English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In a recent Reply [arXiv:1012.4361] to our Comment [arXiv:0906.2389, acceptedto PRL], Serbyn, Skvortsov, and Varlamov raised a question of microscopicdescription, which we did not touch in Comment, and criticized our work [Phys.Rev. B 77, 064501 (2008)]. They hopefully agreed with one of our key resultthat the effective heat current vertex for fluctuating Cooper pairs (theAslamzov-Larkin block in the diagram technique) is modified in the magneticfield, so "the heat current is proportional to the gauge-invariant momentum".However, they stated that we have overlooked the same correction to theelectric current vertex and in this way we lost their huge thermomagneticeffect that does not require any particle-hole asymmetry and, therefore,prevails over the ordinary thermomagnetic effects by at least five orders inmagnitude in ordinary superconductors near T_c and strongly dominates in thetemperature range up to ~ 100 T_c. Here we address their criticism with alldetails and show that our calculations are correct.

On themomagnetic effects due to the supeconducting fluctuations: Reply to arXiv:1012.4361 by Serbyn, Skvortsov, and Varlamov