sign in sign up
<<
Home , Brian Josephson, Ivar Giaever

I This Week’s Citation Classic______fGlaever I & Megerle K. Study of superconductors by tunneling. Phys. Rev. 122:1101-11, 1961. (GeneralElectric Research Laboratory, Schenectady, NY]

The in the electronic density of theorists were still developing their own ex- state is the central feature in the Bardeen, planations for the strange, coherent phe- Cooper,. and Schrieffer1 (BCS) theory of nomena that occur in superconduclors. Cen- I! . Electron tunneling was tral to the BCS theory is the prediction of an intrOduced to study the energy gap in this energy gap in the electron density of state. paper, and it turned 2out to be art easy and il- The experiment described in the paper was luminating method. [The SCIe indicates conceived to measure the postulated gap. that this paper has been cited in over 190 The success of the experiment in that regard publications since 1961.] was phenomenal, and all but the most stub- born scientists accepted the BCS theory. [Disproving ’s statement, ‘New theories are never accepted, the opposition just dies.’] “I feel very lucky to have played a part in all of this. When I started the tunneling ex- Research Development Center periments at the prodding of John Fisher, I Company really didn’t believe that could Schenectady, NY 12301 tunnel because at the time I was a mechani- cal engineer. When I became convinced that February 21, 1984 tunneling took place in my experiment, I read skepticism in the eyes of my much “An apocryphal story has it that Louis more experienced colleagues at General Pasteur spent his declining years rereading Electric, and I searched for the more conclu- his own papers while muttering to himself, sive experiment. While taking a course in ‘Beautiful, oh so beautiful’ [in French, of -state physics given by Hil Huntington coursel. Getting a Citation Classic gives at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, I more ordinary scientists an excuse to take a learned about the superconducting energy second look at an earlypaper. I certainly did gap, and all I really did was put the tunnel- while muttering to myself, ‘Has it really ing together with superconductivity. been more than 20 years?’ [in Norwegian, of “It was a very exciting and enjoyable time. course]. It was the very firstfull-length paper Maybe I am just getting old, but it seems to I wrote, and presumably the Swedish Acade- me that the research climate in this country my read it while muttering to themselves, has changed greatly in the 20 or so years ‘Not bad for a Norwegian’ [in Swedish, of that have gone by. Today, there is a general course]. The paper is an extension of two3 4 lack of faith in the value of basic research. earlier Physical Review Letters papers ’ As a result,young scientists tend to be close- describing tunneling into superconductors iy supervised and their work narrowly fo- which led to a share in the 1973 cused. Like ourselves 20 years ago, they in physics (along with and need time to think about the important ). problems that expand human understand- “1 suspect the paper has been so highly ing. And they need more time to wrestle, suf- cited because it describes an experiment fer, and hopefully solve some of them. Grv- that confirmed the relatively new theory of en these opportunitiesthey will develop into superconductivity by Bardeen, Cooper, and mature, capable scientists whom we will Schrieffer (BCS). At the time, many other need so desperately tomorrow.”

1. Bardeea I, Cooper L N & Schrleffer I II. Thcoiy of superconductivity. PAys. Re,’. 1O8:1t75-204, 1957. (Cited 2,465 times since 1957.) 2. H.roae A & Pitemo C. Physics and applications of the . New York: Wiley. 1982. 529 p. 3. Chewer I. Energy gap inauperconductors measured by electron tunneling. PAys. Re,’. Let,. 5:147-8. 1960. (Cited 145 times since 1960.) 4. .- ...... Electron,lunneling between two superconductors. PAys. Re.. Le:t. 5:464-6, 1960. (Cited 115 times since (960.)

20 E1&AS @1984 by(SI® CURgENT CONTENTS®