1. B.Spivak with A. Zuyzin Quantum (T=0) superconductor-metal? (insulator?) transitions.

2. Quantum superconductor-metal (insulator) transitions take place at T=0 as functions of external parameters such as the strength of disorder, the magnetic field and the film thickness.

3. Examples of experimental data

4. R c = 4 h/e Insulator Superconductor Bi layer on amorphous Ge. Disorder is varied by changing film thickness. Experiments suggesting existence of quantum superconductor-insulator transition

5. Ga layer grown on amorphous Ge Insulator Superconductor Experiments suggesting existence of quantum superconductor-metal transition A metal?

6. Superconductor – glass (?) transition in a film in a parallel magnetic field There are long time (hours) relaxation processes reflected in the time dependence of the resistance. H || The mean field theory: The phase transition is of first order. W. Wo, P. Adams, 1995

7. T=0 superconductor-metal transition in a perpendicular magnetic field There are conductors whose T=0 conductance is four order of magnitude larger than the Drude value. N. Masson, A. Kapitulnik

8. The magneto-resistance of quasi-one-dimensional superconducting wires The resistance of superconducting wires is much smaller than the Drude value The magneto-resistance is negative and giant (more than a factor of 10) P. Xiong, A.V.Hertog, R.Dynes

9. A model: Superconducting grains embedded into a normal metal S N Theoretically one can distinguish two cases: R >  and R <   is superconducting coherence length at T=0 R

10. A mean field approach The parameters in the problem are: grain radius R, grain concentration N, interaction constants   S >0.

11. If R<  there are no superconducting solutions in an individual grain. In this case a system of grains has a quantum (T=0) superconductor-metal transition even in the framework of mean field theory! At  = S  the critical concentration of superconducting grains is of order

12. An alternative approach to the same problem in the same limit R <  S i is the action for an individual grain “I”. S S J ij

13. Perturbation on the metallic side of the transition R <  The metallic state is stable with respect to superconductivity if

14. Quantum fluctuations of the order parameter in an individual grain (T=0, R< ) The action describing the Cooper instability of a grain At R< R c the metallic state is stable

15. R< 

16. At T=0 in between the superconducting and insulating phases there is a metallic phase.

17. Properties of the exotic metal near the quantum metal-superconductor transition a.Near the transition at T=0 the conductivity of the “metal” is enhanced. b. The Hall coefficient is suppressed. c. The magnetic susceptibility is enhanced. d. There is a large positive magneto-resistance. In which sense such a metal is a Fermi liquid? For example, what is the size of quasi-particles ? Is electron focusing at work in such metals ?

18. Are such “exotic” metals localized in 2D? There is a new length associated with the Andreev scattering of electrons on the fluctuations of  This length is non-perturbative in the electron interaction constant S

19. The case of large grains R>>  : there is a superconducting solution in an individual grain Fluctuations of the amplitude of the order parameter can be neglected. Caldeira, Legget, Ambegaokar, Eckern, Schon Does this action exhibit a superconductor-metal or superconductor-insulator transition ? G>1 is the conductance of the film.

20. t Correlation function of the order parameter of an individual grain Kosterlitz 1976

21. At T=0 in between the superconducting and insulating phases there is a metallic phase. However, in the framework of this model the interval of parameters where it exists is exponentially narrow.

22. A superconducting film in a perpendicular magnetic field (T=0) a. The mean field superconducting solution exists at arbitrary magnetic filed. b. Classical and quantum fluctuations destroy this solution and determine the critical magnetic field. Mean field solution + “mean field treatment” of disorder. Mean field solution without “inappropriate” averaging over disorder. Solution taking into account both mesoscopic and quantum fluctuations. H

23. Theoretically in both cases (R>  and R<  ) the regions of quantum fluctuations are too narrow to explain experiments of the Kapitulnik group.

24. Is it a superconductor-glass transition in a parallel magnetic field? W. Wo, P. Adams, 1995

25. HcHc In the pure case the mean field T=0 transition as a function of H || is of first order. In 2D arbitrarily disorder destroys the first order phase transition. (Imry, Wortis).

26. A naive approach (H=H c ). R b. More sophisticated drawing: L x is independent of the scale L This actually means that The surface energy vanishes and the first order phase transition is destroyed! Phase 2 Phase 1

27. The critical current and the energy of SNS junctions with spin polarized electrons changes its sign as a function of its thickness L Bulaevski, Buzdin

29. Does the hysteresis in a perpendicular magnetic field indicate glassiness of the problem in a perpendicular magnetic field? N.Masson, A. Kapitulnik

30. Why is the glassy nature more pronounced in the case of parallel magnetic field? Is this connected with the fact that in the pure case the transition is second order in perpendicular magnetic field and first order in parallel field?

31. Negative magneto-resistance in 1D wires P. Xiong, A.V.Hertog, R.Dynes

32. Negative magneto-resistance in quasi-1D superconducting wires. A model of tunneling junctions: At small T the resistance of the wire is determined by the rare segments with small values of I c. The probability amplitudes of tunneling paths A and B are random quantities uniformly distributed, say over an interval (-1,1). A B

33. An explanation of experiments : The probability for I c to be small is suppressed by the magnetic field. Consequently, the system exhibits giant magneto-resistance. A problem: in the experiment G>> 1. A question: P(G) G GDGD 1 e 2 /h

34. Do we know what is the resistance of an SNS junction ? s s N The mini-gap in the N-region is of order  )~D/L 2   is the energy relaxation time

35. Conclusion: In slightly disordered films there are quantum superconductor-metal transitions. Properties of the metallic phase are affected by the superconducting fluctuations

36. Superconductor-disordered ferromagnetic metal-superconductor junctions. The quantity J(r,r’) exhibits Friedel oscillations. At L>>L I only mesoscopic fluctuations survive. Here I is the spin splitting energy in the ferromagnetic metal. SFS r r’ Mean field theory (A.Larkin, Yu.Ovchinnikov, L.Bulaevskii, Buzdin). In the case of junctions of small area the ground state of the system corresponds to a nonzero sample specific phase difference. I c is not exponentially small and exhibits oscillations as a function of temperature. IcIc T

37. SFS junctions with large area The situation is similar to the case of FNF layers, which has been considered by Slonchevskii. The ground state of the system corresponds to S F S r r’

38. The amplitudes of probabilities A i have random signs. Therefore, after averaging of only blocks ~1/R survive. l R r1r1 r2r2 r3r3 r4r4 A qualitative picture. AiAi

39. The kernel is expressed in terms of the normal metal Green functions and therefore it exhibits the Friedel oscillations. Friedel oscillations in superconductors (mean field level):