is that the cooper pairs
once formed they will have the same wave function, as regards both the center of mass
and the relative coordinate. The superconducting energy gap and the evidence of long-
range electronic order both pointed out that the electrons in a SC are somehow bound
together [27].

The BCS ground state is a state in which all electrons form bound pairs. This ground state
is preferred to correspond to the superconducting state which is separated from its lowest
excited state by a finite energy ( ) [21]. On heating a SC to its critical temperature, the
Sc is destroyed; the energy gap vanishes and the conductor reverts back to its normal
conducting state. In its simplest form, BCS gives the Tc in terms of the electron-phonon
coupling potential and the density of states of electron at the .

(2.20a)

(2.20b)

where is reduced Plank constant, is Debye phono

frequency, λ = N(0)V is London penetration depth, N (0) denote the density of electronic
level of single spin population at the in the normal conducting state and V is electron-

phonon coupling interaction parameter and is Boltzmann constant.

Density of state is the product of the electronic density of state N (0) and the attractive
electron-phonon interaction V. This is the crucial factor which decides how much the
energy is lowered and how strong is the binding between the bound pair. And that is also,
there is why when V is much large, the electron phonon coupling is strong; electrical
resistivity increase and a material become poor conductor. The BCS theory confirms the
existence of energy gap 2 in the excitation spectrum of SC. As expressed for the gap at
absolute zero similar to (2.20a), is predicted by the term as [28]

( ) ( ) (2.21)

14
with ( )

According to classical physics, part of the resistivity of a metal is due to collisions

between free electrons and thermally displaced ions of the metal lattice, and part is due to
scattering of electrons from impurities or defects in the metal lattice. This classical model
could never explain the superconducting state, because the electrons in a material always
experience some collisions, and therefore resistivity can never be zero. Electron near the
FS will at sufficiently low temperature be attracted to one another by coupling the lattice
vibration, phonon (ball in SC) and from pair of electrons. The effect is a weak attractive
force between the two electrons (cooper pairs). It can be said that the attractive force
between two cooper electrons is an electron – lattice – electron interaction (phonon
mediated), where the crystal lattice serves as the mediator of the attractive force. The
electron of pair has equal and opposite momentum which one is with +k and other with –
k, one spin up state and the other spin down state, so that the total momentum is zero and
also total spin is zero [12, 20].

a)

Figure 2.4: a) an electron flies a way polarizing positive ions in its surrounding area to
create an attractive potential for a second electron following the first electron. b) The
electron of pair has equal and opposite magnitude momentum and one spin up and other
spin down state [20].
Based on BCS theory, SCs are categorized into two; namely conventional and
unconventional SCs. Conventional SCs are those SCs that can be fully explained with the
BCS theory or related theories. According to BCs theory, conventional SCs are obtained
below 30K (TC) whereas unconventional SCs are the SCs which are failed to be

15
explained using such theories and their Tc is above 30K. This criterion is important, as
the BCS theory is explaining the properties of conventional SCs since 1957, but on the
other hand there have been no satisfactory theory to explain fully unconventional SCs. In
most of cases type I SCs are conventional, but there are several exceptions as niobium,
which is both conventional and II [29].
From a view point of quantum physics, the vibrations might be mathematically described
by vibration quantum (phonon) and the pairing is mediated through the exchanged of
phonons. The pairing interaction between two different electrons in states ⃗ and ⃗⃗⃗⃗⃗
near the FS leads to creation of cooper pairs. These pair breaks and forms as the electrons
exchange phonons, so their overall momentum is conserved in time. It can be pointed out
that all cooper pairs created one coherence state (at T=0), which can be expressed by one
wave – function having quasi – macroscopic behavior.

Let us assume an attractive potential ⃗ ⃗⃗⃗⃗ as the Fourier transformation of coulomb

electrostatic force real space at the temperature of . The BCS Hamiltonian of
such a physical system is normally represented by a relation

∑⃗ ⃗⃗⃗⃗⃗ ∑⃗ ⃗ ⃗⃗ ⃗⃗ ∑⃗ ⃗⃗⃗⃗⃗ (2.22)

where symbolizes the kinetic energy of electrons, which is k – state dependent and

defined by a relation = . Here, symbolizes the probability amplitude of finding

an electron in the state above the FS, and represents the probability amplitude of
finding an electron under the Fermi surface. Therefore the probability of finding an
electron above or under is or , and we find that + =1. When the
temperature decreases below critical temperature, cooper is formed and condensate in the
sense that they are all going to the same quantum state known as the Bosen – Einstein
condensate. On heating a SC to its critical temperature, the Sc is destroyed, the energy
gap vanishes and the conductor reverts back to its normal conducting state. For =0 and
the N (0) V << 1 [28], for the BCS theory equation (2.20a) and (2.20b) can be written as

16
 ( )
KBTC= ( ) (2.23a)

( )
( )
(2.23b)

where N(o)V is the coupling constant.

This equation most interesting revels that the higher V, the higher is like hood for
concerned metal or alloys to become SC on cooling when Tc value is known, it is
possible to evaluate N(o)V which is regarded as superconducting coupling constant.

In the BCS theory the relation between the value of the TC and energy gap between the
BCS ground state and the first excited state is derived as

( )=2ħ ( ) =1.75KB (2.24)

In this relation, KB denotes the Boltzmann constant. The temperature depends of was
calculated to be approximately

( ) ( )√ ( ( ) ) (2.25)

This function is in good agreement with experimental observation for many conventional
SCs. It was pointed out that for easier calculation, this equation (2.20) can be
approximated near a Tc [30] as

( ) 1.74 ( ) (√ ) (2.26)

2.3. Types of superconductors

The superconducting state can be destroyed by an external magnetic field; the field Hc is
called thermodynamic critical field. Depending on their physical properties (according
the different behavior under magnetic field at the transition from the superconducting to
the normal state), SCs are categorized into two, namely type-I and type-II [19].

17
2.3.1. Type – I superconductor

A superconductor can be type – I, meaning it has a single critical field, above which all
Sc is lost and below which the magnetic field is completely expelled from the SC or if
their phase transition is of first order. If the magnetic field H is below critical field (Hc),
the material is in the Sc; but as soon as the magnetic field is above Hc, it immediately
transits in the normal state (there is a single value of the critical field Hc at which the
transition from superconducting to normal behavior is abrupt called soft SC), as shown in
figure 2.5(a). Examples: Mercury, Lead and Tin [19, 26].

For type – I SCs, the magnetic field H remains zero until the sample exceeds the critical
field Hc. Most elemental SCs are type – I SCs and exhibits low critical fields and a simple
magnetization curve (see figure 2.5a). Pure specimens of many materials exhibit this
behavior. Al, Sn, Hg, Zn are examples of type – I SCs But copper, silver and gold, three
of the best metallic conductors, do not rank among the superconductive elements. Type –
I SCs always have positive surface energy, thus allowing for magnetic field lines to
penetrate the material [19, 26].

2.3.2. Type – II superconductors

Type-II superconductor, meaning it has two critical fields, between which it allows
partial penetration of the magnetic field through isolated points (the lower critical field
Hc1 and the upper critical field Hc2 or there is a lower critical field HC1 at which transition
begins and an upper critical field HC2 at which transition is completed) or if their phase
transition is of second order. These points are called vortices. Examples: Niobium and
vanadium. Below Hc1, the SC is in a pure Sc state, the same as a type – I SC in a
magnetic field below Hc, which is called the Meissner state. But between Hc1 and Hc2,
magnetic flux from external fields is no longer completely expelled, and the SC is in a
mixed state. Above Hc2, the SC is completely destroyed, and the material exists in a
normal state, as shown in figure 2.4(b). The magnetic field H remains zero only for
relatively small magnetic fields (H < Hc1). Then above this critical value (Hc1), magnetic
flux enters the SC in the form of vortices‟s (see figure 2.4b) [19, 26].

18
Type–II SC have negative surface energy when the field is larger than H c1, thus allowing
for magnetic field lines to penetrate the material. As the magnetic field increases, the
density of vortices increases until the upper critical field Hc2 is reached where vortex are
overlap with one another, and the material becomes a normal metal (above Hc2 the Sc is
completely destroyed, and the material exists in a normal state) [24]. Type-II SCs are
called “hard” SCs [23].

Figure 2.5: Phase diagrams for type-I (a) and type-II (b) superconductors [20].

Ginzburg-Landau theory (G-L theory) is a very successful mathematical theory used to

model Sc. G-L theory is based on Landau‟s previously-established theory of second-order
phase transitions [19]. We can also differentiate type SCs using the Ginzburg – Landua

parameter. k where is penetration depth and ξ is coherence length. It has been

shown that type-I SCs are those with k < , and type-II SCs those with [24].
√ √

2.4. Iron based superconductors

The first material of iron based superconductors (FebSC) to show Sc are LaOFeP
reported in 2006, whose Tc is 7K [31] but it did not attract wide spread attentions at that
time because of its low SC transition temperature. After two years, the discovery of T c =
26K Sc in fluorine doped LaFeAsO [32] and consequently the findings of other FebSCs

19
with an even higher transition temperature which suggest that the FebSCs are high
temperature superconducting material. Here an experimental approach was proposed to
investigate the order parameter symmetry of unconventional multiband SCs, which is
based on a disorder-induced change from sign-reversed (s ) to sign-preserved (s++)
symmetry [33, 34]. We present an investigation of a Ba(Fe0.9Co0.1)2As2 thin film by THz
spectroscopy and stepwise proton irradiation [35]. With increase of the irradiation, the
low-energy superconducting gap first vanishes but recovers at higher irradiation doses.
The behavior is explained by the change from sign-reversed (s ) to sign-preserved (s++)
symmetry and consequently by s symmetry in the pristine sample.

In 2008, discover of FebSCs by Hosono represent the foundation of a new era in the field
of Sc replacing copper era by Iron era. Hideo Hosono and his colleagues announced the
first non-Cuprate HTSc in the electron – doped LaOFeAs at 26k, has attracted great
attention worldwide. All FebSC compounds share similar electronic band structure in
which the electronic states at the Fermi level are occupied predominantly by the Fe 3d
electrons. The FebSC phase diagrams with distinct areas of the AFM ordered SDW and
Sc phases [36].

2.5. The 122 FebSCs family and physical properties of BaFe2As2

The 122 FebSC families have general form AFe2As2. This family consists of a variety of
different compounds with wide ranges of doping in both hole and electron sides that form
a rich phase diagram where the Sc and magnetism compete or coexist thus make them
still attractive to be studied. The most studied compounds are the hole doped Ba1-
xkxFe2As2 with Tc= 38k and the electron doped Ba(Fe1-xCox)2As2 of with Tc=24k.
BaFe2As2 has the iron arsenic slabs separated by a layer of Ba+ cations, with ThCr2Si2-
type structure [37].

20
Figure 2.6: The lattice structure of 122 BaFe2As2 [38].

This 122 FebSC family has a general form AFe2An2 where A=Ca, Ba, and An = As, P,
Se. The 122 FebSC family consists of a variety of different compounds with wide ranges
of doping in both hole and electron sides [38] that form a rich phase diagram where the
Sc and magnetism compete or coexist. The most studied compounds are the hole doped
Ba1−xKxFe2As2 (KBa122) with Tc=38K [39] and the electron doped Ba(Fe1−xCox)2As2
(Co-Ba122) of 24K Tc [40, 41]. Both share the same parent compound, BaFe2As2
(Ba122), which is a compensated metal, that is the total volume of its three-hole FSs is
equal to the total volume of two electron FS [42, 43]. The parent Ba122 goes into
magnetically ordered phase below 140K [44] and never superconduct.

There is also an interesting case of isovalent doping, BaFe2(As1−xPx)2 with Tc= 30K [37]
with similar phase diagram of other doped Ba122 compounds. To this, one can add a
number of similar compounds like Ba1−xNaxFe2As2 with Tc=34K [45, 46],
Ca1−xNaxFe2As2 of Tc=20 K [47], CaFe2As2 of Tm=170K and Tc greater than 10K under
pressure [48], EuFe2(As1−xPx)2 with Tc=26 K [49]. The ARPES spectra well represent the
bulk electronic structure of this family, at least, for the hole doped 122 systems, where
the superconducting gap is routinely observed [31, 32] and is in a good agreement with
the bulk probes [50, 51].

21
Initial work on chemical substitution in BaFe2As2 focused on the hole-doped material
Ba1−xKxFe2As2 [52]. In this case, it has been established that the structural/magnetic
transition is totally suppressed for K concentrations above x = 0.4 [53], whereas Sc
appears for a wide range of concentrations from x = 0.3 to 1 [52]. It has also been shown
that Co-substitution (i.e. Ba(Fe1−xCox)2As2) also suppresses the magnetic and structural
transitions, eventually leading to Sc [54]. Cobalt has neither a large vapor pressure nor
attacks the quartz tubing used to encapsulate the growths. Superconductivity appears for
Co concentrations 0.025 < x < 0.18, with a maximum Tc for a Co concentration of x
0.06, coincident with the concentration at which the structural/magnetic phase transitions
are suppressed below Tc.

According to their formulas, FebSCs are often classified as 1111, 122, 111, 11, and 245
families of FebSC. To date, all family exhibit a clear evidence of superconductivity, with
the highest transition temperatures up to 55K–56K in the 1111 family, [52]. FebSCs have
been extended to a large variety of materials including four proto typical families of
FebScs, "1111" system RFeAsO (R=the rare earth element) which are LaFeAsO [53],
SmFeAsO [54] etc., "122" type BaFe2As2 [55], LaFe2As2 [56], SrFe2As2 [57] or
CaFe2As2 [58], "111" type, NaFeAs, LiFeAs and "11" type TeFe, SeFe.

The most studied and probably the largest numbers of SCs are in the 122 family which
are made up of combinations of metallic alkaline earth (Ba, K, Ca, S, . . .) - transition
metal (Fe, Co, Ni…)-pnictogen (As, P). More than 450 compounds are possible within
these combinations [59].

2.6. Crystal and electronic structure of 122 family iron based

superconductors.

The crystal structures of the 122 family of iron pnictide are discussed briefly below [60].

22
Figure 2.7: Schematic crystal structure of: (a) LaFeAsO, (b) BaFe2As2 (c) LiFeAs

(d) FeSe

The ternary iron arsenide BaFe2As2, with the tetragonal ThCr2Si2 -type structure space
group (space group I4/nmm) contains practically identical layers of edge-sharing FeAs4/4
tetrahedra, but they are separated by barium atoms instead of LaO sheets (as shown in
figure 2.7) [60]. The transition temperature for some different compounds of iron pnictide
is shown in the table 1.

23
Table 1: Summary of the maximum transition temperatures at ambient pressure for
various iron based superconductors [60].

Material (Iron compounds) doped 122 Maximum transition temperature (Tc) in

Family K
Sr(Fe1-xPdx)2As2 9
Sr(Fe1-xNix)2As2 10
Sr(Fe1-xRux)2As2 13.5
Ca(Fe1-xCox)2As2 17
Ba(Fe1-xPdx)2As2 19
Ba(Fe1-xNix)2As2 20
Ba(Fe1-xRux)2As2 21
Sr(Fe1-xRhx)2As2 22
Sr(Fe1-xIrx)2As2 22
Ba(Fe1-xCox)2As2 22 – 24
Ba1-xRbxFe2As2 23
Ba(Fe1-xRhx)2As2 25
Eu1-xKxFe2As2 32
Eu1-xNaxFe2As2 35
K1-xSrxFe2As2 36
Cs1-xSrxFe2As2 37
Ba1-xKxFe2As2 38

2.7. Phase diagram of Ba(Fe1-xCox) 2As2)

An important step to understand Sc in Fe-pnictide system is the determination of the

phase diagram as a function of doping [52]. A typical phase diagram of an FebSC in the
(T, x) plane, where x upon doping, the SDW order parameter is suppressed and shows a
metallic AFM order, also called SDW, below TN at x= 0 [54]. As we see from the phase
diagram (figure 2.8), in the range 0.03<x<0.125 we see the purely super conducting
phase represented with yellow, in green area Sc and AFM coexist and the dark blue line
represent the transition between orthorhombic and tetragonal structure. The decrease in
TN with

24
Figure 2.8: Temperature verses cobalt concentration and electron doped barium iron
arsenide phase diagram [56, 57].

The decrease in TN with increasing doping can partly be explained by the fact that Co2+
has a smaller magnetic moment than Fe2+ thus decreasing the molecular field. From the
phase diagram we can predict the properties of the width the doping x=0.0495 [57].

The crystal grown with the lowest doping levels are the X=0.03 doping samples. These is
called under doping crystals, which have a SDW and structural transition, only now they
are shifted to low temperature and separated by almost 10k [58]. Sc emerges with
maximum TC(x) near the point where TC(x) exceeds TN(x) (an “optimal doping‟‟) [59].
The gap symmetry at optimal doping is most likely sign reversal, but the structure of the
s-wave gap varies from one material to another; the gap is node less in Ba(Fe1-xCox)2As2
[61]. The first crystals grown our own crystal grower Dr.Y. Hang, had anomial cobalt
doping of x=0.07. The over doping has higher cobalt concentration than the optimally
doped crystals. The shape of the structure depends on the doping level [62].

The highest Tc [63] is achieved when magnetism is completely destroyed or at least

strongly hindered; this can usually be obtained by electron- or hole-doping, but in some
cases Sc can also emerge by applying pressure. At room pressure, Sc can be induced (or
enhanced) by three different kinds of doping:

25
1) Electron doping: an increase in the negative charge in the FeAs layers is obtained for
example in the Ba(Fe1-xCox) 2As2, REFeAs (O1-xFx) and LaFeAsO1-xHx systems.

2) Hole doping: the positive charge in the FeAs layer is increased in the Ba(Fe1-xKx) 2As2,
(La1-xSrx) FeAsO systems.

3) Isovalent doping: by replacing Fe with Ru in the 122 system Such a Ba (Fe1-xRux) 2As2
systems.

At strong hole doping, electron FSs disappear and only hole FSs are present [64]. These
electronic structures agree well with theoretical calculations [65], which is another
argument to treat FebSCs as itinerant fermionic systems. The measured FS reflects the
actual crystal structure of FebSCs in which there are two nonequivalent positions of a
FebSCs above and below an iron plane, and, as a result, there are two Fe atoms (called
folded BZ) in the unit cell.

2.8. Electron doped in barium iron arsenide (BaFe2As2)

Iron is one of the most abundant metals on the surface of the earth and has been known as
a useful element since aptly named Iron age. However, it was not until recently that when
combined with element from the group five and group six of the periodic table (named
respectively the pnictogen after the Greek verb for choking and chalcogen meaning ore
formers). Sc can be recovered by substituting the A ions by some impurity electrons or
holes. The compound was doped by the chemical substitution of A2+ ions by potassium
ions (K+), while electrons are doped by the replacement of divalent iron atoms with
trivalent cobalt (Co) or tetravalent nickel (Ni) ions Tc can be enhanced by applying
pressure on doped or undoped compounds. The differences between the two systems
regarding structural and magnetic transition are, in oxypnictide both the structural and
magnetic transition occurs at different temperature. The magnetic transition occurs
10K to 20K lowers than the structural transition. While in AFe2As2 compounds it is
found coupled and for same transition temperature [66]. The second class (AFe2As2 with
A block as the charge reservoir and A may represent (Sr, Ba, Ca or in general alkali and
alkaline earth metals) and A may be substituted doping one impurities.

26
Iron is ferromagnetic transitional metal whose electronic configuration is Fe: 3d64s2 [67].
The iron 3d electrons are responsible for the low lying electronic structure [68] and these
3d electrons are the conduction electrons [69]. The study for the FebSc is one of
particular interest because Fe2+ ions have magnetic moments which are generally
believed to be detrimental to Sc, and opens a new direction for exploring new SCs [70].
Compare to Fe2+ ion, Co2+ (3d7) has one more 3d electron, but Ni2+ ion (3d8) has two
more 3d electrons. Then it is expected that each Ni dopant induces two extra itinerant
electrons while each Co dopant only induces one extra itinerant electron. Actually, both
Ni doped and Co doped systems show maximum Tc at the same effective doping level. A
discovery of Sc in BaFe2As2 under electron doping, by a substitution of Fe atoms by Co
forming Ba(Fe1-xCox)2As2 has been constructed at low Cobalt concentrations.

Barium has the electron configuration [Xe] 6s2 which favor the Ba2+ state, arsenic with
the electron configuration [Ar]3d104s24p favors As3-, which means Iron is in the Fe2+ state
with the electron configuration [Ar]3d6 and gives 6 electrons to the conducting band.
There are several ways to dope BaFe2As2. In Hole doping you can replace Ba2+ with K+
which gives away one less electron/creates an extra hole. When we dope BaFe2As2 with
cobalt you replace the Fe2+ ion with the electron configuration [Ar] 3d7 which has an
extra conducting electron in the d-shell. The extra electron (holes) increase the possibility
for the electrons to pair up and superconductivity can emerge [71].

2.9. Magnetic order in iron based superconductors

The nature of magnetism in FebSC compound is an intensively studied topic, due to its
interplay with Sc and the possible relation with the pairing mechanism. As Neutron
scattering experiments [72] illustrated most FebSC materials share an AFM long range
order in the parent compounds with two inter penetrated Neel spin lattices such that AFM
stripes form along one direction with ferromagnetic stripes along the perpendicular
direction. It is a major opinion that this magnetic state is a SDW state arising from the
particle hole instability due to nesting, which is itinerant in nature [73].

One of the ways of achieving Sc in FebSC materials is via electron/hole doping. In the
undoped state, the 122 compound exhibits simultaneous structural and magnetic phase

27
transitions below 140K, changing from the high temperature paramagnetic tetragonal
phase to the low temperature orthorhombic phase with the collinear AFM structure. On
electron doping on 122 FebSC family the static AFM order is suppressed and Sc emerges
[39]. Neutron diffraction experiments on Co-Ba122 [74] confirm that the commensurate
AFM order appears below the structural transition temperature and Sc coexists with AFM
order for 0.06 ≤ x ≤ 0.102.

Neutron scattering and other experiments on electron doped 122 FebSCs [75] confirmed
that commensurate long range AFM coexist with SC in under doped region. In addition,
for electron doped Ba122 samples near optimal SC, it has been shown that the
commensurate static AFM order changes into transversely incommensurate short range
AFM order that coexists and competes with Sc [76, 77].

2.10. Spin density wave in iron based superconductors

Spin density wave (SDW) are low-energy order states of solids, which occurs at low
temperature in anisotropic, low-dimension materials or in metals those have high
densities of states at the Fermi level N (EF). Other low temperature ground states that
occur in such materials are superconductivity, FM and AFM. In iron based the SDW
ground state is obtained from FS nesting. There is a strong evidence for microscopic
coexistence coming from the same Fe 3d electrons in 122 families, like Co-Ba122 which
has excellent sample homogeneity [78].

When we come to the width of the coexistence for the Ba122 series, the phase overlap is
large because the optimal doping level for Sc is located at the phase boundary between
the AFM and SC phases [79]. A development of SDW is accompanied by the slight
distortion from the tetragonal to the orthorhombic unit cell. Therefore, one can present a
model to study the coexistence of Sc and AFM, that in corporate two competing physical
processes involving electron-hole AFM like of opposite spins with a net moment
difference (Q) between the conjugates and electron-electron (superconducting) pairing of
opposite spins with total momentum zero [80].

28
2.11. Superconductivity and magnetism

Magnetic field plays an important role in the field of Sc. According to the way SCs
behave in an applied magnetic field can be classified as type – I or type – II SCs. The
application of strong magnetic field to SCs destroys its Sc. For a type – I SC, there is one
small critical applied magnetic field above which the SC becomes normal metal. They
expel the magnetic field if it is less than the critical field. Hence type – I SCs exhibit
complete Meissner effect [81]. The Tc in the materials decreases with increasing of
applied magnetic field, and the magnitude of the Hc varies with temperature [82].

The other type of SC is type – II. It is characterized by two critical magnetic fields,
designated by Bc1 and Bc2. If the applied magnetic field is less than the lower critical
field Bc1, they superconduct perfectly as type – I and there will be perfect diamagnetism.
If the applied magnetic field exceeds the upper critical magnetic field it becomes normal
state [80]. Typically, magnetic fields destroy Sc because the energy they generate disturb
the close interaction between pairs of electrons that are a requirement for Sc. Once this
energy becomes greater than that which unites the two electrons, the electron pairs break
apart and Sc is suppressed [83].

It would be very interesting to see whether or not such coexistence is possible, as it may
give some clues about whether fluctuation of magnetism, which is demonstrated by three
forms of ordered magnetism, namely the FM, AFM and ferrimagnetism can lead to
emergence of Sc. In a ferromagnetic material like magnetite, the neighboring magnetic
moments (caused by the electron spin of atoms or molecules) within a magnetic domain
(a magnetism unit) align along the same direction. In a material exhibiting AFM,
however, neighboring units of magnetic moments align against each other. A compound
exhibiting AFM order cannot be magnetized, as the net magnetic moment of the bulk
material is zero. However, an internal magnetic field can be produced inside an AFM
material [84, 85].

29
 CHAPTER THREE
3. Methodology

3.1. Free energy

Mean free energy [86] could be used to diagonalize the Hamiltonian and to obtain gap
equations. Based on the low temperature recent experimental and theoretical evidences
on the electronic and magnetic properties of electron doped (cobalt doped) barium iron
arsenide ( ) , we develop a model Hamiltonian. We also drive the
theoretical expression for the source of the center of BCS result such as superconducting
transition critical temperature ( ), superconducting order parameter( ( )), magnetic
transition temperature ( ) and magnetic order parameter ( ( )) in particular, a
system of itinerant electrons has been considered. The gap parameter is used to study the
correlation between the two parameters (superconducting order parameter ( ( )) and
magnetic order parameter( ( )). And we study the electronic structure of different
state (normal, magnetic and superconducting) for different orbitals and gap symmetries
based on our model calculations.

In this chapter, we have tried to get expression for critical temperature Tc using mean
field mechanism on the generalized BCS Hamiltonian of two band SCs with zero
momentum pairing case.

3.2. Mean field Hamiltonian

The model Hamiltonian for p-wave ferromagnetic SC is similar to the s-wave

superconductor. Let‟s start from the generalized BCS Hamiltonian of two band (one up
pairing the other down pairing) ferromagnetic SC of the form

̂= ̂ + ̂

∑ (k) ̂ ̂ ∑ (k,k') ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ (3.1)

To arrive at the effective mean field Hamiltonian one needs to perform a mean field
transformation on the second term in ( ) This term is composed of four fermion

30
interaction which is difficult to work with, and it would be convenient to make it
quadratic in the fermion operator. To do this we can take two of this operators and define

̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ (̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ) (3.2a)

and ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ (̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ) (3.2b)

which is obviously true and can be interpreted as for example the operator ̂ ̂
equal to its average plus the fluctuation about its average, denoted by the term in
parentheses. Up on multiplication of ( ) with ( ), terms that are
quadratic in fluctuation can be dropped because they can be considered as small,
especially for systems with many particles as in SCs [87]. Hence,

̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂

̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ (3.3)

Substituting ( ) in ( ) the Hamiltonian will become

̂ ∑ (k) ̂ ̂ ∑ (k,k') ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂

∑ (K,k') ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂

∑ (k,k')( ̂ ̂ ) ̂ ̂ (3.4)

The full effective Hamiltonian will be

̂ ∑ (k) ̂ ̂ ∑ ( ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ )

| |
∑ (3.5a)
( )

where ∑ (k,k') ̂ ̂ (3.5b)

and ∑ (k,k') ̂ ̂ (3.5c)

31
are the superconductivity order parameter, or energy gaps. This mean field theory
transformation is used very often in many-body problems, especially in SCs. Here the
energy gap is assumed momentum (k) dependent.

3.3. The Mean field approximation

We consider spins [88] on a square lattice where L is the number of lattice sites
in each direction. Each spin can take only two possible values (spin up) and
(spin down). Each spin interacts only with its 4 neighbors and also with a
magnetic field H. The Ising model in two dimensions is given by the energy

* + ∑〈 〉 ∑ (3.6)

The system is assumed to be in equilibrium with a heat bath with temperature T. Thermal
equilibrium of the Ising model is described by the canonical ensemble. The probability of
finding the Ising model in a configuration { } is given by Boltzmann distribution

* +
* + (3.7a)

The partition function is given by

* + * +
∑* + ∑ ∑ (3.7b)

The magnetization M in a configuration { } is the order parameter of the system.

It is defined by

∑ (3.8a)

The average of M is given by

〈 〉 ∑ 〈 〉 (3.8b)

The above 〈 〉 〈 〉 since all spins are equivalent. We have

32
 〈 〉 (3.8c)

In order to compute < M > we need to compute Z. In this section we use the mean field
approximation. First, we rewrite the energy * + in the form

* + ( ∑〈 〉 ) ∑ =∑ ∑ (3.9a)

The effective magnetic field is given by

∑ ( ) () (3.9b)

The index ( ) runs over the four nearest neighbors of the spin . In the mean field
approximation we replace the spins () by their thermal average < s >. We obtain

〈 〉 (3.10a)

where

In other words,

* + ( 〈 〉) ∑ ∑ (3.10b)

(∑ ) =( ) = (3.10c)

The free energy and magnetization are then given by

= (( )) (3.11a)

〈 〉 〈 〉 ( ( )) (3.11b)

3.4. The Model of Hamiltonian

As specified very early Sc is a phenomenon that can be interpreted by quantum

mechanics. Therefore, we will be forced to develop Hamiltonian to study the coexistence

33
between Sc and magnetism in electron doped BaFe2As2 SC. The direct BCS Hamiltonian
is effective even for unconventional SCs [4]. Since the electron phonon coupling is too
weak in FebSCs to produce high transition temperature as are observed experimentally,
our equation of Hamiltonian needs some modification for unconventional
superconductors‟ case. Thus, in order to study Ba(Fe1−xCox)2As2 SC theoretically in
general and particularly to find expressions for transition temperature and SDW we need
a system of electrons pockets and hole pockets [89].

The model of the Hamiltonian for our system could be expressed as

̂= ̂ + ̂ + ̂

∑ (k) ̂ ̂ ∑ (k) ̂ ̂

∑ (̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ )

∑ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ (3.12)

Where ̂ = ∑ (k) ̂ ̂ ∑ (k) ̂ ̂ is the kinetic energies at the Fermi

surface

̂= ∑ (̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ) is
superconducting interaction between electron-electron

̂ ∑ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ is magnetic spin
interaction between hole-electron.

In the model Hamiltonian, the first two terms successive ( ̂ ) describe the itinerant
electrons forming the hole and electron Fermi pockets near the Fermi energy (EF). So
that, these electrons are responsible for the third ( ̂ ) pair interaction (singlet
superconducting channel) and the last ( ̂ ) magnetic interactions. The operator ̂ and ̂
are the operators for hole at (0, 0) and electron bands at ( ) respectively, and the

34
respective dispersions near the two pockets (k) and (k). For our case, we use the two
pure states (pure superconducting state and pure magnetic state).

3.5. Pure superconducting state

In most FebSC systems, Sc emerges upon electron or hole doping, or can be induced by
pressure or by isovalent doping. This means that iron based SCs systems,
superconducting induced by electron or hole doping, or can be induced by pressure or
isovalent doping. Therefore, the advanced doping method using cobalt in BaFe2As2
(Ba122) induced Sc. Now, it is necessary to study the superconducting state by ignoring
the last term ( ̂ ) from equation (3.12) which means B = 0 for pure Sc or perfect
diamagnetic, so that the Hamiltonian could be written as

̂ ̂ ̂

̂ ∑ (k) ̂ ̂ ∑ (k) ̂ ̂

∑ (̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ̂ ) (3.13)

This can be defined as the pure region of the phase diagram Ba(Fe1-xCox)2As2 [56, 57],
since holes and electrons pockets are considered here. To decouple Hamiltonian, we use
the mean field approximation, and thus the mean field Hamiltonian of superconducting
state is expressed as

∑ (k) ̂ ̂ ∑ (k) ̂ ̂

∑ (k)( ̂ ̂ h.c) ∑ (k)( ̂ ̂ h.c) (3.14)

where is Hermitian conjugates, ̂ ̂ and ̂ ̂ represents the occupation

number of the band electronic states of spin σ and -σ electrons of hole and electrons
respectively. The mean fields are:

( ) ∑ 〈̂ ̂ 〉 (3.15a)

35
And ( ) ∑ 〈̂ ̂ 〉 (3.15b)

where 〈 ̂ ̂ 〉 and 〈 ̂ ̂ 〉 are the expectation value (amplitude) of the hole and
electron pocket near FS respectively.

3.6. Free energy in superconductivity and computing the SDW gap equation

Free energy of a certain thermodynamic system is a function from which other

thermodynamic quantities like entropy, energy gap functions, etc. can be derived.
Furthermore, the minimum of the Free energy corresponds to the equilibrium state of the
thermodynamic system. For example, in superconducting state the minimum of the Free

energy defined as , has free energy and SC order parameter [90]. From which we

can compute the equation for SC order parameter. For our superconducting system the
diagonal form of the mean-field Hamiltonian with inclusion of the interaction part is

( ) ( )
∑ ( ) ∑ ( ) (3.16)

( ) ( )
where is vanished when is large.

From ( ) the free energy of the non-interacting quasi-particles is defined as

( ) (3.17a)

From equation (3.17a), the free energy is calculated as

( ) ( ) ( )
∑ ( ( )) (3.17b)

In equation (3.16), ( ) ( ) are the quasi particle energies. The electron

operators are expressed in terms of the quasi particle operator. The two gap parameter
yields the following SC gap equations.

( ) ( )
( ) ∑ ( ) (3.18a)
( )

36
 ( ) ( )
And ( ) ∑ ( ) (3.18b)
( )

For our purpose and following BCS theory, it sufficient to use the simple attractive
interactive interaction between the electrons. we considered in our solution of cooper
pairing problem in the following way.

| ( )|
={ (3.19)

This an isotropic interaction, independent of momentum.

For the gap ( )= ( ) = , we have = - v and substituting this into (3.19),

gives

( ( )⁄ )
1=v∑ (3.20)
( )

where and KB is the Boltzmann‟s constant.

3.7. Calculating critical transitional temperature ( ) and superconducting

order parameter ( )

The critical (superconducting) temperature Tc of a superconductor is the temperature

above which it comes to the normal state and at this point the energy gap is zero. To
determine Tc, we consider the density of state ( ) near the FS. Assuming that the Fermi
level is not located close to energies where ( ) has a rapid variation. We may then
simply replace ( ) with ( ) which is density of state at Fermi-level when all energies
are measured dimensional coupling constant ( ) , we get

( )
1 = N(0)V ∫ tanh( )
( )

√( ) | |
( )

( ) ∫
√( ) | |

37
 √( ) | |
( )

( ) ∫ (3.21)
√( ) | |

For the BCS theory, we can drive an expression for the critical temperature. At T =T c ,
the gap is (Tc)= 0. Then, replacing T in equation (3.21) with Tc and setting (T) = 0
yields an equation with respect to Tc, we obtain

√( ) | |
( )

( )
∫ √( ) | |

∫ (3.22)

√( ) | |
using x= .

To evaluate the integral, we apply integration by parts and use the fact >> .

( ) ( )
∫ ( ) ( ))| ∫

( ) ( ) ( )

( ) (3.23a)

Hence, ( ), by taking natural logarithm, we get

(3.23b)

38
where (∑ ( )) is the Euler Maschronic constant [4].

Using this value in ( ) gives

(3.24)

From this expression we can conclude that, the critical temperature ( ) is directly
proportional to the Debye frequency ( ), it depends on the density of state ( ) and
interaction strengths. As the interaction becomes weaker and weaker, ) goes down or
decreases.

Assuming that the Fermi level is not located close to energies where ( )a rapid
variation has. We may then simply replace ( ) with ( ) which is density of state at
Fermi-level when all energies are measured dimensional coupling constant ( ) ,
from ( ) and ( ) we get

( )
1 = N(0)V ∫ tanh( )
( )

√( ) | |
( )

( ) ∫
√( ) | |

√( ) | |
( )

( ) ∫ (3.25)
√( ) | |

Let us study the limiting behaviors at . Since ( ) , we have

∫ √( )
(3.26)

where we denoted ( ). Evaluation of the integral is straight forward and gives

39
 ( ) (3.27)

In most cases, is of the order of a few milli-electron volt ( ) much smaller than
, which is of the order of a few hundreds of . Hence, we can expand the
( ) for large x to obtain

( ) (3.28a)

Hence, ( ) ( ), we obtain

( ) (3.28b)

Taking the natural logarithm in both sides of ( ) yields

(3.28c)

Both Tc and ( ) depends sensitively on the coupling constant, and that both are
function of with an essential singularity as .

Taking the ratio of equation (3.28c) to equation (3.24), we get

( )
(3.29)

Temperature dependence of energy gap, near Tc, we get

( )
( ) (3.30)
( )

Plugging equation (3.29) into (3.30), we obtain

40
 ( ) ( )

( ) √ (3.31)

This expression shows that the superconducting order parameter Varies with temperature
when the magnetic order parameter is zero.

3.8. Pure magnetic state

The model Hamiltonian equation (3.12) can yield a Spin density wave phase for zero
superconducting interaction. In order to induce Spin density wave order with ordering
momentum at the corners of the Brillion zone, Q= (0, ±π) the interaction
and then the mean-field Hamiltonian is

∑ ( ) ∑ ( )

∑ ( )( ) (3.32a)

We note that (3.19) is obtained after introducing the mean field

( ) ∑ ̂ (3.32b)

3.9. Calculating magnetic transition temperature ( ) and magnetic order

parameter ( )

In magnetic SDW [4] state the minimum of the Free energy defined as has free

energy and SDW order parameter, from which we can compute the equation for SDW
order parameter. For pure SDW state the diagonal form of the mean-field Hamiltonian
with inclusion of the interaction part could be

( )
∑ ( ) ∑ ( ) (3.33)

41
where ( ) and ( ) are the quasi particles energies. Using the Free energy equations
for non-interacting particles and minimizing the Free energy, we can calculate the SDW
gap equation

( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ∑ * ( ) ( )+ (3.34)
( ) ( )

These pairing interaction sets of SDW gaps hole and electron pockets are equal in
magnitude of but opposite signs due to the presences of spin fluctuation. Assume

( ) ( ) (3.35)

Inserting equation (3.34) into equation (3.35), yields

( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ∑ * ( ) ( )+ (3.36)
( )

( ) function is an odd function so that,

( ) ( ) and the summation changes into integral and ( ) is the density

of state.

( )
( ) ∫ * ( )+ (3.37a)
( )

where ∑ and hence = N(0)V

√ ( ) ( )
∫ * ( )+ (3.37b)
√ ( ) ( )

As T Tm, . Then,

( )
∫ (3.37c)

42
To estimate this integral, we perform integration by part and use the fact that
. Then equation (3.37c) becomes

( ) ( )
∫ ( ( ) ( )| ∫

( ) ( ) ( )

( ) (3.38a)

Hence, ( ) (3.38b)

Taking natural logarithm of ( ) results

(3.39)

where (∑ ( ) ) is the Euler Maschronic constant [4].

This equation may be solved to give

(3.40)

Know, we use Fourier Laplace transformation to find the magnetic order parameter ( )
from equation (3.17c).

(√ ( ) ( )
∫ * ( )+ ∫ ∑
√ ( ) ( ) ( )

43
 =∫ ∑ ∫ ∑
( ) (( ) )

(√ ( ) ( )
=∫ * ( )+
√ ( ) ( )

∫ ∑ (3.41)
(( ) )

Hence ∑ (( ) )
∑ ( )
(3.42)

where

then equation (3.41) is reduced to

(√ ( ) ( )
∫ * ( )+
√ ( ) ( )

(√ ( ) ( )
=∫ * ( )+ ∫ ∑ d (3.42)
√ ( ) ( )
( )

An integral by part of the first integral of equation (3.42) yields

∑ ( ) (3.43)
(( ) )

In similar way, the second integral of equation (3.42) can be integrated to give

∑ ∑ (( ) ∫ (3.44)
(( ) ) ) ( )

Using the law series and the Zeta function, equ.(3.44) becomes

( ) ( )
∑ (3.45)
(( ) )

Inserting equation (3.43) and (3.45) into equation (3.42), we obtain

44
 √ ( ) ( )
∫ * ( )+ ∫ ∑ d
√ ( ) ( )
( )

( ) ( )
( )

( ) ( ) (3.46)

( ) ( )
where ( ) (3.47)

Hence, ( )

From BCS the superconducting parameter ( ), when . Then from equation

(3.42), we obtain

( ) (3.48)

Taking the natural logarithm of ( )) and equating with ( ) the magnetic

temperature, , can be calculated as

( ) ( ) ( )

( ) ( ) ( )

( ) ( )

( ) ( ) (3.49a)

Using ( ( )) ( ) which implies

(( ))

45
 ( ) ( ) (3.49b)

Equating equation (3.49a) and (3.49b), we get

( ) ( )

( )( )

⁄
√ ( )

( ) √ (3.50)

This expression shows that the magnetic order parameter ( ) varies with temperature.

46
 CHAPTER FOUR
4. Results and discussion

In this chapter, our aim is to discuss about what we have done in chapter three of this
paper. In chapter three, we have used the model Hamiltonian and free energy formalism
to described the effect of temperature ( ) on superconducting order Parameter ( ) and
magnetic order parameter ( ) on AFM transition temperature ( ) in our system,
( ) superconductor. And also we obtained or derived the mathematical
expressions for superconducting transition (critical) temperature ( ), superconducting
order parameter ( ( ), magnetic order parameter ( ( ) and AFM transition
temperature ( ) theoretically.

Superconducting transition temperature (Tc) can be evaluate numerically as a

function of coupling strength(λ)by taking Debye frequency as a constant.
Using equ. (3.24), we can plot the superconducting transition temperature
(TC) versus coupling strength (λ).

Equation------(3.24)
10

9
Wd=10-3
Critecal temperature(K)

1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Coupling length( ) -15
x 10

Figure 4.1: Superconducting transition temperature (Tc) versus coupling

strength (λ) of ( )

From figure 4.1: by keeping the Debye frequency constant we have seen that,
as the coupling strength increases, the superconducting transition temperature
increases. The superconducting transition temperature has been expressed as a
function of coupling strength and Debye frequency. As a result it depends on
the coupling strength (λ) and frequency of Debye (ωD) Keeping the coupling

47
strength constant, the superconducting transition temperature increases
linearly as Debye frequency increases.

Equation-----(3.28c)
10

)
Superconducting order parameter(
9

1
0.5 1 1.5 2
Coupling length() -37
x 10

Figure 4.2: Superconducting parameter versus coupling length for

( )

From figure 4.2, by keeping the Debye frequency constant and doubling
equation 3.28c, we have seen that as superconducting order parameter
increases the coupling length also increases.

Equation--------(3.40)
10

7
Coupling length()

1
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Magnetic temperature(K) -37
x 10

From figure 4.3: by keeping the Debye frequency constant we have seen that, as the
coupling strength increases, the superconducting magnetic temperature decreases.

In cobalt doping the ( ) series the phase diagram as a function of Co

concentration represented by x is “bell-shaped” with ( ) and it presents a maximum of
24K for or from ( – ) [37, 60]. Using equation (3.31) and the value of
, we obtained the value of superconducting order parameter for our system or

48
 ( ) and we have plotted the phase diagram of ( ) versus ( ) as
shown in the figure 4.1 shown below depending on the values of ( ) and ( ) from
table 4.1.

Table 4.1: Numerical values of ( ) using equation (3.31).

T(K) 0 4 8 12 16 20 24

s(meV) 6.33787 5.78565 5.17486 4.48155 3.65915 2.58745 0

25
Eq (3.31)
Superconducting order parameter(meV)

SpinMagetic Ord
20
Normal

15

SC
10

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
-3
Temperature(K) x 10

Figure 4.4: Superconducting order parameter for pure ( ) superconductor

vs. superconducting transitional temperature.

As shown on figure 4.4: As the temperature T increases the superconducting order

parameter decreases and the graph of s versus T falls to zero or vanishes when the
temperature T is equals to Tc.

In similar way, from equation (3.40) and (3.50), we calculated the value of magnetic
order parameter ( ) by using or [66]. Based on this
value, we plotted figure 4.2 which is the phase diagram of magnetic order parameter (
versus ) as shown below.

49
Table 4.2: Numerical value of ( ) using equation (3.40)

T(K) 0 4 8 12 16 20 24

m(meV) 2.90486 3.39215 3.81773 4.20042 4.55105 4.87652 5.18159

Eq (3.50)
25

Magetic Ord par

Magnetic order parameter(meV)

20
Normal

15

SC
10

0
2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Temperature(K) x 10
-3

Figure 4.5: AFM order parameter for pure ( ) superconductor versus

Temperature.

As we observed from this graph, the magnetic order parameter is increasing as the
temperature increasing. This implies that, magnetic order parameter is directly
proportional to the magnetic transition temperature ( ).

Finally, by using equation (3.31) and (3.50), we integrate figure 4.4 and figure 4.5 to
compete the region where the superconducting order parameter and magnetic order
parameter are coexist as plotted in figure 4.3 shown below.

Table 4.3: Numerical values of temperature, ( ) and ( ).

T(K) 0 4 8 12 16 20 24
s(meV) 6.33787 5.78565 5.17486 4.48155 3.65915 2.58745 0
m(meV) 2.90486 3.39215 3.811773 4.20042 4.55105 4.87652 5.18159

By using this value, we plotted the phase diagram of our system ( ( ) )

which the and versus temperature as shown below.

50
 Eq(3.31)
Eq(3.50)

Megnetic order parameter(meV)

25
Magetic Ord
Spin Magntic Ord
20
Normal

15

SC SDW
10

5 SC + SDW

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Temperature(K) x 10
-3

Figure 4.6: Superconducting and magnetic order parameters of pure ( )

superconductor verses Temperature.

The blue and green lines represent and respectively. As we can see from this plot
or figure, the superconducting order parameter and magnetic order parameter have the
point at which they intersect each other. From this, we can conclude that the
superconductivity and magnetism has a coexistence and both superconductivity and
magnetism depends on the temperature of a given compound or element in both electron
and hole doping.

In general, superconducting order parameter decreases as the temperature increases

whereas the magnetic order parameter increases as the temperature increases. We have
got the final result as the coexistence of superconductivity and magnetism in
Ba(Fe1xCox)2As2 (as shown on the plot of our system phase diagram,
which is decreasing as the temperature increases and which is
increasing with the temperature). The critical temperature we obtained analytically for
our system is approximately equal to value obtained the experimental value at
concentration ( ) and the formula for our system is ( )

51
 CHAPTER FIVE
5. Conclusion and recommendation

5.1. Conclusion

Using a model Hamiltonian and Free energy method (formalism), we found the
mathematical expression for critical temperature (Tc), superconducting order
parameter ( ), magnetic transition temperature (Tm) and magnetic ordering parameter
( ( )), using equations (3.24), (3.31), (3.40) and (3.50) respectively. Using the
numerical calculations, we plotted the phase diagram of s(T) versus (figure 4.4),
m(T) versus temperature (figure 4.5). Finally, we integrated these two phase diagrams
to show the coexistence between superconductivity and magnetism or spin density wave
for our system( ( ) ) (figure 4.6).

From The above figure‟s 4.1 we conclude the Temperature is directly proportional to
Debye frequency mean when we increase the values of Debye frequency the
superconducting transition temperature increase linearly. Similarly the superconducting
transition temperature goes down when the Debye frequency is decrease.

In general, our results clearly show that, the superconducting order parameter decreases
as the temperature increases whereas magnetic order parameter increases with respect to
AFM transition temperature increase. The present work shows that there is a small region
of temperature where both the phases are in coexistence which is indicated by (
) in the figure 4.3. For our system, at a concentration( ), the
superconducting critical temperature is which is in the interval of value
obtained experimentally and the general formula for our system
becomes( ( ) ).

5.2. Recommendation

The importance of this study is to provide information on coexistence between

superconductivity and magnetism in electron doped barium arsenide at low temperature.
The models that have been chosen and developed were those for which the data are
commonly and widely available. From this point of view, this study could be considered

52
as a reference for another researcher. This work is limited in its area on the study of
Cobalt doped. However, the study provides a good starting point for other
compounds/elements.

53
 References

[1] H.K Onnes, Investigations into the properties of substances at low Temperatures,
which has led, amongst other things, to the preparation of liquid Helium, volume physics

1901-1921 of Nobel Lectures 1967.

[2] John C. Gallop (1990). SQUIDS, the Josephen Effects and Superconducting

Electronics. CRC Press. Pp. 3, 20. ISBN 0750300515.

[3] Charles Kittle Professor Emeritus, Introduction to Solid state physics eight edition

University of California, Berkeley. Rev. 259 (2005).

[4] Giuseppe Grosso Department of physics, Solid state physics second edition
University

of Pisa and NEST, Institute of Nanoscience-CNR, Pisa, Italy Giuseppe Pastori

Parravicni. Rev. 790 (2014).

[5] S.O. Pillai, Solid state physics, new age International (p) limited 2007.

[6] J. G. Bednorz and K. A. Müller, Z. Phys. B 64, 189 (1986).

[7] Charles Kittle, introduction to solid state physics, Book, New York,7thedition, (1986)

[8] V. L. Ginzburg and L.D. Landau (1950). "On the theory of superconductivity". Zh.

Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 20 (1064).

[9] Ma Long and Yu Wei-Qiang, Review of nuclear magnetic resonance studies on iron-

based superconductors, Chin. Phys. B, 22, 8, 087414 (2013).

[10] Marcus Tagel, et al., The layered iron arsenide oxides Sr2CrO3FeAs and

BaScO3FeAs, Z. Anong. chem. 635, 2242-2240 (2009).

[11] Rajikant, Applied Solid State Physics, Radba offset, Delhi, 511, (2011).

[12] J. Bardeen, L. N. Cooper, and J. R. Schrieffer, Phys. Rev. 108, 1175 (1957).

[13] Ma Long and Yu Wei-Qiang, Review of nuclear magnetic resonance studies on iron-

54
 based superconductors, Chin. Phys. B, 22, 8, 087414 (2013).

[14] Marcus Tagel, et al., The layered iron arsenide oxides Sr2CrO3FeAs and
BaScO3FeAs,

Z. Anong. chem. 635, 2242-2240 (2009).

[15] Material view staff, Investigating magnetism in iron-based superconductors, (2013).

[16] Neil W. Ashcroft N. David Mermin, Solid State Physics, Cornell University. (1976)

[17] E. Maxwell (1950). "Isotope Effect in the Superconductivity of Mercury". Phys.

Rev.

78 (4): 477.

[18] M. R. Beasley, J. E. Mooij, and T. P. Orlando, Phys. Rev. Lett. 42, 1165 (1979).

[19] H. K. Onnes (1911). "The resistance of pure mercury at helium temperatures".

Commun. Phys. Lab. Univ. Leiden 12: 120.

[20] J. G. Bednorz and K. A. M¨uller, Possible high superconductivity in the Ba-La-

Cu-

O system, Z. Phys. B: Condens. Matter, 64, 189-193 (1986).

[21] J. P. Srivastava, element of solid state physics, 2nd edition, page 494-495, (2009).

[22] W. Meissner and R. Ochsenfeld. Untitled. Naturwissenschaften,21(44):787788,

November 1933. 2.

[23] F. London and H. London (1935). "The Electromagnetic Equations of the

Supraconductor". Proc. R. Soc. London A 149 (866): 71–88.

[24] Rita John, Solid State Physics, 2014, 384 – 388.

[25] J. F. anent Superconductivity, super fluids and condensates, (Oxford University

Press,

2003).

[26] C. Salima, A.Zahiya, J. Khachan, et al, phys. Rev, 10, 1016 (2012).

55
[27] Peter Berglund, The glass transition in high-temperature superconductors,
Stockholm,

Sweden, (2010).

[28] Shigej; Fusita and Salvador Godoy, Quantum Stastical theory of superconductivity,

plenum press, New York (1996).

[29] B.V.M. Engineering College, V.V.Nagar,Gujarat,India, (May 2011).

[30] J. G. Bednorz, K. A. Mueller, et al, Zeitschrift fur Phys. Lett, B 64, 2 (1986)

[31] http://superconductors.org/TYPe1.htm#cooper.

[32] Y. Kamihara et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 128, 1001 (2006).

[33] Efremov, D.V.; Korshunov, M. M; Dolgov, O.V.; Golubov, A.A.; Hirschfeld, PJ,
Phys

Rev B, 84, 180512 (2011).

[34] Efremov, D. V.; Golubov, A. A.; Dolgov, O. V., NJP, 15,013002 (2013).

[35] M. B. Schilling, A. Baumgartner, B. Gorshunov, E. S. Zhukova, V. A. Dravin, K. V.

Mitsen, D. V. Efremov, O. V. Dolgov, K. Iida, M. Dressel, and S. Zapf, Phys. Rev.

B 93, 174515 (2016)

[36] R. Prozorov et al., J. Phys449, 012020 (2013).

[37] Oleg Kim, Phonons and Anharmonic Lattice Effects in Iron Pnictide
Superconductors,

Chalmers University of technology, Guthenburg, Sweden, (2010).

[38] H.H. Wen and S. Li, Annu. Rev. Cond. Matt. Phys. 2, 121 (2011).

[39] M. Rotter et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 107006 (2008).

[40] A. S. Sefat et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 117004 (2008).

[41] N. Ni et al., Phys. Rev. B 78, 214515 (2008).

[42] V. Brouet et al., Phys. Rev. B 80, 165115 (2009).

56
[43] T. Kondo et al., Phys. Rev. B 81, 060507 (2010).

[44] M. Rotter et al., Phys. Rev. B 78, 020503 (2008).

[45] R. Cortes-Gil et al., Chem. Mater. 22, 4304 (2010).

[46] S. Aswartham et al., arXiv:1203.0143 (2012).

[47] G. Wu et al., J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 20, 422201 (2008).

[48] T. Park et al., J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 20, 322204 (2008).

[49] Z. Ren et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 137002 (2009).

[50] D. V. Evtushinsky et al., New J. Phys. 11, 055069 (2009).

[51] D. V. Evtushinsky et al., J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 80, 023710 (2011).

[52] Marianne Rotter, Marcus Tegel, Dirk Johrendt, Inga Schellenberg, Wilfried Hermes,

and Rainer Pottgen. Phys. Rev. B, 78:020503, 2008.

[53] H. Chen, Y. Ren, Y. Qiu, Wei Bao, R. H. Liu, G. Wu, T. Wu, Y. L. Xie, X. F.Wang,

Q. Huang, and X. H. Chen. Coexistence of the spin-density wave and

superconductivity in Ba1xKxFe2As2. EPL (Europhysics Letters), 85(1):17006, 2009.

[54] Athena S. Sefat, Rongying Jin, Michael A. McGuire, Brian C. Sales, David J. Singh,

and David Mandrus. Phys. Rev. Lett., 101:117004, 2008.

[55] Ren, Zhi-An; Che, Guang-Can; Dong, Xiao-Li; Yang, Jie; Lu, Wei; Yi, Wei; Shen,

XiaoLi; Li, Zheng-Cai; Sun, Li-Ling; Zhou, Fang; Zhao, Zhong-Xian (2008).

"Superconductivity and phase diagram in iron-based arsenic-oxides ReFeAsO1-δ

(Re = rare-earth metal) without fluorine doping". EPL (Euro physics Letters)
83:17002.

arXiv:0804.2582. Bibcode:2008EL.....8317002R. doi:10.1209/0295-5075/83/17002

[56] Rotter, Marianne; Tegel, Marcus and Johrendt, Dirk (2008). "Superconductivity at

38K in the Iron Arsenide (Ba1–xKx) Fe2As2". Physical Review Letters 101 (10):

57
 107006. arXiv:0805.4630. Bibcode:2008 PhRvL.101j7006 R.doi:10. 1103/Phys Rev

Lett.101.107006. PMID 18851249

[57] Sasmal, K.; Lorenz, Bernd; Guloy, Arnold M.; Chen, Feng; Xue, Yu-Yi; Chu, Ching

Wu (2008). "Superconducting Fe-Based Compounds (A1–xSrx) Fe2As2 with A=K

and Cs with Transition Temperatures up to 37 K". Physical Review Letters 101

(10):107007. Bibcode: 2008PhRvL.101j7007S.doi:10.1103/physr evlett.

101.107007.

PMID 18851250.

[58] Shirage, Parasharam Maruti; Miyazawa, Kiichi; Kito, Hijiri; Eisaki, Hiroshi; Iyo,

Akira (2008). "Superconductivity at 26 K in (Ca1–xNax) Fe2As2". Applied Physics

Express 1:081702. Bibcode: 2008APExp...1h1702M. doi:10.1143/APEX.1.081702.

[59] F. Steglich, J. Aarts, C. D. Bredl, W. Liekeet al, Phys. Rev. Lett.43,1892 (1979).

[60] J. H. Chu, J. G. Analytis, C. Kucharczyk, and I. R. Fisher, Determination of the

Phase Diagram of the Electron-Doped Superconductor Ba(Fe1-xCox)2As2, Phys. Rev.

B 79, 014506 (2009).

[61] N. Fujiwara, et al., Detection of antiferromagnetic ordering in heavily doped

LaFeAsO1-xHx pnictide superconductors using nuclear-magnetic-resonance

techniques, arXiv:1308. 2125v1 [cond-mat. supr-con] 6 Aug (2013).

[62] R. Prozorov et al., J. Phys449, 012020 (2013).

[63] A. Carrington, Rep. Prog. Phys. 74, 124507 (2011).

[64] Yu Shun-Li and Li Jian-Xin., Chin. Phys. B 22, 087411 (2013).

[65] D. V. Evtushinsky et al., New J. Phys. 11, 055069 (2009).

[66] H. Takahashi, K. Igawa, K. Arii, Y. Kamihara, M. Hirano, and H. Hosono: Nature

453 (2008) 376.

58
[67] D. Schmidta, H. F. Brauna, “Effect of antimony substitution in iron pnictide

compounds”, arxi:1510.08665v1 [cond-mat.supr-con] (2015).

[68] K.N.Upadhyaya, a text of in organic chemistry, Vikas publishing house pvt ltd,

729 (2003).

[69] M.Neupane, et al.,”Electron-hole Asymmetry in superconductivity of pnictides

originated from the observed rigid chemical potential shift” arxiv:1005.2966v1

[cond-mat.supr-con] (2003).

[70] Gitte Stieper, competing superconducting and Magnetic order parameter and Field

Induced Magnetism in Ba(Fe0.95Co0.05)2As2 Copenhagen University, 2012.

[71] C. Lester, et al., Neutron scattering study of the interplay between structure and

magnetism in Ba(Fe1-xCox)2As2 physical review letters B 79 144523 (2009).

[72] D. Pengcheng et al., Nature physics, 1083, 52483 (2012).

[73] Yu Shun-Li and Li Jian-Xin., Chin. Phys. B 22, 087411 (2013).

[74] C. Lester et al., Phys. Rev. B 79, 144523 (2009).

[75] D. K. Pratt et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 087001 (2009).

[76] D. K Pratt et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 257001 (2011).

[77] H. Q Luo et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 247002 (2012).

[78] S.Maiti, et al., Gap nodes induced by coexistence with antiferromagnetism in iron

based superconductors, arxiv:1203.0991v1 [cond-mat.supr-con] (2012).

[79] Y. Nakai et al., J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 81 033701 (2012).

[80] Nandi, S., Kim, M. G., Kreyssing, A., Fernades, R. M., Pratt, D. K., Thaler, A., Ni,

A. I. Feb 2010 phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 057006.

[81] P. G. DE GENNES, Superconductivity of Metals and Alloys. W. A. Benjamin,

59
 INC (1966).

[82] J. Flouquet and A. Buzdin, Phys. World 15, 9 (2002).

[83] Rein Huisman Phase diagam of BaFe2-xCoxAs2pnictides using transport

measurement

Van der Waals-Zeeman Institute Faculty of Science, university of Amsteram, 2010.

[84] V.L.Ginzburg, Sov.Phys.JETP4,153(1957)

[85] Xin Lu, et al., Point-contact spectroscopic studies on normal and superconducting

AFe2As2-type iron pnictide single crystals, Supercond. Sci.Technol,

23,7,054009 (2010).

[86] V. P. Mineev and T. Champel, Physical Rev. B 69, 144521(2004).

[87] Rein Huisman Phase diagam of BaFe2-xCoxAs2pnictides using transport

measurement

Van der Waals-Zeeman Institute Faculty of Science, university of Amsteram, 2010.

[88] V.L.Ginzburg, Sov.Phys.JETP4,153(1957)

[89] J. W. Lynn, et al., Magnetic order close to superconductivity in the iron-based

layered

LaO1-xFxFeAs systems, Nature, 453, (7197):899, (2008).

[90] Xin Lu, et al., Point-contact spectroscopic studies on normal and superconducting

AFe2As2-type iron pnictide single crystals, Supercond. Sci.Technol,

23,7,054009 (2010).

60