This article was downloaded by: 10.3.97.

143
On: 20 Dec 2023
Access details: subscription number
Publisher: CRC Press
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG, UK

Handbook of Superconductivity
Fundamentals and Materials, Volume One
David A. Cardwell, David C. Larbalestier, I. Braginski Aleksander

Flux Quantization

Publication details
https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.1201/9780429179181-13
Colin Gough
Published online on: 05 Jul 2022

How to cite :- Colin Gough. 05 Jul 2022, Flux Quantization from: Handbook of Superconductivity,
Fundamentals and Materials, Volume One CRC Press
Accessed on: 20 Dec 2023
https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.1201/9780429179181-13

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR DOCUMENT

Full terms and conditions of use: https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/legal-notices/terms

This Document PDF may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproductions,
re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or
accurate or up to date. The publisher shall not be liable for an loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages
whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Colin Gough
A2.7.1 Introduction
The quantization of magnetic flux is a direct manifestation
of the macroscopic quantum description of the supercon-
ducting state. Flux quantization is a defining property of any
superconductor, as is the closely related Meissner effect (see
Chapter A2.4).
Almost as an afterthought, while discussing the quantum-
mechanical, wave-like properties of superconductors, London
(1950), in his monograph on Superfluids [1], added a foot-
note predicting that flux in a superconducting ring would
be quantized in units of h/q, where q was the charge of the
superconducting electrons. London assumed that q was equal
to the single electron charge. The subsequent BCS theory [2]
showed that superconductivity involved paired electron states
(Cooper pairs). Flux is therefore quantized in units of
(
φ0 = h / 2e 2.07 × 10−15 Tm 2 or in equivalent units of Vs
(A2.7.1)
The flux Φ within a thick superconducting ring or cylinder is
therefore given by
Φ=
∫ B.ds = nφ
area
0 (A2.7.2)
where n is an integer.
Although London assumed that the quantization of flux
was of purely academic interest, worthy only of a footnote,
this property now underpins many of the most important
device applications of superconductors. These include:
a. superconducting quantum interference devices
(SQUIDs), where the response to a magnetic field is
periodic in the flux quantum (see Chapter H3.2);
b. various versions of single flux quantum logic (SFQ),
where the quantum of flux in a superconducting
ring is used as the elementary bit of information (see
Chapters H3.5 and H3.6); and
A2.7
Flux Quantization
c. the primary voltage standard, where the volt is now
defined in terms of a frequency, f = V/φ0 , equiva-
lent to the number of flux quanta per second pass-
ing through a Josephson junction, where V is the
voltage across the junction. This is known as the ac
Josephson relation [3], where the frequency f = 484
MHz μV−1. Using an array of superconducting junc-
tions in series, the frequency and, hence, the voltage
can be measured to very high precision (see Chapters
A2.8 and H5.1).
d. flux quanta as the Q-bits used in current embodiments
of quantum computing (see Chapter H3.7).
The observation of quantized flux in units of h/2e provided
the first convincing evidence for the pairing of electrons in
conventional superconductors [4, 5]. A similar experiment
using an early ceramic YBa 2Cu3O8 sample [6] confirmed
) electron pairing in the cuprate high-temperature supercon-
ductors. Because such superconductors are believed to have
d-wave symmetry, superconducting circuits that result in
quantized flux trapping with Φ = (n + 1/2)φ0 can be devised.
The observation of trapped states involving half a flux quan-
tum provides the most convincing demonstration to date for
d-wave superconductivity in the cuprate high-temperature
superconductors [7–9].
In 1955, Abrikosov showed that the magnetic state of type
II superconductors involved singly quantized flux lines pen-
etrating the bulk of the material [10]. At the centre of the
flux line, the superconducting order parameter is reduced to
zero, so that states involving a circulating vortex of current
can exist within the bulk, the flux line core essentially act-
ing as line singularity around which the quantized current
can flow. The flux associated with the circulating current is
ϕ0, so that their number density is B/ϕ0m−2. In many cuprate
high-temperature superconductors, the coupling between the
superconducting CuO2 planes is so weak that they are essen-
tially two-dimensional. Flux penetrates such layers in the
form of two-dimensional vortices, or flux pancakes, again
69
70 Handbook of Superconductivity

involving a single flux quantum ϕ0. As the interlayer coupling

is increased, the flux pancakes align along the field direction
to form the equivalent of a conventional flux line in a three-
dimensional, but strongly anisotropic type II superconductor
(see Chapter A3.1).
Single electron flux quantum states were later found in nor-
mal metals via the Aaronov–Bohm effect [11].

A2.7.2 Theory
A2.7.2.1 Quantization of Flux in a Ring or
Cylinder FIGURE A2.7.1 (Left) A superconducting ring or cylinder in an
external field B, illustrating the path of integration well inside the
Flux quantization is a direct consequence of a macroscopic
superconductor along which Js = 0; (Right) an allowed wave solution
wave-mechanical description of the superconducting state.
with n = 6 waves around the loop, so that the enclosed flux is 6ϕ0.
This was first suggested by London and was further devel-
oped by Abrikosov [10] within the context of the Ginsburg–
since ψ(r) must be single-valued, as shown by a typical wave
Landau (GL) theory [12], based on Landau’s earlier model of
solution with n = 6 in Figure A2.7.1(Right). Furthermore,
second-order phase transitions. In such a model, the super-
conducting state is described by a macroscopic wave function
ψ (r )e iθ(r ) where |ψ|2 = ns is the number density of supercon-
ducting electrons, and θ(r) is a position-dependent phase. By
∫ A.ds = ∫ curl A . ds = ∫ B. ds
path area area
(A2.7.8)

analogy with the conventional wave-mechanical treatment of

is simply the magnetic flux Φ enclosed within the integra-
particles in a magnetic field, the supercurrent density Js can
tion path. Combining these two results, we have the principal
be written as
result that
e*
Js =  Ψ * ( −i∇ − e * A ) Ψ + complex conjugate  (A2.7.3) n 2 π h
2m*  Φ=
e*
=n
2e
(A2.7.9)

where the term involving the vector potential A arises from

where we have assumed Cooper pairing with e* = 2e. The
the generalized momentum, p → p – e* A, of a particle with
experimental confirmation of flux quantization in units of
effective mass m* and charge e* in a magnetic field B = curl A.
h/2e therefore provides a direct confirmation of electron pair-
The above expression can be written more simply as
ing in the superconducting state.
e * nd The Meissner state with Φ = 0 is a special case of the above
Js =  ∇θ ( r ) − e * A  . (A2.7.4) relationship with n = 0. This is the only allowed solution for
m* 
a ‘singly connected’ superconductor—a superconductor with
We now consider a superconducting ring or cylinder and no hole or line singularity, such as a flux line core, passing
evaluate the line integral of the above expression well inside through it.
the superconductor, where the screening currents associ- If the thickness of the superconducting ring or cylinder is
ated with the Meissner effect are effectively zero, as shown in less than the penetration depth, or if we take an integration
Figure A2.7.1(Left) (see Chapter A2.4). Along this path Js = 0, path close to the inner surface, the screening current will not
so that be zero. It is then not the total flux that is quantized, but what
is termed the fluxoid. In this more general case, we can write

A= ∇θ ( r ) . (A2.7.5)
∫ B.ds + µ λ ∫ j.ds = nφ
e* 2
0 0 (A2.7.10)
area path
On integrating around the path, we have
2 2
 where we have substituted the relationship m* /nse * = µ 0λ L ,
∫
path
A. ds =
e* ∫ ∇θ(r ).d s.
path
(A2.7.6) where λL is the London penetration depth over which the sur-
face screening currents decay.
Fundamental to the operation of any SQUID is the period-
Now,
icity of its properties with the flux in units of the flux quantum
ϕ0. This may easily be shown by considering the energy of a
∂θ ( r )
∫ ∇θ(r ). ds = ∫
path path
∂s
ds = [θ ( r )]BA = n2π (A2.7.7) superconducting ring intersected by a single Josephson junc-
tion, as shown in Figure A2.7.2.
Flux Quantization
FIGURE A2.7.2 A superconducting ring intersected by a
Josephson junction.
The stored energy E in a ring with inductance L can be
written as
(
E = Φ − Φenclosed )2 / 2L − EJ cos(θA − θB . ) (A2.7.11)
The first term is the stored magnetic energy (1/2)Li 2 = (1/2)
(Φ – Φenclosed)2/L, where (Φ – Φenclosed) is the difference
between the applied flux Φ (Bapplied × area of ring) and
the flux enclosed within the superconducting ring, while
the second term is the Josephson energy –EJcos(θA – θB),
where θA – θB is the difference in phase of the supercon-
ducting order parameter across the Josephson junction and
EJ = I cφ0 2π (see Chapter A2.8). If we again consider a line
integral well within the superconducting ring, where Js = 0,
we obtain θA – θB = 2πΦenclosed /φ0 .
The total energy E can therefore be written as
E = ( Φ − Φenclosed ) /2L − EJ cos ( 2πΦenclosed / φ0 ).
2
FIGURE A2.7.3 The first experimental confirmation of flux quantization in units of h/2e, demonstrated by the discrete values of flux
trapped in a small tin cylinder when cooled in a small axial magnetic field [4].
71
Minimizing the energy with respect to Φenclosed, we obtain
Φ − Φenclosed = LI c sin ( 2πΦenclosed / φ0 ) . (A2.7.13)
The supercurrent flowing around the ring, (Φ – Φenclosed)/L, is
therefore periodic in Φenclosed in units of the flux quantum ϕ0.
This is the basis of operation of both the rf and dc SQUID. For
a dc SQUID, the critical current is periodic in the applied flux
Φ such that
I c = 2I 0 cos(πΦ / φ0 ) (A2.7.14)
as discussed in more detail in the section on Josephson junc-
tion devices (Chapter H3.2).
A2.7.3 Experimental
A2.7.3.1 Flux Quantization in Conventional
Superconductors
The confirmation of flux quantization in conventional super-
conductors was published independently by two groups in
1961 [4, 5]. The same journal issue also included a number of
related theoretical papers. Both experiments involved the use
of very small-diameter superconducting cylinders coated on
the surface of a nonmagnetic core.
In the measurements of Deaver and Fairbank [4], a thin cyl-
inder of tin was deposited on a 1 cm length of 13-μm-diameter
copper wire. This was cooled in a small axial field, and the
magnetic moment trapped was deduced from the voltage
induced when the sample was vibrated inside a pick-up coil.
Many successive measurements were made on cooling in
different fields. The trapped flux was shown to be a stepped
function of applied field consistent with flux quantization in
(A2.7.12)
units of h/2e, as shown in Figure A2.7.3. Doll and Näbauer
72 Handbook of Superconductivity

FIGURE A2.7.4 Demonstration of flux quantization in units of h/2e in a ceramic YBCO ring [6]. The lines are spaced exactly h/2e apart and
the regular transitions between the quantum states were induced by short bursts of electromagnetic radiation.

[5] performed a slightly different experiment, trapping field In one such experiment, Wellstood and co-workers used a
in a lead cylinder coated on the surface of a 10-mm quartz conventional s-wave superconductor to make a superconducting
fibre. This was supported on a very light torsion fibre and the loop connecting adjacent edges of a square HTS crystal. Because
trapped magnetic moment deduced from the torsional oscilla-
tions of the sample in the applied field. To their surprise, they
observed the flux trapped in units of about half the value pre-
dicted by London, but consistent with later ideas of electron
pairing and the quantization of flux in units of h/2e.

A2.7.3.2 Flux Quantization in the Cuprate

High-Temperature Superconductors
Many exotic theories were initially proposed to account for
the very high transition temperatures of the cuprate super-
conductors, including superconducting states involving 2, 4,
8 or even 16 electrons. At the same time, several experienced
researchers remained highly sceptical of the ‘superconduct-
ing’ transition, believing it could simply be a transition to a
very much lower-resistance state. Early measurements [6] on a
multiphase ceramic ring of Y-Ba-Cu-O demonstrated the exis-
tence of very long-lived, trapped flux states differing in flux by
h/2e, as shown in Figure A2.7.4. These measurements not only
confirmed the existence of a truly superconducting, zero-resis-
tance, quantum mechanical state, but also confirmed electron
pairing, just as in conventional superconductors. However,
such measurements cannot reveal anything about the nature
of the microscopic mechanisms leading to such pairing.

A2.7.3.3 Flux Trapping in the Cuprate

HTc Superconductors
It is now firmly established that the cuprate HTc supercon-
ductors have a predominantly d-wave symmetry, with nodes
in the superconducting wave function at 45° to the in-plane
CuO bonds. The sign of the wave function therefore reverses
on changing between the a- and b-directions, as illustrated
schematically in Figure A2.7.5(a). Several experiments have
confirmed this sign change, consistent with d-wave symmetry
of the HTS wave function [7–9].
FIGURE A2.7.5 Scanning flux microscope measurements illus-
trating the d-wave symmetry of cuprate superconductors by Tsuei
and co-workers. (a) the orientations of the tricrystal and epitaxially
grown high Tc superconductors and the position of the lithographi-
cally patterned rings, which are intersected by weak-link, Josephson
junctions, on crossing the substrate grain boundaries. (b) The trap-
ping of half a flux quantum in the central ring crossing three grain
boundaries, with no flux quanta trapped in the two rings crossing
single grain boundaries, and one flux quantum (though it could have
been any integer) in the isolated ring. (Courtesy of Tsuei.)
Flux Quantization
of the symmetry of the d-wave function, the weak-link Josephson
junctions formed at the boundaries between the d-wave and
s-wave superconductors have to accommodate the change in
sign with direction of the superconducting d-wave function. This
implies that the flux trapped in such a loop is given by
Φenclosed = (n + 1/ 2 ) φ0 . (A2.7.15)
The smallest flux that can be trapped is, therefore, half a flux
quantum, and all trapped flux states are offset from the origin
by half a flux quantum, as Mathai et al. [8] confirmed in a
series of careful measurements.
Half quantum flux trapping was also observed by Kirtley et
al. [9] in a series of measurements in which thin film HTc super-
conductors were deposited on a tricrystal substrate (three crys-
tals cut in specific crystalline orientations and fused together
along their carefully cut edges). As shown in Figures A2.7.5(a)
and (b), a series of thin film rings were lithographically pat-
terned, one enclosing the intersection of all three interfaces,
two rings crossing a single interface and another ring well away
from the interface areas. The tricrystal was carefully designed
with crystalline orientations chosen so that, over the three junc-
tions crossing the central ring, symmetry dictates that there has
to be a π phase change in the superconducting phase. The lowest
flux that such a ring can trap is therefore ± 1/2ϕ0, as shown in
Figure A2.7.5(b), taken from the cover of Science (Vol 271, 1995).
Experiments demonstrating 1/2 quantum flux trapping
provide the strongest evidence for the d-wave symmetry of the
FIGURE A2.7.6 The periodic response of an rf HTS SQUID as a function of applied field for various levels of rf bias. The response can be
shown to be periodic in ϕ 0 over many thousands of flux quanta. (Courtesy of Gross.)
73
cuprate superconductors. Such trapping has been confirmed
for all cuprate superconductors investigated to date, but has
never been observed for conventional superconductors.
A2.7.3.4 The SQUID and Flux Quantization
As indicated in the previous section, the flux enclosed by a
superconducting ring containing one or more Josephson junc-
tions is periodic in the flux quantum φ0 . SQUIDs (described in
Chapter H3.2) can measure changes in applied flux (B × area
of SQUID) to an accuracy approaching 10 −7 φ0 H/z−1/2, making
a SQUID the most sensitive of any broadband magnetic sen-
sor. A single Josephson junction has a Fraunhofer pattern with
a strong flux quantum dependence, which can also be used to
measure magnetic fields, see Schilling et al. [13].
Figure A2.7.6 illustrates the voltage response of a HTS rf
SQUID as a function of the externally applied flux ϕe, illustrat-
ing the response periodic in φ0 [14]. The curves are obtained
for different values of rf bias.
A2.7.4 Flux Quanta and the
Mixed State of Type II
Superconductors
Unlike type I superconductors, which exhibit the Meissner
effect excluding the penetrations of flux into the bulk, flux
enters type II superconductors in a semi-regular array of
74 Handbook of Superconductivity

quantized Abrikosov vortices each carrying a single quantum

of flux.
Although quantized flux lines in the bulk of a supercon-
ductor cannot be visualized directly, their existence can be
inferred from small-angle neutron diffraction. In such mea-
surements, the magnetic moment of the neutron probes the
spatial variations of the internal magnetic field associated
with the circulating currents around each flux line. Such
measurements by Cribier et al. [15] provided the first direct
evidence for the flux line lattice in the mixed state of type II
superconductors.
Figure A2.7.7 shows a more recent example of a very high-
resolution neutron diffraction pattern obtained from a trian-
gular flux lattice in the mixed state of a large single crystal of
niobium. Note the similarity with an X-ray diffraction pat-
tern. Neutron scattering provides detailed information on
the spatial variations of the local flux density B(x), whereas
X-rays probe the variation in electron density ρ(x). Neutron
diffraction has proved to be a very powerful tool for looking
at the phase transitions and rich flux lattice states of type II
and high-Tc superconductors as a function of temperature and
applied magnetic field. FIGURE A2.7.8 Magnetic flux decoration measurements illustrat-
ing a near-perfect triangular lattice [14].

A2.7.5 Flux Decoration Measurements

It is possible to decorate individual flux lines emerging from
the surface of a superconductor with very fine magnetic pow-
der, which can then be visualized using a scanning electron
microscopy (SEM). The magnetic grains tend to segregate in
the regions where flux lines leave the surface of a supercon-
ductor. This technique was pioneered by Essmann and Trauble
[16] in the 1970s. For a more recent review of the Bitter deco-
ration technique, see Fasano et al. [17]. Figure A2.7.8 shows
an example of such a measurement, which illustrates a near-
perfect triangular lattice of singly quantized flux lines emerg-
ing from the surface of a superconductor. Occasional defects,
such as dislocations in the flux line lattice, can be identified.

A2.7.6 Scanning SQUID and Hall

Probe Microscopes
More recently, microscopes using dc SQUIDs with small
pick-up coils (< 10 μm) as magnetic pick-up coils have been
used to map out the fields produced by quantized flux lines
emerging from the surface of thin films and single crystals.
Figure A2.7.5(b) shows the use of such a microscope to mea-
sure the half flux quantum of flux in a HTS thin film ring on a
tricrystal substrates (see Figure A2.7.5[a]). A small Hall probe
can also be used to probe flux line structures with almost the
same sensitivity [18].

FIGURE A2.7.7 Small-angle neutron diffraction from the lattice
of quantized flux lines in a niobium single crystal. (ILL Grenoble, by
courtesy of Forgan.)
A2.7.7 Direct Measurement of
Quantized Flux by Electron
Holography
Another exciting modern advance has been the development
by Tonomura’s group of transmission electron microscopy
using interfering coherent electron beams to image quantum
vortices in thin cross-sections of superconducting materials
Flux Quantization
FIGURE A2.7.9 Image of individual flux lines in a thinned single
crystal of niobium. Individual vortices are images as ‘dimples’ with
one side darker than the other. The larger streaks crossing the image
are interference effects associated with crystal bending and differ-
ences in thickness. (Courtesy of Tonomura.)
[19]. An example of such an image in a thin section of a Nb
superconductor is shown in figure A2.7.9, where every ‘dim-
ple’ represents an individual flux line.
A2.7.8 Scanning Tunneling
Microscopy
Hess et al. [20] used Lorentz scanning tunneling microscopy
(STM) to investigate the electronic core states of Abrikosov
flux lines. See also the review of such measurement by
Suderow et al. [21].
STM/STS measurements can also be used to investigate
flux lines. See, for example, Cottet et al. [22] investigation of
flux vortices in the type II superconductor MgB2.
A2.7.9 Magneto-Optics
Researchers from the University of Oslo and Bell Laboratories
were the first to observe flux lines using an optical microscope
[23]. Flux lines in NbSe2 were imaged by Hess et al. with ~ 1 μm
resolution making use of the magneto-optic Faraday effect,
involving rotation of the plane of polarisation of light passing
through a ferrite garnet film placed in close proximity to the
surface (Figure A2.7.10).
Magneto-optic methods are reviewed by Jooss et al. [24].
Even real-time magneto-optical imaging of the vortex lattice
and individual vortices is now possible [25]. Such techniques
enable the dynamics of both correlated groups of vortices and
individual flux quanta to be investigated as a function of time,
temperature and applied field. It is important to be able to
visualize such events, because such processes are almost cer-
tainly present though often ignored in theoretical models for
thermally activated and quantum creep. For a more detailed
review of magneto-optic methods, see Chapter G3.5.
75
FIGURE A2.7.10 Magneto-optic images of vortices in NbSe2 at
4.2 K in a field of 8 gauss. The white marker represents 10 μm.
A2.7.10 Superconducting Logic
Circuits and Quantum
Computing
Electronic circuits use Josephson junctions with single flux
quanta as the quanta of information form the basis of vari-
ous ultra-fast, low-power, computer circuits; see Chapters
H3.5 and H3.6. Currently, there is a great interest in the use of
superconducting circuits using the switching of flux quantum
states to act as Q-bits to carry information; see Chapter H3.7.
References
[1] London F 1950 Superfluids Vol 1, (New York: Wiley)
p 152
[2] Bardeen J, Cooper L N and Schrieffer J R 1957 Phys. Rev.
108 1175
[3] Josephson B D 1962 Phys. Lett. 1 251
[4] Deaver B S and Fairbank W M 1961 Phys. Rev. Lett. 7 43
[5] Doll R and Nabauer M 1961 Phys. Rev. Lett. 7 51
[6] Gough C E, Colclough M S, Forgan E M, Jordan R G,
Keene M, Muirhead C M, Rae AIM, Thomas N, Abell J S
and Sutton S 1987 Nature 326 855
[7] Wollman D A, Van Harlingen D J, Giapintzakis J and
Ginsberg D M 1995 Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 797
[8] Mathai A, Gim Y, Black R C, Amar A and Wellstood F C
1995 Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 4523
[9] Kirtley J R, Tsuei C C, Rupp M, Sun J Z, Yu-Jahnes L -S,
Gupta A, Ketchen M B, Moler K A and Bhushan M 1996
Phys. Rev. Lett. 76 1336
76
[10] Abrikosov A A 1957 Sov. Phys. JETP 5 1174
[11] Aaronov Y and Bohm D 1959 Phys. Rev. 115 485
[12] Ginsburg V L and Landau L D 1950 Zh. Eksperim. I.
Teor. Fiz. 20 1064 (in Russian)
[13] Gross R, Chaudhari P, Kawasaki M, Ketchen M B and
Gupta A 1990 Appl. Phys. Lett. 57 727
[14] Schilling M, Barthelmess H J, Krey S and Ludwig F 2007
Advances in Solid State Physics 40 769
[15] Cribier D, Jacort B, Rao L M and Farnoux B 1964 Phys.
Lett. 9 106
[16] Essmann U and Trauble H 1967 Phys. Lett. A24 526
[17] Fasano F and Menghini M 2008 Supercond. Sci. Technol.
2 (2) 023001
[18] Oral A, Bending S J, Humphreys R G and Heneni M
1996 J. Low Temp. Phys. 105 1135
[19] Harada K, Matsuda T, Bonevich J, Igarisho M, Kopndo
S, Pozzi G, Kawabe U and Tomura A 1992 Nature 360 51
[20] Hess H F, Robinson R B, Dynes R C, Valles J M and
Waszczak J V 1989 Phys. Rev. Lett. 62 214
[21] Suderow H, Guillamon I, Rodrigo J G and Viera S 2014
Supercond. Sci. Technol. 27(6) 063001
[22] Cottet M J G, Cantoni M, Mansart B, Alexander D T
L, Hebert C, Zhigadlo N D, Karpinski J and Carbone F
2013 Phys. Rev. B 88 014505
Handbook of Superconductivity
[23] Goa P E, Haughlin H, Baziljevich M, Il’yashenko E,
Gammel P and Johansen T H 2001 Supercond. Sci.
Technol. 14 729
[24] Jooss Ch, Albrecht J, Kuhn H, Leonhardt s and
Kronmüller H 2002 Rep. Prof. Phys. I65 651
[25] Gao P, Hauglin H, Olson Å A, Baziljevich M and
Johansen T H 2003 Rev. Sc. Instrum. 74 141
Further Reading
Fujita S et al Quantum Theory of Conducting Matter –
Superconductivity (2009 New York: Springer)
Kleiner R and Godoy K Supercondutivity - An Introduction
(3rd edition) (2015 Berlin: Wiley-VCH)
Rose-Innes A C and Rhoderick E H Introduction to
Superconductivity (1978 Oxford: Pergamon)
Tinkham M Introduction to Superconductivity (2nd edition)
(1996 Singapore: McGraw Hill)
Waldram JR Superconductivity of Metals and Cuprates (1990
Bristol: IOP Publishing)