It is really quite simple: And it is probably for this reason why the Superconducting community is trying everything in its power to block it. The fact is that a voltage over two contacts can only become zero when the concomitant electric-field between the contacts becomes canceled. This is "primary school" physics. This is what Onnes observed when he discovered superconduction; This is thus the defining property of superconduction that MUST be explained. This is the property that has since 1911 NOT been explained. You see, such a cancellation cannot occur while a current is flowing through a metal whether scattering of the charge carriers occur or not. It can only occur when the metal turns into a perfect dielectric as soon as superconduction initiates. But where does the current then comes from? Obviously there is no electric-field that can drive it. Thus the energy must come from somewhere else and this energy must not dissipate normally; or else one will measure resistance. Thus it can only be supplied by quantum fluctuations: Each charge carrier borrows energy for a time interval as allowed by Heisenberg's uncertainty relationship to move from its position to the position of the next charge carrier; which in turn borrows energy to move on. The energy is thus used and returned; just as the second law of thermodynamics requires for perpetual motion to occur: And Oh yes the charge-carriers need not be paired-electrons. The factor 2 measured for flux quantization comes from Heisenberg's uncertainty relationship and does not relate to a double-charge.
You can thus see why, after 50 years of Cooper Pairs, which also led to the vector bosons etc. the mainstream scientits would rather die than to publish arguments (based on incontrovertible principles already taught in undergraduate physics) that they have been barking up the wrong tree.
Thanks for the fuller explanation, Johan.
Obviously, superconductivity has not been completely resolved, and you bring up a good point as to why one never hears of the 'cause' of zero electric field....
I have had thoughts like this before...that the cooper pairs ARE interacting with the quantum fluctuations, but only because they ARE in the condensed state, not to the supplantation of it.
Nevertheless, you say, ".... such a cancellation (of E) cannot occur while a current is flowing through a metal whether scattering of the charge carriers occur or not. It can only occur when the metal turns into a perfect dielectric as soon as superconduction initiates" (good point).... but then you surmise there is no other source
for the electromotive force to drive the current.....except ZPE.
But are you aware of the fact that there IS an instantaneous non-conservative electric field that develops as a result of the expulsion of the magnetic field (at critical temp.) which does drive the current.? According to Maxwell, of course. And if, as is typically shown, resistance drops to zero, then the supercurrent continues WITHOUT any further need for electric field. Likewise, IF the supercurrent is actually conducted through a dielectric by means of a resistance free interaction with the vacuum fluctuations, there is still no need for an electric field.
My point is that there is no NEED for Quantum fluctuations to be a SOURCE of energy....it may very well be the mechanism for superconduction, however....
All that is necessary is an initial
electro-motive force to get cooper pairs moving. If the vacuum interaction is non-dissipative that is sufficient to keep them moving...
I think if you frame your arguments in such a manner, you will not receive so much resistance from your adversaries who are obviously on edge about the 'free energy' / perpetual motion implications.....In fact, I suggest you leave out any mention of the term 'perpetual motion' in your future explanations....
just my thoughts.