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

International Journal of Modern Physics B

BCS-Bose crossover theory extended with hole Cooper pairs

Israel Chávez, L. A. García, MANUEL DE LLANO, M. Grether

Published Aug 21, 2017• 3 citations
Publisher

Abstract

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.

DOI
10.1142/s0217979217450138

Related papers

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

Superconductor superfluid density from the Bardeen–Cooper–Schrieffer/Bose crossover theory

Israel Chávez, M. Grether, MANUEL DE LLANO

Abstract The superfluid density $$n_{s}(T)$$ n s ( T ) of a superconductor is calculated based on the generalized Bose–Einstein condensation (GBEC) theory that addresses a fully-interacting ternary boson-fermion gas mixture of free electrons as fermions, plus two-electron Cooper pairs (2eCPs) and also, explicitly, two-hole Cooper pairs (2hCPs), both as bosons. Here we consider two special cases (i) 100%–0% (i.e., with no condensed 2hCPs) and (ii) 0%–100% (i.e., with no condensed 2eCPs). Subsumed in GBEC are the Bardeen–Cooper–Schrieffer (BCS) and Bose–Einstein condensation (BEC) theories along with the BCS-BEC crossover theory extended with 2hCPs. We find that in the weak-coupling regime $$n_{s}(0)$$ n s ( 0 ) agrees with data from the Uemura et al. (2004) graph for several elemental SCs by taking in 3D with a quadratic energy-dispersion relation while in 2D with a linear relation are much too far below the data. In the strong-coupling regime the linear behavior of critical temperature $$T_{c}$$ T c vs $$n_{s}(0)$$ n s ( 0 ) obtained here is just as Božović et al. (2016) found. However, in 2D with a linear relation accounting for 0%–100%, $$n_{s}(T)/n_{s}(0)$$ n s ( T ) / n s ( 0 ) compares well with some high- $$T_{c}$$ T c -cuprate SC data between the two coupling regimes.

SN Applied Sciences•Jun 13, 2022•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

Generalized BCS-Bose Crossover Picture of Superconductivity

Josep Amengual i Batle, M. Casas, MANUEL DE LLANO +2 more

A recent unification of the BCS theory with that of the Bose–Einstein condensation (BEC) through a "complete" boson-fermion model is discussed as a generalization of the "BCS-Bose crossover" picture of superconductivity. Good first-principles Tc predictions in 2D are calculated with no adjustable parameters for the so-called "exotic" cuprate superconductors of the "Uemura plot", without abandoning the phonon interaction mechanism. The only condition is that one depart moderately from the perfect electron-/hole-Cooper-pair symmetry to which BCS (as well as the "crossover") theory are restricted by construction.

International Journal of Modern Physics B•Aug 10, 2003•0 citations

Generalized Bose-Einstein Condensation and BCS-Bose Crossover Theory

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

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.

•Sep 5, 2005•0 citations

BCS and BEC Finally Unified: A Brief Review

Josep Amengual i Batle, M. Casas, Mauricio Fortes +5 more

We review efforts to unify both the Bardeen, Cooper and Schrieffer (BCS) and Bose-Einstein condensation (BEC) pictures of superconductivity. We have finally achieved this in terms of a "\textit{complete} boson-fermion (BF) model" (CBFM) that reduces in special cases to all the main continuum (as opposed to "spin") statistical theories of superconductivity. Our BF model is "complete" in the sense that not only two-electron (2e) but also two-hole (2h) Cooper pairs (CPs) are allowed in arbitrary proportions. In contrast, BCS-Bogoliubov theory--which can also be considered as the theory of a mixture of kinematically independent electrons, 2e- and 2h-CPs--allows only equal, 50%-50%, mixtures of the two kinds of CPs. This is obvious from the perfect symmetry about $μ$, the electron chemical potential, of the well-known Bogoliubov $v^{2}(ε)$ and $u^{2}(ε)$ coefficients, where $ε$ is the electron energy. The CBFM is then applied to see: a) whether the BCS model interaction for the electron-phonon dynamical mechanism is sufficient to predict the unusually high values of $T_{c}$ (in units of the Fermi temperature) of $\simeq 0.01-0.1$ exhibited by the so-called ``exotic'' superconductors \cite{Brandow} in both 2D and 3D--relative to the low values of $\lesssim 10^{-3}$ more or less correctly predicted by BCS theory for conventional, elemental superconductors; and b) whether it can at least suggest, if not explain, why "hole superconductors" have higher $T_{c}$'s.

arXiv:cond-mat/0211456•Nov 21, 2002•4 citations
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.
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.
Abstract The superfluid density ns(T)n_{s}(T)ns​(T) n s ( T ) of a superconductor is calculated based on the generalized Bose–Einstein condensation (GBEC) theory that addresses a fully-interacting ternary boson-fermion gas mixture of free electrons as fermions, plus two-electron Cooper pairs (2eCPs) and also, explicitly, two-hole Cooper pairs (2hCPs), both as bosons. Here we consider two special cases (i) 100%–0% (i.e., with no condensed 2hCPs) and (ii) 0%–100% (i.e., with no condensed 2eCPs). Subsumed in GBEC are the Bardeen–Cooper–Schrieffer (BCS) and Bose–Einstein condensation (BEC) theories along with the BCS-BEC crossover theory extended with 2hCPs. We find that in the weak-coupling regime ns(0)n_{s}(0)ns​(0) n s ( 0 ) agrees with data from the Uemura et al. (2004) graph for several elemental SCs by taking in 3D with a quadratic energy-dispersion relation while in 2D with a linear relation are much too far below the data. In the strong-coupling regime the linear behavior of critical temperature TcT_{c}Tc​ T c vs ns(0)n_{s}(0)ns​(0) n s ( 0 ) obtained here is just as Božović et al. (2016) found. However, in 2D with a linear relation accounting for 0%–100%, ns(T)/ns(0)n_{s}(T)/n_{s}(0)ns​(T)/ns​(0) n s ( T ) / n s ( 0 ) compares well with some high- TcT_{c}Tc​ T c -cuprate SC data between the two coupling regimes.
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.
A recent unification of the BCS theory with that of the Bose–Einstein condensation (BEC) through a "complete" boson-fermion model is discussed as a generalization of the "BCS-Bose crossover" picture of superconductivity. Good first-principles Tc predictions in 2D are calculated with no adjustable parameters for the so-called "exotic" cuprate superconductors of the "Uemura plot", without abandoning the phonon interaction mechanism. The only condition is that one depart moderately from the perfect electron-/hole-Cooper-pair symmetry to which BCS (as well as the "crossover") theory are restricted by construction.
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.
We review efforts to unify both the Bardeen, Cooper and Schrieffer (BCS) and Bose-Einstein condensation (BEC) pictures of superconductivity. We have finally achieved this in terms of a "\textit{complete} boson-fermion (BF) model" (CBFM) that reduces in special cases to all the main continuum (as opposed to "spin") statistical theories of superconductivity. Our BF model is "complete" in the sense that not only two-electron (2e) but also two-hole (2h) Cooper pairs (CPs) are allowed in arbitrary proportions. In contrast, BCS-Bogoliubov theory--which can also be considered as the theory of a mixture of kinematically independent electrons, 2e- and 2h-CPs--allows only equal, 50%-50%, mixtures of the two kinds of CPs. This is obvious from the perfect symmetry about μμμ, the electron chemical potential, of the well-known Bogoliubov v2(ε)v^{2}(ε)v2(ε) and u2(ε)u^{2}(ε)u2(ε) coefficients, where εεε is the electron energy. The CBFM is then applied to see: a) whether the BCS model interaction for the electron-phonon dynamical mechanism is sufficient to predict the unusually high values of TcT_{c}Tc​ (in units of the Fermi temperature) of ≃0.01−0.1\simeq 0.01-0.1≃0.01−0.1 exhibited by the so-called ``exotic'' superconductors \cite{Brandow} in both 2D and 3D--relative to the low values of ≲10−3\lesssim 10^{-3}≲10−3 more or less correctly predicted by BCS theory for conventional, elemental superconductors; and b) whether it can at least suggest, if not explain, why "hole superconductors" have higher TcT_{c}Tc​'s.