Physics Today
Jump to Content
Increase text size Decrease text size
  • Sign In
  • View Items in Cart View Cart
  • Advanced
  • Keyword
 
  • Home
  • Print Edition
  • Daily Edition
    • News Picks
    • The Dayside
    • Physics Update
    • Singularities
    • Points of View
    • Politics and Policy
    • Science and the Media
    • Obituaries
    • We Hear That
    • Events Calendar
  • Advertising
  • Buyer's Guide
  • About us
    • Our mission
    • Our people
    • American Institute of Physics
    • Member societies
    • Register
    • Subscribe
    • Submit content
    • Marketing reprints
    • Rights and permissions
    • Help/FAQ
    • Change mailing address
    • Contact us
  • Jobs
    • Job Seeker Login
    • Search Jobs
    • Post Resumes
    • Career Resources
    • For Employers
    • Success Stories
    • Resume Templates
    • About Us
    • Advertising
    • Display Advertising
    • Employer Resources
    • Banner Advertising
    • Security Tips
Follow us: Facebook    Twitter    rss    E-mail alert
  • Table of contents
  • Past issues

yellow star Featured Jobs

  • Search jobs
  • Post jobs
Letters

American physics implosion

Kannan Jagannathan's review of two recent books (PHYSICS TODAY, December 2006, page 57) with the arresting titles Not Even Wrong: The Failure of String Theory . . . and The Trouble with Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science . . . amusingly compares string theorists' faith in their own transcendental insights to the Great Disappointment of 1844, in which religious leader William Miller and his followers renounced worldly goods and awaited the Second Coming. However, the tempest in a teacup surrounding string theory conceals a much larger problem in American physics. That problem is well illustrated by theories that have evolved over the past 20 years to describe high-temperature superconductivity (HTSC).

Since its discovery in 1911, superconductivity has fascinated many physicists. However, by 1980 the field was thought to be dormant; even the quest for higher transition temperatures Tc seemed to have leveled off around 30 K. In 1986 Georg Bednorz and K. Alex Müller announced that they had found superconductivity in a most unexpected place: not a metal, but a ceramic oxide, with Tc near 40 K. Within a few years, transition temperatures had climbed to well over 100 K.

Unlike string theory, HTSC was a field with abundant experimental information—today there are more than 65 000 publications on the topic, about one-third of them patents. Here was a real challenge for theory; no fewer than nine Nobel Prize winners, and many other scientists as well, have contributed theories on the subject. The question they raised most often was, What interactions are responsible for the high transition temperatures—the conventional electron–phonon interaction, as in the metallic superconductors, or something else? Of the nine Nobel laureates, three supported the conventional interaction, while six went for something exotic—usually electron– spin interactions. The experiments are now in, and the majority was wrong—the electron–phonon interaction is responsible.

Few readers will be surprised to learn that so many Nobel laureates were wrong. As they say on Wall Street, prior performance is no guarantee of future success. But now comes the interesting part—the three who were right are European, and the six who were wrong are American. That can scarcely be a coincidence, and it says something about American physics and especially what American professors and graduate students expect from research. Plainly stated, string theory and erroneous theories of HTSC may have a common explanation: Americans have become so self-centered that their physics theories are disconnected from reality, not only when no data are available, but even when experimental data are abundant.

J. C. Phillips
(jcphillips8@comcast.net)
Rutgers University
Piscataway, New Jersey

 

  • Article Tools
  • Enlarge text   Enlarge text
  • Shrink text   Shrink text
  • Comment on this articleWrite a letter to the editor
  • Related from the archive
  • Not Even Wrong: The Failure of String Theory and the Search for Unity in Physical Law
    and
    The Trouble with Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next
  • Free this month
  • Space debris
  • Statistical physics is for the birds
  • Varying cosmic-ray flux may explain cycles of biodiversity
  • New Books
  • New Products
  • Letters
  • Most popular articles
  • Gedanken experiment: Levitate a physics sitcom?
    Points of View
  • Nanoplasmonics: The physics behind the applications
    February 2011
  • Half-quantum vortices
    Physics Update
  • Quantum criticality
    February 2011

 



SERVICES
Physics Today Jobs
Physics Today Buyers Guide
Event Calendar
Obituaries
DAILY EDITION
The Dayside
News Picks
Science in the Media
Politics & Policy
Singularities
Physics Update
Points of View
THE MAGAZINE
This month in print
Institutional subscriptions
Information for advertisers
READER SERVICE
Register
Sign in
Subscribe
Email alert
MORE INFO
FAQ
Contact us
About Physics Today
Privacy Policy
Marketing reprints
Rights and Permissions

Copyright © by the American Institute of Physics - All rights reserved

Find articles by AUTHORNAME

This PublicationThis Publication
ScitationScitation
SPINSPIN
ScitopiaScitopia
Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
PubMedPubMed