1. Introduction
The time-dependent Ginzburg–Landau equations (GL) are the major tool in modeling vortex motion. Although this approach is applicable only for gapless systems near the critical temperature [
1], it is gauge invariant and reproduces correctly major features of the vortex motion.
A simpler linear London approach has been employed through the years to describe static or nearly static vortex systems. The London equations express the basic Meissner effect and can be used at any temperature for problems where vortex cores are irrelevant. Moving vortices are commonly considered the same as static which are displaced as a whole.
However, recently it has been shown that this is not the case for moving vortex-like topological defects in, e.g., neutral superfluids or liquid crystals [
2]. This is not so in superconductors within the time-dependent London theory (TDL) which takes into account normal currents, a necessary consequence of moving magnetic structure of a vortex [
3,
4]. In this paper, the magnetic field distribution of moving Pearl vortices in thin films is considered. It is shown that the self-energy of a moving vortex decreases with increasing velocity. The interaction energy of two vortices moving with the same velocity becomes anisotropic; it is enhanced when the vector
connecting vortices is parallel to the velocity
and suppressed if
. The magnetic flux carried by moving vortex is equal to flux quantum, but this flux is redistributed so that the part of it in front of the vortex is depleted, whereas the part behind it is enhanced.
In time-dependent situations, the current consists, in general, of normal and superconducting parts:
where
is the electric field and
is the order parameter.
The conductivity
approaches the normal state value
when the temperature
T approaches
; in s-wave superconductors it vanishes fast with decreasing temperature along with the density of normal excitations. This is not the case for strong pair breaking when superconductivity becomes gapless, and the density of states approaches the normal state value at all temperatures. Unfortunately, there is not much experimental information about the
T dependence of
. Theoretically, this question is still debated; e.g., [
5] discusses the possible enhancement of
due to inelastic scattering.
Within the London approach
is a constant
, and Equation (
1) becomes:
where
is the London penetration depth. By acting on this via curling, one obtains:
where
is the position of the
-th vortex;
is the direction of vortices. Equation (
3) can be considered as a general form of the time-dependent London equation.
The time-dependent version of London Equation (
3) is valid only outside vortex cores, similarly to the static London approach. As such, it may give useful results for materials with large GL parameter
values in fields away from the upper critical field
. On the other hand, Equation (
3) is a useful, albeit approximate tool for low temperatures where GL theory does not work and the microscopic theory is forbiddingly complex.
2. Thin Films
Let the film of thickness
d be in the
plane. Integration of Equation (
3) over the film thickness gives, for the
z component of the field, a Pearl vortex moving with velocity
:
Here,
is the flux quantum;
is the sheet current density related to the tangential field components at the upper film face by
;
is the Pearl length; and
. With the help of div
, this equation is transformed to:
As was shown by Pearl [
6], a large contribution to the energy of a vortex in a thin film comes from stray fields. In fact, the problem of a vortex in a thin film is reduced to that of the field distribution in free space subject to the boundary condition supplied by solutions of Equation (
4) at the film’s surface. Outside the film curl
div
, one can introduce a scalar potential for the
outside field:
The general form of the potential satisfying Laplace equation that vanishes at
of the empty upper half-space is
Here,
,
, and
is the two-dimensional Fourier transform of
. In the lower half-space, one has to replace
in Equation (
7).
As is done in [
3], one applies the 2D Fourier transform to Equation (
5) to obtain a linear differential equation for
. Since
, we obtain:
In fact, this gives distributions for all field components outside the film, its surface included. In particular,
at
(the upper film face) is given by
We are interested in the vortex’s motion with constant velocity
, so that we can evaluate this field in real space for the vortex at the origin at
:
It is convenient in the following to use Pearl
as the unit length and measure the field in units
:
(we left the same notations for
and
in new units; when needed, we indicate formulas written in common units).
2.1. Evaluation of
With the help of identity
one rewrites the field as
To evaluate the last integral over
, we note that the three-dimensional (3D) Coulomb Green’s function is
To do here the last step, we used
,
and
It follows from Equation (
14)
Replace now
,
,
to obtain instead of Equation (
13):
After integrating by parts, one obtains:
For the Pearl vortex at rest
,
, and the known result follows; see, e.g., [
7]:
and
are second-kind Bessel and Struve functions.
Hence, we succeeded in reducing the double integral (
11) to a single integral over
u. Besides, the singularity at
is now explicitly represented by
, whereas the integral over
u is convergent and can be evaluated numerically.
The field distribution is not symmetrical relative to the singularity position: the field in front of the moving vortex is suppressed relative to the symmetric distribution of the vortex at rest, whereas behind the vortex it is enhanced. This is an interesting consequence of our calculations: the magnetic flux of the moving vortex is redistributed so that it is depleted in front of the vortex and enhanced behind it.
We can characterize this redistribution by calculating the magnetic flux
in front of the vortex:
The integral over
y gives
, whereas when integrating over
we use
where
indicates that the integral over
in Equation (
20) should be understood as the principal value. Hence, we have
The integration now is straightforward and we obtain
Note that the total flux carried by vortex is given by Fourier component
; see Equation (
9). I.e.,
is the flux through the half-plane
of the vortex at rest. The flux behind the moving vortex is therefore
2.2. Potential and London Energy of the Moving Vortex
The potential
introduced above is useful not only as an intermediate step in the evaluation of a magnetic field; it is directly related to the London energy (the sum of the magnetic energy outside the film and the kinetic energy of the currents inside) [
8].
The potential
Employing again the identity (
12), we have
with
.
2.2.1. Self-Energy of a Moving Vortex
This energy is given by
whereas the integral (
26) in this limit is logarithmically divergent. As is commonly done, we can approach the singularity at
from any side—e.g., setting
and
, the core size is:
for the small dimensionless
. Compare this with the energy of a vortex at rest; see, e.g., [
8]:
Hence, the vortex self-energy decreases with increasing velocity, a result qualitatively similar to that of moving vortices in the bulk [
4].
2.2.2. Interaction of Moving Vortices
It has been shown in [
8] that in infinite films the interaction is given by
;
is the potential of the vortex at the origin at the position
of the second. Using Equation (
26) we obtain
Clearly,
. This energy can be evaluated numerically and the result is shown in
Figure 2 for
.
It is worth noting that in thin films the interaction is not proportional to the field of one vortex at the position of the second. In our case the field of one vortex (see
Figure 1) is not symmetric relative to
, whereas the interaction energy is.
2.3. Electric Field and Dissipation
Having the magnetic field (
9) of a moving vortex, one gets for two vortices, one at the origin and the second at
:
(in common units). The moving, nonuniform vortex’s magnetic field causes an electric field
out of the vortex core, which in turn causes the normal currents
and the dissipation
. Usually this dissipation is small relative to Bardeen–Stephen core dissipation [
9], but for fast vortex motion and high conductivity of normal excitations [
5] it can become substantial [
3].
The field
caused by known
is given by Maxwell equations
and
:
For a constant velocity, one can consider the dissipation at
. The dissipation power is:
The integral here is divergent at large
k, but the London theory breaks down in the vortex core of a size
, so one can introduce a factor
to truncate this divergence. We then calculate the reduced quantity
shown in
Figure 3.
We note that the dissipation develops a shallow ditch along the x axis. Hence, for a fixed separation of vortices in the pair, the dissipation is minimal if they are aligned along the velocity.
3. Discussion
We have shown that in thin films the magnetic structure of the moving Pearl vortex is distorted relative to the vortex at rest. A similar formal procedure can be employed for moving Abrikosov vortices in the bulk, see
Appendix A. The flux quantum of a moving vortex is redistributed and the back side of the flux is enhanced, whereas the front side is depleted. Physically, the distortion is caused by normal currents arising due to changing in time magnetic field at each point in space; the electric field is induced and causes normal currents. Naturally, it leads to the suppression of the flux where it is increasing (in front of the moving vortex) and to enhancement where it is decreasing (behind the vortex). We characterize this asymmetry by the difference of fluxes behind (
) and in front (
) of the moving vortex
. For a realistic situation,
, although the relaxation time
where
is the poorly-known conductivity of above-the-gap normal excitations. Measuring
one can extract
, an important physical characteristic of superconductors. There is an experimental technique which, in principle, could probe the field distribution in moving vortices [
10]. This is highly sensitive SQUID-on-tip with the loop small on the scale of possible Pearl lengths.
Recent experiments have traced vortices moving in thin superconducting films with velocities well exceeding the speed of sound [
10,
11]. Vortices crossing thin-film bridges being pushed by transport currents have a tendency to form chains directed along the velocity. The spacing of vortices in a chain is usually exceeded by much of the core size, so the commonly accepted reason for the chain formation, namely, the depletion of the order parameter behind moving vortices, is questionable. However, at distances
the time-dependent London theory is applicable. Another promising technique for studying moving vortices is Tonomura’s Lorentz microscopy [
12].
In this paper, we consider only properties of a single vortex and of interaction between two vortices moving with the same velocity, It would be interesting to consider how these results change if the quantization of the transverse electron motion is taken into account [
13]. The problem of interaction in systems of many vortices is still to be considered.