Is time-reversal breaking in Sr_2RuO_4 an intrinsic bulk property? · revision history

Revision 2

Accepted · core change · record

Changes against revision 1:

Title · changed
Revision 1: Is time-reversal breaking in Sr2RuO4 an intrinsic bulk property
Revision 2: Is time-reversal breaking in $\mathrm{Sr_2RuO_4}$ an intrinsic bulk property?
Plain · changed
Revision 1: Muon and optical experiments see signs that the superconducting state of Sr2RuO4 picks a sense of rotation, breaking time-reversal symmetry, but the signal may come from defects.
Revision 2: Muon and optical experiments see signs that the superconducting state of $\mathrm{Sr_2RuO_4}$ picks a sense of rotation, breaking time-reversal symmetry, but the signal may come from defects.
Precise · changed · core
Revision 1: Determine whether the time-reversal symmetry breaking seen by zero-field muSR and polar Kerr rotation below $T_c$ in Sr2RuO4 is a bulk property of the superconducting order parameter or is tied to dislocations and local strain. An answer compares muSR and Kerr signal size across samples with measured defect density, and tests whether the signal onset follows $T_c$ under stress and disorder.
Revision 2: Determine whether the time-reversal symmetry breaking seen by zero-field muSR and polar Kerr rotation below $T_c$ in $\mathrm{Sr_2RuO_4}$ is a bulk property of the superconducting order parameter or is tied to dislocations and local strain. An answer compares muSR and Kerr signal size across samples with measured defect density, and tests whether the signal onset follows $T_c$ under stress and disorder.
Settled by
Systematic muSR and Kerr studies on samples with controlled dislocation density showing whether the signal scales with volume or with defects.
Kind
well-posed
Answer type
yes-no
References
(empty)
Literature status
contested
Status note
(empty)
Posed since
(empty)

Decisions