Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Generalized Bose-Einstein Condensation and BCS-Bose Crossover Theory

MANUEL DE LLANO, Francisco J. Sevilla, M. A. Solís, J. J. Valencia

Published Sep 5, 2005• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

We show how critical temperatures Tc from the BCS-Bose crossover theory (defined self-consistently by both the gap and fermion-number equations) requires unphysically large couplings for the Cooper/BCS model interaction to differ significantly from the Tc of ordinary BCS theory (where the number equation is replaced by the assumption that the chemical potential equals the Fermi energy). Furthermore, within a recent generalization of Bose-Einstein condensation (GBEC) that includes electron and also, without loss of generality, hole Cooper pairs (CPs), both species interacting with unpaired electrons and holes, it is shown that although explicitly ignoring either hole- or electron CPs yields the precise BCS gap equation for all temperatures T, only half of the T = 0 BCS rigorous-upper-bound condensation energy is obtained.

Related papers

BEC, BCS and BCS-Bose Crossover Theories in Superconductors and Superfluids

MANUEL DE LLANO, Francisco J. Sevilla, M. A. Solís +1 more

For the Cooper/BCS model interaction in superconductors (SCs) it is shown: a) how BCS-Bose crossover picture transition temperatures Tc, defined self-consistently by both the gap and fermion-number equations, require unphysically large couplings to differ significantly from the Tc of ordinary BCS theory defined without the number equation since here the chemical potential is assumed equal to the Fermi energy; how although ignoring either hole- or electron-Cooper-pairs in the recent "complete boson-fermion model": b) one obtains the precise BCS gap equation for all temperatures T, but c) only half the zero-temperature BCS condensation energy emerges. Results (b) and (c) are also expected to hold for neutral-fermion superfluids (SFs)--such as liquid $^3$He, neutron matter and trapped ultra-cold fermion atomic gases--where the pair-forming two-fermion interaction of course differs from the Cooper/BCS one for SCs.

arXiv:cond-mat/0412418•Dec 16, 2004•0 citations

Generalized Bose-Einstein condensation in superconductivity and superfluidity

MANUEL DE LLANO, Rocio R. Jauregui, J. Récamier +1 more

Unification of the Bardeen, Cooper and Schrieffer (BCS) and the Bose‐Einstein condensation (BEC) theories is surveyed in terms of a generalized BEC (GBEC) finite‐temperature statistical formalism. A vital distinction is that Cooper pairs (CPs) are true bosons that may suffer a BEC since they obey BE statistics, in contrast with BCS pairs that are “hard‐core bosons” at best. A second crucial ingredient is the explicit presence of hole‐pairs (2h) alongside the usual electron‐pairs (2e). A third critical element (particularly in 2D where ordinary BEC does not occur) is the linear dispersion relation of CPs in leading order in the center‐of‐mass momentum (CMM) power‐series expansion of the CP energy. The GBEC theory reduces in limiting cases to all five continuum (as opposed to “spin”) statistical theories of superconductivity, from BCS on one extreme to the BEC theory on the other, as well as to the BCS‐Bose “crossover” picture and the 1989 Friedberg‐Lee BEC theory. It accounts for 2e‐ and 2h‐CPs in arbitrary proportions while BCS theory can be deduced from the GBEC theory but allows only equal (50%‐50%) BE condensed‐mixtures of both kinds of CPs. As it yields the precise BCS gap equation for all temperatures as well as the precise BCS zero‐temperature condensation energy for all couplings, it suggests that the BCS condensate is a BE condensate of a ternary mixture of kinematically independent unpaired electrons coexisting with equally proportioned weakly‐bound zero‐CMM 2e‐ and 2h‐CPs. Without abandoning the electron‐phonon mechanism in moderately weak coupling, and fortuituously insensitive to the BF interactions, the GBEC theory suffices to reproduce the unusually high values of Tc (in units of the Fermi temperature TF) of 0.01–0.05 empirically found in the so‐called “exotic” superconductors of the Uemura plot, including cuprates, in contrast to the low values of Tc/TF⩽10−3 roughly reproduced by BCS theory for conventional (mostly elemental) superconductors.

AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2008•0 citations

Role of superconducting energy gap in extended BCS-Bose crossover theory

Israel Chávez, L. A. García, MANUEL DE LLANO +1 more

The generalized Bose–Einstein condensation (GBEC) theory of superconductivity (SC) is briefly surveyed. It hinges on three distinct new ingredients: (i) Treatment of Cooper pairs (CPs) as actual bosons since they obey Bose statistics, in contrast to BCS pairs which do not obey Bose commutation relations; (ii) inclusion of two-hole Cooper pairs (2hCPs) on an equal footing with two-electron Cooper pairs (2eCPs), thus making this a complete boson–fermion (BF) model; and (iii) inclusion in the resulting ternary ideal BF gas with particular BF vertex interactions that drive boson formation/disintegration processes. GBEC subsumes as special cases both BCS (having its 50–50 symmetry of both kinds of CPs) and ordinary BEC theories (having no 2hCPs), as well as the now familiar BCS-Bose crossover theory. We extended the crossover theory with the explicit inclusion of 2hCPs and construct a phase diagram of [Formula: see text] versus [Formula: see text], where [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] are the critical and Fermi temperatures, [Formula: see text] is the total number density and [Formula: see text] that of unbound electrons at [Formula: see text]. Also, with this extended crossover one can construct the energy gap [Formula: see text] versus [Formula: see text] for some elemental SCs by solving at least two equations numerically: a gap-like and a number equation. In 50–50 symmetry, the energy gap curve agrees quite well with experimental data. But ignoring 2hCPs altogether leads to the gap curve falling substantially below that with 50–50 symmetry which already fits the data quite well, showing that 2hCPs are indispensable to describe SCs.

International Journal of Modern Physics B•Aug 21, 2017•3 citations

GENERALIZED BOSE-EINSTEIN CONDENSATION IN SUPERCONDUCTIVITY

MANUEL DE LLANO

Unification of the BCS and the Bose-Einstein condensation (BEC) theories is surveyed in detail via a generalized BEC (GBEC) finite-temperature statistical formalism. Its major difference with BCS theory is that it can be diagonalized exactly. Under specified conditions it yields the precise BCS gap equation for all temperatures as well as the precise BCS zero-temperature condensation energy for all couplings, thereby suggesting that a BCS condensate is a BE condensate in a ternary mixture of kinematically independent unpaired electrons coexisting with equally proportioned weakly-bound two-electron and two-hole Cooper pairs. Without abandoning the electron-phonon mechanism in moderately weak coupling it suffices, in principle, to reproduce the unusually high values of Tc (in units of the Fermi temperature TF) of 0.01-0.05 empirically reported in the so-called "exotic" superconductors of the Uemura plot, including cuprates, in contrast to the low values of Tc/TF ≤ 10-3 roughly reproduced by BCS theory for conventional (mostly elemental) superconductors. Replacing the characteristic phonon-exchange Debye temperature by a characteristic magnon-exchange one more than twice in size can lead to a simple interaction model associated with spin-fluctuation-mediated pairing.

International Journal of Modern Physics B•Oct 20, 2010•0 citations

Is Room-temperature Superconductivity with Phonons Possible?

MANUEL DE LLANO

By recognizing the vital importance of two‐hole Cooper pairs (CPs) in addition to the usual two‐electron ones in a strongly‐interacting many‐electron system, the concept of CPs was re‐examined with striking conclusions: namely, they are gapped and linearly‐dispersive resonances with a finite lifetime—but provided the ideal‐gas Fermi sea is replaced by a BCS‐correlated unperturbed ground‐state “sea.” Based on this, Bose‐Einstein condensation (BEC) theory has been generalized to include not boson‐boson interactions (also neglected in BCS theory) but rather boson‐fermion (BF) interaction vertices reminiscent of the Fröhlich electron‐phonon interaction in metals. Instead of phonons, the bosons in the generalized BEC (GBEC) theory are now both particle and hole CPs. Unlike BCS theory, the GBEC model is not a mean‐field theory restricted to weak‐coupling as it can be diagonalized exactly. In weak coupling it reproduces the BCS condensation energy, and the next‐order‐in‐coupling term increases its magnitude with respect to BCS. Each kind of CP is responsible for only half the condensation energy. The GBEC theory reduces to all the old known statistical theories as special cases—including the so‐called “BCS‐Bose crossover” picture which in turn generalizes BCS theory by not assuming that the interelectronic chemical potential equals the Fermi energy. Indeed, a BCS condensate is precisely the weak‐coupling limit of a GBE condensate with equal numbers of both types of CPs. With feasible Cooper/BCS model interelectonic interaction parameter values, and even without BF interactions, the GBEC theory yields transition temperatures [including room‐temperature superconductivity (RTSC)] substantially higher than the BCS ceiling of around 45K, without relying on non‐phonon dynamics involving excitons, plasmons, magnons or otherwise purely‐electronic mechanisms. The results are expected to shed light on the experimental search for RTSC.

arXiv:cond-mat/0601526•AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2006•2 citations

BCS-Bose crossover theory extended with hole Cooper pairs

Israel Chávez, L. A. García, MANUEL DE LLANO +1 more

Applying the generalized Bose–Einstein condensation (GBEC) formalism, we extend the BCS-Bose crossover theory by explicitly including hole Cooper pairs (2hCPs). From this follows a phase diagram with two pure phases, one with 2hCPs and the other with electron Cooper pairs (2eCPs), plus a mixed phase with arbitrary proportions of 2eCPs and 2hCPs. One has a special-case phase when there is perfect symmetry (i.e., with ideal 50–50 proportions between 2eCPs and 2hCPs). Explicitly including 2hCPs leads to an extended BCS-Bose crossover which predicts [Formula: see text] values for some well-known conventional superconductors (SCs) (i.e., assuming electron–phonon dynamics). These compare reasonably well with experimental data. We compare with experimental [Formula: see text] values for some conventional SCs associated with the new dimensionless number density [Formula: see text] with theoretical curves associated with the extended crossover for the special case of perfect symmetry. They all obey the Bogoliubov et al. upper limit, thus vindicating it.

International Journal of Modern Physics B•Aug 21, 2017•3 citations
We show how critical temperatures Tc from the BCS-Bose crossover theory (defined self-consistently by both the gap and fermion-number equations) requires unphysically large couplings for the Cooper/BCS model interaction to differ significantly from the Tc of ordinary BCS theory (where the number equation is replaced by the assumption that the chemical potential equals the Fermi energy). Furthermore, within a recent generalization of Bose-Einstein condensation (GBEC) that includes electron and also, without loss of generality, hole Cooper pairs (CPs), both species interacting with unpaired electrons and holes, it is shown that although explicitly ignoring either hole- or electron CPs yields the precise BCS gap equation for all temperatures T, only half of the T = 0 BCS rigorous-upper-bound condensation energy is obtained.
For the Cooper/BCS model interaction in superconductors (SCs) it is shown: a) how BCS-Bose crossover picture transition temperatures Tc, defined self-consistently by both the gap and fermion-number equations, require unphysically large couplings to differ significantly from the Tc of ordinary BCS theory defined without the number equation since here the chemical potential is assumed equal to the Fermi energy; how although ignoring either hole- or electron-Cooper-pairs in the recent "complete boson-fermion model": b) one obtains the precise BCS gap equation for all temperatures T, but c) only half the zero-temperature BCS condensation energy emerges. Results (b) and (c) are also expected to hold for neutral-fermion superfluids (SFs)--such as liquid 3^33He, neutron matter and trapped ultra-cold fermion atomic gases--where the pair-forming two-fermion interaction of course differs from the Cooper/BCS one for SCs.
Unification of the Bardeen, Cooper and Schrieffer (BCS) and the Bose‐Einstein condensation (BEC) theories is surveyed in terms of a generalized BEC (GBEC) finite‐temperature statistical formalism. A vital distinction is that Cooper pairs (CPs) are true bosons that may suffer a BEC since they obey BE statistics, in contrast with BCS pairs that are “hard‐core bosons” at best. A second crucial ingredient is the explicit presence of hole‐pairs (2h) alongside the usual electron‐pairs (2e). A third critical element (particularly in 2D where ordinary BEC does not occur) is the linear dispersion relation of CPs in leading order in the center‐of‐mass momentum (CMM) power‐series expansion of the CP energy. The GBEC theory reduces in limiting cases to all five continuum (as opposed to “spin”) statistical theories of superconductivity, from BCS on one extreme to the BEC theory on the other, as well as to the BCS‐Bose “crossover” picture and the 1989 Friedberg‐Lee BEC theory. It accounts for 2e‐ and 2h‐CPs in arbitrary proportions while BCS theory can be deduced from the GBEC theory but allows only equal (50%‐50%) BE condensed‐mixtures of both kinds of CPs. As it yields the precise BCS gap equation for all temperatures as well as the precise BCS zero‐temperature condensation energy for all couplings, it suggests that the BCS condensate is a BE condensate of a ternary mixture of kinematically independent unpaired electrons coexisting with equally proportioned weakly‐bound zero‐CMM 2e‐ and 2h‐CPs. Without abandoning the electron‐phonon mechanism in moderately weak coupling, and fortuituously insensitive to the BF interactions, the GBEC theory suffices to reproduce the unusually high values of Tc (in units of the Fermi temperature TF) of 0.01–0.05 empirically found in the so‐called “exotic” superconductors of the Uemura plot, including cuprates, in contrast to the low values of Tc/TF⩽10−3 roughly reproduced by BCS theory for conventional (mostly elemental) superconductors.
The generalized Bose–Einstein condensation (GBEC) theory of superconductivity (SC) is briefly surveyed. It hinges on three distinct new ingredients: (i) Treatment of Cooper pairs (CPs) as actual bosons since they obey Bose statistics, in contrast to BCS pairs which do not obey Bose commutation relations; (ii) inclusion of two-hole Cooper pairs (2hCPs) on an equal footing with two-electron Cooper pairs (2eCPs), thus making this a complete boson–fermion (BF) model; and (iii) inclusion in the resulting ternary ideal BF gas with particular BF vertex interactions that drive boson formation/disintegration processes. GBEC subsumes as special cases both BCS (having its 50–50 symmetry of both kinds of CPs) and ordinary BEC theories (having no 2hCPs), as well as the now familiar BCS-Bose crossover theory. We extended the crossover theory with the explicit inclusion of 2hCPs and construct a phase diagram of [Formula: see text] versus [Formula: see text], where [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] are the critical and Fermi temperatures, [Formula: see text] is the total number density and [Formula: see text] that of unbound electrons at [Formula: see text]. Also, with this extended crossover one can construct the energy gap [Formula: see text] versus [Formula: see text] for some elemental SCs by solving at least two equations numerically: a gap-like and a number equation. In 50–50 symmetry, the energy gap curve agrees quite well with experimental data. But ignoring 2hCPs altogether leads to the gap curve falling substantially below that with 50–50 symmetry which already fits the data quite well, showing that 2hCPs are indispensable to describe SCs.
Unification of the BCS and the Bose-Einstein condensation (BEC) theories is surveyed in detail via a generalized BEC (GBEC) finite-temperature statistical formalism. Its major difference with BCS theory is that it can be diagonalized exactly. Under specified conditions it yields the precise BCS gap equation for all temperatures as well as the precise BCS zero-temperature condensation energy for all couplings, thereby suggesting that a BCS condensate is a BE condensate in a ternary mixture of kinematically independent unpaired electrons coexisting with equally proportioned weakly-bound two-electron and two-hole Cooper pairs. Without abandoning the electron-phonon mechanism in moderately weak coupling it suffices, in principle, to reproduce the unusually high values of Tc (in units of the Fermi temperature TF) of 0.01-0.05 empirically reported in the so-called "exotic" superconductors of the Uemura plot, including cuprates, in contrast to the low values of Tc/TF ≤ 10-3 roughly reproduced by BCS theory for conventional (mostly elemental) superconductors. Replacing the characteristic phonon-exchange Debye temperature by a characteristic magnon-exchange one more than twice in size can lead to a simple interaction model associated with spin-fluctuation-mediated pairing.
By recognizing the vital importance of two‐hole Cooper pairs (CPs) in addition to the usual two‐electron ones in a strongly‐interacting many‐electron system, the concept of CPs was re‐examined with striking conclusions: namely, they are gapped and linearly‐dispersive resonances with a finite lifetime—but provided the ideal‐gas Fermi sea is replaced by a BCS‐correlated unperturbed ground‐state “sea.” Based on this, Bose‐Einstein condensation (BEC) theory has been generalized to include not boson‐boson interactions (also neglected in BCS theory) but rather boson‐fermion (BF) interaction vertices reminiscent of the Fröhlich electron‐phonon interaction in metals. Instead of phonons, the bosons in the generalized BEC (GBEC) theory are now both particle and hole CPs. Unlike BCS theory, the GBEC model is not a mean‐field theory restricted to weak‐coupling as it can be diagonalized exactly. In weak coupling it reproduces the BCS condensation energy, and the next‐order‐in‐coupling term increases its magnitude with respect to BCS. Each kind of CP is responsible for only half the condensation energy. The GBEC theory reduces to all the old known statistical theories as special cases—including the so‐called “BCS‐Bose crossover” picture which in turn generalizes BCS theory by not assuming that the interelectronic chemical potential equals the Fermi energy. Indeed, a BCS condensate is precisely the weak‐coupling limit of a GBE condensate with equal numbers of both types of CPs. With feasible Cooper/BCS model interelectonic interaction parameter values, and even without BF interactions, the GBEC theory yields transition temperatures [including room‐temperature superconductivity (RTSC)] substantially higher than the BCS ceiling of around 45K, without relying on non‐phonon dynamics involving excitons, plasmons, magnons or otherwise purely‐electronic mechanisms. The results are expected to shed light on the experimental search for RTSC.
Applying the generalized Bose–Einstein condensation (GBEC) formalism, we extend the BCS-Bose crossover theory by explicitly including hole Cooper pairs (2hCPs). From this follows a phase diagram with two pure phases, one with 2hCPs and the other with electron Cooper pairs (2eCPs), plus a mixed phase with arbitrary proportions of 2eCPs and 2hCPs. One has a special-case phase when there is perfect symmetry (i.e., with ideal 50–50 proportions between 2eCPs and 2hCPs). Explicitly including 2hCPs leads to an extended BCS-Bose crossover which predicts [Formula: see text] values for some well-known conventional superconductors (SCs) (i.e., assuming electron–phonon dynamics). These compare reasonably well with experimental data. We compare with experimental [Formula: see text] values for some conventional SCs associated with the new dimensionless number density [Formula: see text] with theoretical curves associated with the extended crossover for the special case of perfect symmetry. They all obey the Bogoliubov et al. upper limit, thus vindicating it.