Phenomenologism vs fundamentalism: The case of superconductivity

CURRENT SCIENCE, 94 (10):1256-1264 (2008)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article argues that phenomenological treatment of physical problems is more powerful than fundamental treatment. Developments in the field of superconductivity present us with a clear example of such superiority. The BCS (Bardeen, Cooper and Schrieffer) was accepted as the fundamental theory of superconductivity for a long time. Nevertheless, Landau and Ginzburg phenomenological model has so far proven to be a more fruitful theoretical representation to understand and to predict the features of superconductivity and superconductive materials.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

What do we mean when using the acronym 'BCS'?Alexander Gabovich & Vladimir Kuznetsov - 2013 - European Journal of Physics 34 (2):371-382.
The Higgs mechanism and superconductivity: A case study of formal analogies.Doreen Fraser & Adam Koberinski - 2016 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 55:72-91.
Einstein and the Early Theory of Superconductivity, 1919–1922.Tilman Sauer - 2007 - Archive for History of Exact Sciences 61 (2):159-211.
Superconductivity and structures: revisiting the London account.Steven French & James Ladyman - 1997 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 28 (3):363-393.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-09-12

Downloads
320 (#66,171)

6 months
63 (#87,568)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Towfic Shomar
University Of Jordan

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references