Reply to Comment on "Superfluid stability in the BEC-BCS crossover" by Sheehy and Radzihovsky

Simple item page
dc.creatorPao, C. -H.
dc.creatorWu, S. -T.
dc.creatorYip, S. -K.
dc.date2006-08-23
dc.date.accessioned2026-07-07T07:19:46Z
dc.date.available2026-07-07T07:19:46Z
dc.descriptionThe reason behind the discrepancy between the phase diagrams of our earlier work [1] and the comment of Sheehy and Radzihovsky [2] is discussed. We show that, in contrast to what is claimed in [2], the requirement of positive susceptibility is sufficient to rule out states that are local maximum of the free energy (as a function of the order parameter $Δ$
dc.description6 pages, 1 figure
dc.identifierhttps://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0608501
dc.identifierhttp://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0608501
dc.identifier.urihttp://salesiana.dossiersoluciones.com/handle/123456789/114750
dc.subjectSuperconductivity
dc.subjectStrongly Correlated Electrons
dc.titleReply to Comment on "Superfluid stability in the BEC-BCS crossover" by Sheehy and Radzihovsky
dc.typetext

Files

Collections

arXiv