http://phys.org/news/2011-10-physicists-unveil-theory-kind-superconductivity.html
and another http://phys.org/news/2014-02-result-cheaper-efficient-solar-cells.html Electrons could become squeezed in that their quantum properties become delocalized. An electron can be spread out all over the superconductor because its location is pinned. It is hard to tell what is going on if the electron is viewed realistically rather like a pin ball. The electron has over 500 modes of existence based on how these particles move in relationship to each other, I adhere to the spin net emergence of the electron in that electrons and light strings are the same thing with the electron being the tip of the light string. Voltage is a description of the electron that is only applicable to a particular state of electron matter. Voltage may not apply to all the ways that an electron can exist. It is not clear that voltage can be applied to electrons in a superconductor; especially when the type of superconductor is not defined. On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 6:09 PM, John Berry <[email protected]> wrote: > While looking at reviews for Caver A. Mead's book, I read a review that > said he made a mistake including voltage in a calculation for > superconductors. > > Now I think that there must be voltage of a type in superconductors, there > are 2 types of voltage. > > One is the voltage drop across a conductor. This is similar to the voltage > on a charged capacitor. > > But there are other type is kinetic voltage, this is where a charge is > moving at a given velocity as it used in particle accelerators. > > Voltage of this type can be compared to (or come from) inertia, and if > electrons are moving then there will be some persistence even if impedance > is removed since electrons still have mass. > > If a superconducting ring that carried a current was suddenly opened, the > electrons are still moving and must compress slightly as they come to a > stop leaving the ends momentarily charged to some degree. > > Additionally imagine a superconductive loop in an alternating EM field, > there is a voltage induced by the changing magnetic field (or > relativistically distorted electric field) and this does not lead to a > voltage drop, but there is still a voltage, if this loop was opened and a > normal circuit inserted you would indeed see a voltage. > > Indeed even if we use a resistive wire in such a loop, no voltage drop is > noted, and yet there is still a voltage present to overcome the resistance, > and the resistance is still impeding the flow of electrons. But would it be > correct to say that this is happening with no voltage, even though none can > be read by any instrument? > > > John > > >
