This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Experimental Observation of a Self-Heating Effect of 4He Superflow

Yongle Yu †  and Hailin Luo † State Key Laboratory of Magnetic Resonance and Atomic and
Molecular Physics, Wuhan Institute of Physics and Mathematics,
Chinese Academy of Science, West No. 30 Xiao Hong Shan, Wuchang,
Wuhan, 430071, China
‡ Fujian Institute of Research on the Structure of Matter,
Chinese Academy of Sciences, 155 Yangqiao Road West, Fuzhou, 350002, China
Abstract

we report a counter-intuitive self-heating effect of 4He superflow. This fundamentally unusual heating effect bears a phenomenological resemblance to the Peltier effect of electric current across two different conductors. It reveals that 4He superflow carries thermal energy and entropy, which is in contrast to the two-fluid model of superfluid 4He. A natural understanding of this heating effect is provided by a recently developed microscopic quantum theory of superfluid 4He.

pacs:
05.70.-a, 67.25.dg, 67.40.Kh

Keywords: superflow, entropy, quantum many-body physics

As one of the most fundamental quantum systems in condensed matter physics, superfluid 4He [1, 2] exhibits a wide variety of extraordinary behaviors. Some intriguing phenomena of superfluid 4He, such as the fountain effect [3] and the mechano-colaric effect [4], reveal a fundamental coupling between thermodynamic motion and the hydrodynamic motion of the system. Pursuing a quantum understanding of this unusual coupling is challenging but nevertheless important. In the past, people rely on the two-fluid model [5, 6] of superfluid 4He to describe physics raised by this coupling. In spite of its phenomenological success and its capability to explain many interesting behaviors of superfluid 4He observed later (see e.g. [7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15]), the two-fluid model is not completely flawless by itself. It involves a hypothesis of a macroscopic sub-system (i.e. superfluid component) with zero entropy, which is highly exotic. The zero-entropy hypothesis implies unavoidably that this sub-system has a temperature of absolute zero, but it is difficult to imagine how such a sub-system can coexist with its thermal surroundings. Some experiments [16, 17] questioned the validity of the two-fluid model in the past. In this work, we report a counter-intuitive self-heating effect of 4He superflow. This fundamental effect reveals that 4He superflow carries thermal energy and entropy, which is in contrast to the hypothesis of the two-fluid model.

The main setup of the superflow system is schematically plotted in Fig. LABEL:fig:schematic. Three vessels (referred to as pot AA, pot BB and cell CC) are connected in series by two superleaks (referred to as SACS_{AC} and SBCS_{BC}). Cell CC is thermally isolated from its surroundings, except its thermal links to the pots via the superleaks. In the experiment, pot AA is filled with superfluid 4He initially, then superflows through SACS_{AC}, cell CC and SBCS_{BC} can be established eventually by setting a positive temperature difference between pot BB and AA (i.e. fountain effect), resulting in a superfluid transport from pot AA to BB. If superflow carries zero thermal energy, the temperature of cell CC (TCT_{C}) shall eventually lie between the temperature of pot BB (TBT_{B}) and that of pot AA (TAT_{A}). However, it is observed that cell CC can be heated strikingly by the superflows; as a result, TCT_{C} reaches a steady value which exceeds TBT_{B} by more than one hundred millikelvins.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: A schematic plot of superflow system.

The experiment is carried out on a two-stage Gifford-McMahon refrigerator with a cooling power of 1 WW at 4.2 KK and a base temperature of 2.4 KK. In order to reach the superfluid temperature regime, a liquid 4He cryostat is constructed by following largely the design given in Ref. [18]. A stainless steel capillary, with an inner diameter (i.d.) of 0.18 mmmm, an outer diameter (o.d.) of 0.4 mmmm and a length of 1 mm, is used as the Joule-Thomson impedance in the cryostat. The copper pot for collecting liquid 4He, with an i.d. of 4.0 cmcm and a volume of 78 cm3cm^{3}, is also served as pot AA for the experiment. Another copper pot, identical to pot AA, is used as pot BB. Cell CC is made of a small copper block, and the main part of its inner cavity is cylindrical, with a diameter of 3 mmmm and a length of 40 mmmm. Each superleak is made of a stainless steel tube packed with jeweler’s rouge powder (with an average particle size of 70 nmnm determined by TEM). The tube for SACS_{AC} has an i.d. of 0.8 mmmm, an o.d. of 2.0 mmmm and a length of 65 mmmm, while the tube for SBCS_{BC} has an i.d. of 1.0 mmmm, an o.d. of 2.0 mmmm and a length of 65 mmmm. Two superleaks are soft soldered to cell CC, and they are positioned in a way so that the lower end of each superleak is in proximity to one end of cell CC’s cylindrical cavity (see Fig. 2). The upper end of SACS_{AC} joins pot AA while the upper end of SBCS_{BC} joins pot BB.

Refer to caption
Figure 2: A picture of superflow system. SACS_{AC} and SBCS_{BC} refer to the superleaks.

A combination of copper braids and brass strips is used as a thermal link between pot AA and a cooling plate directly mounted to the second stage of the refrigerator, with a thermal conductance of around 2 mW/KmW/K at 2 KK. Pot BB’s major thermal link with its surroundings is a copper braid joining two pots at ends. Resistance wires wrapped around pots are used as heaters. Pot BB as well as pot AA is equipped with a pumping line. Valves are used in the lines so that the pumping rate can be manipulated to provide further means for the temperature controls of the pots. Calibrated carbon ceramic resistances [19] are used as temperature sensors to measure TAT_{A}, TBT_{B} and TCT_{C}, with an accuracy of 5 mKmK. The dissipation power of temperature senor on cell CC is kept well below 10710^{-7} WW, so that its heating effect is very limited.

Two radiation shields made of copper coated with nickel thin layer are amounted to two stages of the refrigerator, with one at a temperature around 45K45K and the other at a temperature below 2.8K2.8K. Great care is made to prevent cell CC from exposing to the thermal radiations from sources at temperature above 3K3K. Comparative experiments were conducted to rule out that background thermal radiation is responsible for the heating phenomenon observed.

For the initial accumulation of liquid 4He (with a purity of 99.999%) in pot AA, TAT_{A} is raised above λ\lambda point to prevent superflow through SACS_{AC}. After decreasing TAT_{A} below λ\lambda point, superflows through superleaks and cell CC can be established by setting a large temperature difference between TBT_{B} and TAT_{A}. At given TAT_{A} and TBT_{B}, superflows are let to flow for long enough without disruption so that TCT_{C} can reach its steady value .Some steady values of TCT_{C} are listed in Tab. 1.

TAT_{A} (KK) TBT_{B} (KK) TCT_{C} (KK)
1.500(4) 1.700(4) 1.847 (1)
1.600(4) 1.800(4) 1.927 (1)
1.600(4) 1.900(4) 2.014 (1)
Table 1: Steady values of TCT_{C} at given TAT_{A} and TBT_{B}.

A heating process of cell CC is plotted in Fig. 3. At the initial moment represented in the figure, pot AA is filled with liquid 4He at a temperature above λ\lambda point while both pot BB and cell CC are empty. Pumping pot AA leads to dropping of TAT_{A}. TBT_{B} drops in pace with TAT_{A} due to relatively large thermal link between two pots. At some point, electric current of the resistance wire around pot BB is activated to stabilize TBT_{B} at the set value of 1.85K1.85K. TCT_{C} decreases with TAT_{A}. When both of them are getting below λ\lambda point, superfluid transport between pot AA and cell CC is initiated and consequently plays a major role in determining the value of TCT_{C} relative to TAT_{A}. TCT_{C} remains a few millikelvins below TAT_{A} for superfluid filling duration of cell CC. If TCT_{C} is further below, fountain pressure of the superfluid, caused by the difference between TAT_{A} and TCT_{C}, overcomes the gravitational pull and directs superfluid back from cell CC to pot AA, leading to increase of TCT_{C}. On the other hand, if TCT_{C} is getting closer to or further above TAT_{A}, the overall force (fountain pressure plus the gravitational pull) conducts superflow from pot AA to cell CC, resulting in decrease of TCT_{C}. This negative feedback mechanism of temperature locks roughly the value of TCT_{C} relative to TAT_{A}.

Refer to caption
Figure 3: A heating process of cell CC.

When cell CC is approximately fully filled and superfluid transport between cell CC and pot BB is initiated, TBT_{B} goes through some fluctuations. This is mainly due to the fact that heat capacitance of the empty pot BB (made of copper) is relatively small. Even a small amount of cold superfluid 4He entering pot BB can cause a large variation of TBT_{B} and the temperature stabilization system is not capable to respond in a timely manner. After a certain amount of superfluid 4He is accumulated in pot BB, further injection of cold superfluid is no longer capable to change TBT_{B} dramatically and the stabilization of TBT_{B} is well restored.

Once the transport of superfluid 4He through superleak SACS_{AC}, cell CC and superleak SBCS_{BC} is fully established, TCT_{C} rises steadily and reaches a value 120 mKmK above TBT_{B}. The heat received by cell CC comes from superflows. Since the kinetic energies of superflows are negligible [20], the heat must originate from the thermal energies of superflows. This heating phenomenon is some way analogous to the Peltier effect of an electric current flowing across two conductors: the superflow entering cell CC carries a thermal energy (density) larger than that of the superflow leaving from cell CC, leading to the heating of cell CC.

A natural understanding of this heating phenomenon can be provided by a recently developed quantum theory of superfluid 4He [21, 22, 23, 24, 25]. In quantum mechanics, microscopic processes of a liquid 4He system are governed by the many-body Hamiltonian operator of the system and by the atomic-molecular interactions between the system and its surroundings. One can use the many-body eigen-states/levels of the Hamiltonian operator and quantum jumps among these eigen-states/levels (caused by the interactions between the system and its surroundings) to give a full microscopic description of the system. When the temperature is below the transition point, one can consider only the low-lying levels since the high-lying levels become irrelevant due to the Boltzmann exponential factor. It is found that all the low-lying levels fall into a large number of groups in a hidden way, with each level belonging to one group only. There exist high energy barriers which separate different groups (of levels) and prevent inter-group quantum level transitions. On the other hand, the atomic-molecular interactions between the system and its surroundings cause frequent intra-group level jumps in an occupied group, which leads to a thermal distribution in the group and to a group-specific thermal equilibrium between the system and its surroundings. At a given temperature, the thermal distribution of levels in a group determines all (group-specific) macroscopic properties of the system, such as its thermal energy (density) and its flow velocity. Different groups have different flow velocities, thus one can use the flow velocities to distinguish groups and can further regard other group-specific properties as being flow-velocity-dependent. It can be argued that the thermal energy density has a negative dependence on flow velocity: the larger the flow velocity is, the smaller the thermal energy density. This unusual velocity dependence of thermal energy density is responsible for the fundamental coupling between the thermodynamic motion and the hydrodynamic motion of superfluid 4He , and it can be used to explain naturally the mechano-caloric effect of the system.

In this experiment, the superflow velocities in superleaks behave in a rather subtle way. Note that a superflow is frictionless and its velocity can not be stabilized by friction, which is in contrast to the case of an ordinary flow. The superflow in superleak SACS_{AC} keeps accelerating or decelerating, subject to pressure difference between superfluid in pot AA and that in cell CC (the fountain pressure, caused by the temperature difference across SACS_{AC}, consists of a significant part of the overall pressure difference). The pressure in cell CC rises rapidly when it changes from a nearly-fully-filled state to a fully-filled state, which regulates the inlet superflow (from the viewpoint of cell CC) in a great deal and prevents it from getting a rather large velocity. On the other hand, the outlet superflow can be accelerated by the pressure rising in cell CC and can reach rather large velocity regime. Moreover, with TC>TBT_{C}>T_{B}, the superflow in SBCS_{BC} can reverse flow direction when cell CC deviates from a fully-filled state, thus the actual flow time of outlet superflow is shorter than the flow time of inlet superflow. From these analyses it is clear that there is an asymmetry between the velocity distribution of the inlet superflow and that of the outlet superflow, which in turn leads to a difference between their thermal energies and to the heating of cell CC.

In conclusion, we observed an intriguing heating effect of 4He superflows. This fundamental phenomenon can be explained naturally by a microscopic quantum theory of superfluid 4He.

This work was supported by the Chinese NSF (Grant No. 11474313), by CAS (Grant No. XDB21030300).

References

References

  • [1] P. Kapitza, Nature 141, 74 (1938).
  • [2] J.  F. Allen & A. D. Misener, Nature 141, 75 (1938).
  • [3] J.  F. Allen & H. Jones, Nature 141, 243 (1938).
  • [4] J.  G. Daunt & K. Mendelssohn, Nature 143, 719 (1939).
  • [5] L. Tisza, Nature 141, 913 (1938).
  • [6] L. Landau, J. Phys. USSR 5, 71 (1941).
  • [7] P. Diribarne, B. Rousset, Y. A. Sergeev, J. Valentin & P.-E. Roche, Phys. Reb. B 103, 144509 (2021).
  • [8] S. Midlik, D. Schmoranzer, & L. Skrbek, Phys. Rev. B 103, 134516 (2021).
  • [9] E. Varga & L. Skrbek, Phys. Rev. B 100, 054518 (2019).
  • [10] F. Vidal & D. Lhuillier , Phys. Rev. B 13, 148 (1976).
  • [11] G. J. Jelatis, J. A. Roth & J. D. Maynard, Phys. Rev. Lett. 42, 1285 (1979).
  • [12] N. Mulders & J. R. Beamish, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 438 (1989).
  • [13] M. H. W. Chan et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 1950 (1988).
  • [14] J. Maps & R. B. Hallock, Phys. Rev. B 27, 5491 (1981).
  • [15] J. D. Reppy and D. Depatie, Phys. Rev. Lett., 12, 187-189 (1964).
  • [16] D.V. Osborne, Proc. Phys. Soc. A , 63, 909 (1950).
  • [17] E. L. Andronikashvili and I. P. Kaverlin, J. Exp. Theor. Phys. U.S.S.R., 28, 126 (1955).
  • [18] A. DeMann, S. Mueller and S. B. Field, Cryogenics, 73, 60 (2016).
  • [19] https://www.temati-uk.com/
  • [20] The average transfer rate of superfluid helium from pot AA to pot BB is 3 to 4 cubic centimeters per hour, and the corresponding flow velocities in superleaks are the order of a few millimeter per second. The associated kinetic energy ( if applicable) is around 102910^{-29} Joule per 4He atom, which corresponds to a temperature scale of 1 μK{\mu}K (negligible for a helium system at a temperature above 1.6 KK). Also, as argued later in the manuscript, the inlet superflow (from the viewpoint of cell CC ) has a velocity smaller than the outlet superflow, so the change of kinetic energy (if applicable) of superflows shall lead to a tiny cooling of cell CC rather than heating it.
  • [21] Y. Yu, Ann. Phys. 323, 2367 (2008), and references therein.
  • [22] Y. Yu, Mod. Phys. Lett. B 29, 1550068-1 (2015).
  • [23] F. Bloch, Phys. Rev. A 7, 2187 (1973).
  • [24] A. G. Leggett, Rev. Mod. Phys. 73, 307 (2001).
  • [25] R. Feynman, R. B. Leighton & M. L. Sands, The Feynman Lectures on Physics, vol. III, chapter 4, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA (1965).