On the estimating the superconducting volume fraction from the internal magnetic susceptibility
Abstract
Zhang et al.1 reported zero-field cooled (ZFC) and field cooled (FC) data measured in a highly compressed Pr4Ni3O10 single crystal. These measurements provide unambiguous confirmation of bulk superconductivity in pressurized Ruddlesden-Popper nickelates. Zhang et al.1 applied an equation (described in Refs.2,3) to recalculate ZFC data measured in a Pr4Ni3O10 (sample S3) in volume fraction f of the superconducting phase in the sample. In result1, f = 0.85 was reported for sample S3 at pressure P = 40.2 GPa. The key postulate of the methodology for the calculation of f (see also works4-6) is that f is equal to the amplitude of the internal magnetic susceptibility internal , or f = internal . Here we argue that this postulate is incorrect and present counterexample where the Pr4Ni3O10 sample S3 can exhibit f < 0.10 and internal = 0.82 . In the result, we addressed recent Replies2,3 on our Comments7,8. Considering that the postulate f = internal is widely used in superconductivity, we extend our request to reconsider the validity of this postulate in the entire field of superconductivity.
Turn this paper into a full lesson
ArcXiv compiles a staged curriculum from this paper: 8-12 lessons across beginner → advanced, synthesised section guides, visuals, flashcards, a quiz, exercises, and on-demand deep dives per section. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.