Superfluid How a Quantum Fluid

Revolutionized Modern Science 1st

Edition Weisend Ii
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmeta.com/product/superfluid-how-a-quantum-fluid-revolutionized-moder
n-science-1st-edition-weisend-ii/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Fashion Killa: How Hip-Hop Revolutionized High Fashion

1st Edition Sowmya Krishnamurthy

https://ebookmeta.com/product/fashion-killa-how-hip-hop-
revolutionized-high-fashion-1st-edition-sowmya-krishnamurthy/

Quantum Mathematics II 1st Edition Michele Correggi

https://ebookmeta.com/product/quantum-mathematics-ii-1st-edition-
michele-correggi/

A Textbook on Modern Quantum Mechanics 1st Edition

Sharma

https://ebookmeta.com/product/a-textbook-on-modern-quantum-
mechanics-1st-edition-sharma/

Justice for All How the Jewish Bible Revolutionized

Ethics 1st Edition Jeremiah Unterman

https://ebookmeta.com/product/justice-for-all-how-the-jewish-
bible-revolutionized-ethics-1st-edition-jeremiah-unterman/
Quantum Mechanics II: Advanced Topics, 2nd Ed. S
Rajasekar

https://ebookmeta.com/product/quantum-mechanics-ii-advanced-
topics-2nd-ed-s-rajasekar/

Quantum Information Science 1st Edition R. Manenti &&

M. Motta

https://ebookmeta.com/product/quantum-information-science-1st-
edition-r-manenti-m-motta/

Geophysical Fluid Dynamics II: Stratified / Rotating

Fluid Dynamics of the Atmosphere■Ocean (Springer
Textbooks in Earth Sciences, Geography and Environment)
Emin Özsoy
https://ebookmeta.com/product/geophysical-fluid-dynamics-ii-
stratified-rotating-fluid-dynamics-of-the-
atmosphere%e2%80%95ocean-springer-textbooks-in-earth-sciences-
geography-and-environment-emin-ozsoy/

Fundamentals of Physics II Electromagnetism Optics and

Quantum Mechanics R. Shankar

https://ebookmeta.com/product/fundamentals-of-physics-ii-
electromagnetism-optics-and-quantum-mechanics-r-shankar/

How to Understand Quantum Mechanics 1st Edition John P

Ralston

https://ebookmeta.com/product/how-to-understand-quantum-
mechanics-1st-edition-john-p-ralston/
J. G. Weisend II

Superfluid
How a Quantum Fluid Revolutionized Modern
Science
J. G. Weisend II
Dept of Industrial Production, Lund University, Accelerator Division,
European Spallation Source, Lund, Sweden

ISBN 978-3-031-42651-3 e-ISBN 978-3-031-42652-0

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42652-0

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive

license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively
licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is
concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in
any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and
retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or
dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.

The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks,

service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the
absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the
relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general
use.

The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the
advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate
at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the
material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have
been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Cover credit: Biwa Studio/Gettyimages

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer
Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham,
Switzerland
To Steve Van Sciver who started me on this journey
and
To Shari, who has taken it with me
Acknowledgements
The creation of this book required the assistance of many people. I
greatly appreciate their efforts which have improved this work and
made the process more enjoyable.
A number of friends and colleagues – Susan Breon, Dimitri
Delikaris, Michael DiPirro, Sam Harrison, Mats Lindroos, Tom Peterson
and Shari Weisend – have read a draft of the book, made valuable
suggestions and looked for errors. Any remaining errors are, of course,
mine alone.
The editorial team at Springer – Sam Harrison, Ragavendar Mohan,
Tom Spicer and Cindy Zitter – was very supportive of this book and
provided help whenever asked.
My colleagues at the European Spallation Source and Lund
University were also supportive of my efforts on this book.
A special thank you to Steve Van Sciver, who first introduced me to
cryogenics and superfluid helium and who has remained a friend and
colleague over the years.
My family – Shari, Rachel, Nick, Alex, Patrick, Kelsey and Lovisa –has
been through a number of book projects with me and has been tolerant,
not only of the time this work took, but also of having me explain
whatever I have just recently learned. As always, their support makes
this book possible.
Contents
1 Introduction
2 A Brief Tour of Cold
3 Discovery
4 Explaining He II:​Quantum Mechanics and the Two-Fluid Model
5 What If You Had a Bucket?​
6 Moving Heat
7 General Weirdness:​Fountains, Porous Plugs, Second Sound and
Films
8 Early Applications
9 The Fabulous 80s:​Tore Supra, IRAS and CEBAF
10 Can You Paddle a Canoe in He II?​– Engineering Studies
11 Colliders:​Super, Large and Otherwise
12 ILC, TESLA, &​SRF Everywhere
13 A Superfluid Space Odyssey
14 High Field Magnets
15 The Other Superfluid
16 The Future
Suggestions for Further Reading
Index
About the Author
J. G. Weisend II
is a Senior Accelerator Engineer at the
European Spallation Source and Adjunct
Professor at Lund University in Sweden. A
specialist in cryogenic engineering, he has
worked at the Superconducting Supercollider
Laboratory, the Centre D’Etudes Nucleaires
Grenoble, the Deutsches Elecktronen-
Synchrotron Laboratory (DESY), the Stanford
Linear Accelerator Laboratory (SLAC), the US
National Science Foundation and Michigan
State University. His other books include: He
is for Helium, Cryostat Design (ed), Cryogenic
Safety (with T. Peterson) and Going for Cold: A
Biography of a Great Physicist, Kurt Mendelssohn (with G.T. Meaden). He
resides in Sweden and California.
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023
J. G. Weisend II, Superfluid
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42652-0_1

1. Introduction
J. G. Weisend II1
(1) Dept of Industrial Production, Lund University, Accelerator
Division, European Spallation Source, Lund, Sweden

Keywords Helium – Superfluid – History – Big science – CERN –

Quantum mechanics

Unless you are a specialist or watch a lot of obscure YouTube videos,

you have probably never heard of He II (pronounced “helium two”) or
superfluid helium. However, this substance, a unique liquid form of the
element helium, is produced and used in multi-ton quantities to enable
much of modern science. He II cools the superconducting magnets that
contain the particle beams at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN.
It is the go-to coolant for superconducting radiofrequency cavities that
are used in accelerators that produce X-ray lasers and intense neutron
beams for the study of materials and that accelerate heavy ions for the
study of rare isotopes and nuclear astrophysics. Since the temperature
of He II is below that of the background temperature in space, He II was
used in space-based infrared telescopes and experiments that made
significant advances in understanding the universe.
Altogether, He II is at the heart of more than a dozen large-scale
scientific facilities worldwide, representing an investment of tens of
billions of dollars. The expected, and more importantly unexpected,
discoveries from these facilities in the areas of new materials, drug
development, biology, chemistry and physics will affect both daily life
and our understanding of the universe. This little-known liquid is, in
reality, one of the enabling technologies of the future.
 He II is a manifestation of quantum mechanics and exhibits at times
amazing behaviors. It can flow up the side of a container against gravity,
can move through small openings without friction, and can transfer
heat extremely efficiently via a mechanism not seen elsewhere in
nature. He II contains quantized vortices that can be used in
fundamental studies of turbulence.
The discovery of He II and the explanation of its behavior began in
the 1930s and involved many leading experimental and theoretical
physicists, including Lev Landau, Richard Feynman, Peter Kapitza and
Kurt Mendelssohn. Starting in the 1960s, efforts turned to using the
properties of He II to solve technical problems, such as cooling
superconductors. This led to a range of engineering studies, related
technological developments and increasingly large-scale applications of
He II.
This book tells the story of He II. It describes the discovery of the
fluid, the observation and understanding of its behavior, the
development of underlying theory and the evolution of He II from a
laboratory curiosity to an industrial scale coolant. The current and
possible future applications of He II are described.
Like all science and engineering, the story of He II is a human story,
and the role that personalities, politics, communication, cooperation
and competition play in the development of He II is captured here as
well. The race to liquefy air, the Second World War, the development of
the atomic bomb and the desire to find and measure the most
fundamental particles in nature are all part of the story.
This work is meant for the general reader. It does not assume any
expertise in physics, engineering or mathematics. There are a number
of technical monographs on He II (see suggestions for additional
reading) but this book is something else. It is an attempt to illuminate
for the general public a little-known area of science and engineering
and show why it matters. As it turns out, it is also a good story.
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023
J. G. Weisend II, Superfluid
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42652-0_2

2. A Brief Tour of Cold

J. G. Weisend II1
(1) Dept of Industrial Production, Lund University, Accelerator
Division, European Spallation Source, Lund, Sweden

Keywords Cryogenics – Kelvin temperature scale – Liquefaction of

atmospheric gases – Nitrogen – Hydrogen – Argon – Oxygen – Dewar –
Isotope – Superconductivity

You have been on the edges of the ultracold. You have seen tanker
trucks on the highway, frequently white and labeled “liquid nitrogen”,
“liquid oxygen” and more rarely “liquid helium”. If you ever had a
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scan at the hospital, you were,
although likely nobody told you, surrounded by a superconducting
magnet cooled by liquid helium. It is possible that some of the natural
gas you use at home was at one point stored or transported as ultracold
liquefied natural gas (LNG). These were all brushes with the
multibillion dollar cryogenics industry.
Cryogenics is the science and engineering of the ultracold, and the
first question to ask is: “How cold are we talking?”
In science and engineering, we typically use the Kelvin temperature
scale. In this scale, 1 K equals 1 °C + 273.15. Thus, room temperature is
approximately 300 K. In comparison, at atmospheric pressure, oxygen
becomes a liquid at 90 K (−183 °C), nitrogen at 77 K (−196 °C),
hydrogen at 20 K (−253 °C) and helium at 4.2 K (−269 °C). The field of
cryogenics is generally defined as applying to phenomena below 120 K
(−153 °C).
 There are two aspects of the Kelvin scale that are immediately
important to our story. The first is that we use the symbol K but never
°K, and we discuss the temperature as kelvin, not degrees kelvin. More
fundamentally, 0 K (−273.15 °C) is a physical limit. Just as we can never
go faster than the speed of light in a vacuum we can never go below 0 K.
In fact, the laws of thermodynamics show that you can’t even reach 0 K
although you can get very close with the current record being
approximately 38 picokelvin (0.000000000038 K). As will be seen, our
subject, He II or superfluid helium, extends into these near 0 K
temperatures.
What is He II? He II is the second liquid phase of the helium 4
isotope. This statement, while a correct answer on a physics quiz, needs
some unpacking. We are all familiar with the concept that matter
occurs in phases, the most common being liquid, gas and solid. In the
case of water, we call these phases liquid water, steam and ice. The
universe is more complicated than this, however. For example,
depending on pressure and temperature, water ice can form in up to 20
different crystalline phases.
The existence of a second liquid phase in helium has, as we shall
see, very important fundamental and practical implications. For the
moment though, consider Fig. 2.1 This figure shows the different
phases of helium as a function of pressure and temperature. Overall, the
figure is relatively simple; we see the vapor phase, two liquid phases
(He I and He II) and a solid phase.
Fig. 2.1 Helium Phase Diagram. The horizontal axis plots temperature in kelvin,
while the vertical axis shows pressure in either kiloPascals (left) or atmospheres
(right). The diagram shows the four phases of helium: solid, vapor, liquid He I and
liquid He II. Note that very high pressures are needed to form solid helium, and He II,
a liquid, exists all the way down to 0 K. From Helium Cryogenics, S.W. Van Sciver,
Springer (2012)
Under certain conditions, He II exhibits superfluidity; that is, it
flows without resistance. Thus, He II is frequently also referred to as
superfluid helium, although this is not strictly correct.1
In addition to the existence of He II, whose story is told below, Fig.
2.1 shows another important feature of helium; unless high pressures
(approximately 20 times that of normal atmospheric pressure) are
applied, helium remains a liquid (in the form of He II) all the way down
to 0 K. From an engineering viewpoint, liquids are much more useful as
coolants than solids. For example, liquids can be pumped and will
penetrate small spaces. Helium is the only substance that remains a
liquid down to near absolute zero. The reason for this, like the existence
of the He II liquid phase, is a result of quantum mechanical effects. The
fact that helium remains a liquid down to these extremely low
temperatures is, as will be seen, part of what makes it so useful.
There is one remaining feature of our definition of He II above. This
is the comment about the helium 4 isotope. Elements exist in different
isotopes. Isotopes of a given element have the same number of protons
in their nucleus but differing numbers of neutrons. The number of
protons in an element is indicated by the atomic number, while the total
number of protons and neutrons is given by the mass number. In the
case of helium, there are only two isotopes. By far, the most common
isotope of helium contains two protons and two neutrons, resulting in a
mass number of four, and is thus known as helium 4, whose symbol is
4
He. It is this common version of helium that we will address in this
book. The other isotope of helium contains 1 neutron and 2 protons
and is thus known as helium 3 (3He). This isotope is exceedingly rare,
making up only 0.1 part per million of naturally occurring helium. This
isotope will be discussed in a later chapter of the book and does
become superfluid under certain conditions.
So, to review, 4He and 3He are different isotopes of the element
helium, while He II (note the use of a Roman numeral) is not an isotope
but rather the second liquid phase of the 4He isotope.
With definitions out of the way, the next step is to understand the
state of cryogenics at the time of the discovery of He II.
Cryogenics really started as a field when researchers in the late 19th
and early twentieth centuries competed to liquefy the so-called
permanent2 atmospheric gases, for example oxygen, nitrogen and neon.
There was no compelling economic or societal need for this effort, but
technology and scientific theory had developed to the point where
liquefying these gases was possible. Reaching lower temperatures and
liquefying gases became a point of institutional and national pride, and
the race to accomplish these feats resembled the race to the North and
South poles or the race to climb the highest mountains taking place at
approximately the same time.
 Of course, once these gases were liquefied, particularly on an
industrial scale, then uses were found for them. An example is the
extensive use of oxygen and nitrogen in steel mills and chemical plants.
Along the way, new techniques for cooling, storing and working with
materials at these temperatures were developed together with a better
scientific understanding of the universe at these temperatures. These
developments formed the basis of the field of cryogenics.
We will see this interplay between application and research again
and again in the story of He II. The process of scientific discovery will
result in new technologies; these technologies will in turn drive or
enable new discoveries.
The composition of air plays a role in this story. Table 2.1 shows the
typical composition of dry air, that is, air with all water vapor removed.
Table 2.1 Typical composition of dry air

Component Percent by volume

Nitrogen 78
Oxygen 21
Argon 0.9340
Carbon dioxide 0.0415
Neon 0.001818
Helium 0.000524
Methane 0.000187
Krypton 0.000114
Xenon 0.0000086

Table 2.1 does not include pollutants such as dust or sulfur dioxide,
and due to rounding errors, the percent of components may not add up
to 100%. The main takeaways should be that 99.9% of dry air is made
up of just three components: oxygen, nitrogen and argon and that the
rare atmospheric gases neon, krypton and xenon occur in vanishingly
small amounts. As we will see, helium, as usual, is a special case.
Hydrogen, due to its chemical reactivity, does not appear as an
atmospheric gas but was easily available, and theory showed that it
likely had a low liquefaction temperature.
Oxygen was first liquefied in 1877 independently and nearly
simultaneously by Louis Paul Cailletet in France and Raoul Pictet in
Switzerland. Cailletet’s technique was to compress oxygen gas to
roughly 20 times that of atmospheric pressure and then cool the high-
pressure container in a bath of liquid ethylene at a temperature of 169
K. When the pressure was suddenly reduced to atmospheric pressure,
the cold oxygen gas cooled further and dropped below its liquefaction
temperature of 90 K. This approach of compressing a gas, cooling it
with a colder substance and then expanding the gas to a lower pressure
for additional cooling is a fundamental technique of cryogenic
refrigeration and is used in much more sophisticated machines today.
However, Cailletet’s machine could only produce bursts of liquid
oxygen, and the liquid droplets produced did not last long due to the
heat leak from the environment.
Zygmunt Wroblewski and Karol Olszewski, working in Krakow,
Poland, liquefied oxygen in 1883 using Cailetet’s approach with one
significant change: by reducing the pressure of the liquid ethylene to
below atmospheric pressure, they reduced the temperature of the
liquid ethylene bath to 137 K. At this temperature, the compressed
oxygen gas starts to liquefy without any reduction of its pressure, and
the resulting liquid (surrounded by the cold 137 K bath rather than a
room temperature of 300 K) would remain longer than in Caillett’s
case.
The technique of reducing the boiling temperature of a liquid by
reducing its pressure is well understood, and as we will see, it is the
approach taken to get to He II temperatures.3 Note that Wroblewski
and Olszewski improved both the ability to make things colder but also
the ability to keep them cold. This dual improvement in both producing
cold temperatures and maintaining cold temperatures is seen
throughout the early days of cryogenics.
Using similar techniques, Wroblewski and Olszewski also liquefied
nitrogen (77 K) in 1883. In 1895, Olszewski, working alone liquified
argon (87 K) and by reducing the pressure on the liquid, was able to
freeze argon at 84 K.
 Argon brings up an interesting problem. To liquefy a gas, you had to
a) know that it exists and b) have a reliable source of it. In the case of
argon, the Scottish chemist William Ramsey discovered argon by
extracting it from air in 1894 and provided it to Olszewski. In 1898,
Ramsey working with Morris Travers also discovered the elements
neon, xenon and krypton in air. William Ramsey also played an
important role with helium.
First though, let’s turn to hydrogen. Hydrogen was first liquefied
(20 K) by James Dewar at the Royal Institution in London in 1898.
However, prior to this, Dewar made a major innovation in cryogenics.
He realized that if you placed one vessel inside another and removed all
the air in the space between the vessels, thus creating a vacuum, you
would greatly reduce the heat transfer between the outer and inner
vessels. Furthermore, if you silvered the glass inner vessel, you would
also reduce the heat transferred by thermal radiation. The result was
that you could store cryogenic liquids such as liquid nitrogen or liquid
hydrogen for days to weeks. Such vacuum insulated containers are
known as dewars or cryostats and are a fundamental building block of
cryogenic engineering today (Fig. 2.2). Dewar displayed the first of his
vacuum insulated flasks (Fig. 2.3) in January 1893. With these devices,
Dewar was able to collect and study the liquid hydrogen he made. Once
hydrogen was liquefied, the next goal for everyone was helium.
Competitors here included Olszewski, Dewar, and Heike Kamerlingh
Onnes of Leiden University in the Netherlands.
Fig. 2.2 Cutaway view of superconducting radiofrequency cavity Cryostat used in
the European Spallation Source Accelerator. The cryomodule is approximately 1 m in
diameter and 8 m long. The accelerator contains forty-two of these and similar
cryostats. Dewar’s innovation in vacuum insulation is a fundamental part of the
design of these cryostats. (Courtesy of CNRS & CEA, France)
Fig. 2.3 Dewar’s “dewar” in the Museum of the Royal Institution. A vacuum space
between the outer wall and inner container greatly reduces the heat leak into the
inner container, allowing storage of cryogenic fluids
The element helium was first discovered as a distinct line in the
Sun’s spectrum observed during an eclipse. The element takes its name
from the Greek god of the sun Helios. The first helium seen on Earth
was found by Luigi Palmieri, who, when studying lava from Mount
Vesuvius, saw the same spectral line in his data in 1882. Twelve years
later and much more significantly, William Ramsey extracted helium
gas from Cleveite (a mineral of uranium).
Terrestrial helium comes from the radioactive decay of uranium,
thorium and some other elements. The principal supply of helium today
is found in some, but not all, natural gas fields. However, this source
wasn’t discovered until 1905. Ramsey sent some helium to Olszewski,
who was unable to liquefy it. Another source of helium was found in the
sands (which contained thorium) of the mineral springs in Bath,
England. Kamerlingh Onnes suggested to Dewar that they share this
helium and work together to liquefy it. However, Dewar refused,
wanting to work alone. Kamerlingh Onnes was able to find another
helium source from monzanite sands (also containing thorium) from
the USA.
It turned out that the helium from Bath contained many other gases
that had to be removed, which delayed Dewar’s efforts, and in 1908,
Kamerlingh Onnes became the first person to liquefy helium. What
happened next is both illustrative and seen frequently in the history of
science.
Once he liquefied helium, Kamerlingh Onnes now had access to
temperatures of 4.2 K (the room pressure boiling point of helium) and
started to conduct research on the properties of materials at these
lower temperatures. One property he investigated was the electrical
resistivity of metals. In 1911, when making these measurements with
mercury, he observed that near 4.2 K, the electrical resistance of
mercury vanished. Kamerlingh Onnes discovered superconductivity:
the ability of some materials to carry electrical current without any
resistance or loss. The practical applications of superconductivity,
developed since then, include powerful magnets for particle
accelerators, MRI systems, fusion energy research and superconducting
radiofrequency cavities for particle acceleration. Today, the principal
use of liquid helium (including He II) is the cooling of superconducting
components. In effect, Kamerlingh Onnes not only liquefied helium but
also discovered the main practical application of liquid helium.
The discovery of superconductivity is a prime example of what
frequently occurs in science whenever a new capability, such as a more
powerful telescope or particle accelerator or a more precise
measurement technique, is developed. New and unexpected scientific
discoveries, sometimes along with new practical applications, arise.
The field of cryogenics continued to develop and grow after 1911,
but this is outside the scope of this book. In the specific case of liquid
helium, developments were slower. Liquid helium and
superconductivity were of academic interest in a number of
universities, but by the early 1930s, only four institutes—one in Leiden,
one in Toronto and two in Berlin—could reach liquid helium
temperatures. Our story now moves to England.

Footnotes
1 However, “Superfluid” makes a better book title than “He II”

2 These were called permanent because they couldn’t be turned into liquid merely
by increasing the pressure on them at room temperature.

3 This effect is seen in everyday life. Water boils at lower temperature when at less
than sea level atmospheric pressure. This is why many cooking recipes have to be
adjusted in Denver, CO.
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023
J. G. Weisend II, Superfluid
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42652-0_3

3. Discovery
J. G. Weisend II1
(1) Dept of Industrial Production, Lund University, Accelerator
Division, European Spallation Source, Lund, Sweden

Keywords Superfluid – Latent heat – Specific heat – Viscosity – Phase

change – Oxford University – Cambridge University – Clarendon
Laboratory

Professor Lindemann really wanted to beat Cambridge University.

In 1933, Frederick Lindemann was the head of Clarendon
Laboratory and thus was responsible for physics research at the
University of Oxford. Lindemann had trained under Prof. Walther
Nernst at the University of Berlin. Nernst proposed what we now call
the Third Law of Thermodynamics. It is this law that shows that we can
never actually reach absolute 0 K (see Chap. 1). The Third Law also
predicts that the specific heat (a property that describes how much a
material’s temperature changes upon absorbing or losing heat) will
approach zero as the temperature approaches zero. In order to provide
experimental evidence of the Third Law, Nernst and his students,
including Lindemann and Francis Simon, along with Simon’s student,
Kurt Mendelssohn, started making precision measurements of the
specific heat of materials at cryogenic temperatures, including at liquid
hydrogen temperatures.
Based on his experiences in Berlin, when Lindemann took up his
position as head of the Clarendon Laboratory in 1919, one of the areas
of research that he started was in cryogenics with the goal of working
at liquid helium temperatures. In 1930, Lindemann purchased a
hydrogen liquefier designed by Francis Simon and started work at
liquid hydrogen temperatures (20 K). Simon also developed a series of
miniature helium liquefiers, and Lindemann was also interested in
these devices.
At about the same time (late 1932), Cambridge University was
building a new laboratory to conduct research in cryogenics and
superconductivity funded by the Royal Society using money from a
donation by Dr. Ludwig Mond. The Mond lab was led by the Russian
physicist Peter Kapitza, and if all went to plan, it would be the first lab
in the UK to liquefy helium.
Lindemann, however, had a different plan. He purchased a helium
liquefier from Simon and had Kurt Mendelssohn come to Oxford in
January 1933 to install and commission it. This was successfully
accomplished, and the first helium in the UK was liquefied on January
13, 1933, beating the Mond lab at Cambridge.
This anecdote illustrates competition in science, a theme that we
will see repeatedly in the story of superfluid helium. However, it is
important to realize that such competition is accompanied by
collaboration. Competing labs frequently share data, experiences,
equipment and people both formally and informally. Open
communication is both a prerequisite for and a hallmark of scientific
progress. We will also see this in the superfluid helium story.
Another reason to tell the story of the first liquefaction of helium in
the UK is that Kapitza, Mendelssohn, Simon and the cryogenics groups
at Oxford and Cambridge played a major role in our understanding of
superfluid helium.
Soon after the liquefaction of helium in Oxford, Kurt Mendelssohn
fled Germany as the Nazis came to power and he went to Oxford.
Professor Lindemann found Mendelssohn a position at the Clarendon
Laboratory. Working together, Mendelssohn and Lindemann recruited
Francis Simon, Nicholas Kurti and Heinz London from Germany to
Oxford in the fall of 1933. Heinz London moved to the University of
Bristol in 1936, but the team of Simon, Mendelssohn and Kurti formed
the basis of the very productive Oxford cryogenics program.
In 1934, Peter Kapitza made what was supposed to be a short visit
back to the Soviet Union from Cambridge. However, once there, his
passport was confiscated, and the Russian government forced him to
remain in the Soviet Union. The reasoning behind this was that the
government wanted Kapitza to start and lead a laboratory in the USSR
similar to the Mond Laboratory. Funding was provided, and the
Institute for Physical Problems (IPP) was established in Moscow with
Kapitza as leader in 1935. Like the Mond laboratory, IPP had a strong
emphasis on research in cryogenics and superconductivity.
The discovery of superfluid helium actually occurred in two steps.
First was the discovery that a second liquid phase of helium existed,
and later was the discovery that this second liquid phase was a
superfluid under certain conditions and thus represented an entirely
new type of fluid.
The observation that a second liquid phase of helium existed was
made at Leiden University, where helium was first liquefied in 1908. In
addition to discovering superconductivity, Kamerlingh Onnes and his
team investigated the physical properties of liquid helium and
continued to reach lower temperatures. One observation was that the
density of the liquid peaked value at 2.2 K, decreasing again as the
temperature of the liquid was reduced to 1.5 K. This was very unusual,
as most fluids would be expected to uniformly increase in density as
they become colder. For a fluid to first increase and then decrease in
density as the temperature is reduced, was a hint that something else
was happening.
The measurement that really showed there were two liquid phases
of helium was done by Willem Keesom and his postdoctoral researcher
Klaus Clusius (whom we will see in an entirely different context later)
at Leiden University in 1932. Keesom and Clusius discovered that there
was a very sharp peak in the specific heat of liquid helium at a
temperature of approximately 2.2 K (see Fig. 3.1). The shape of the
curve in Fig. 3.1 resembles the Greek letter lambda, and thus, this peak
became known as the lambda point and the temperature at which it
occurs as the lambda temperature (Tλ). Through careful measurements,
Keesom and Clusius showed that the lambda temperature varied with
pressure from 2.17 K at 0.0497 atmospheres of pressure to 1.75 K at 30
atmospheres. The line formed by this variation in temperature and
pressure is known as the lambda line and is the border between the
two liquid phases of helium (He I and He II). See Fig. 2.​1 in the previous
chapter.
Fig. 3.1 Specific heat of helium as a function of temperature. The peak in the curve
shows the He I to He II transition. From C. Gorter Progress in Low Temperature
Physics Vol. 1 (1955)
An immediately observed and unusual feature of these two phases
is the lack of a latent heat in the transition between the two phases. To
understand this, consider the boiling of water. Liquid water boils at
100 °C at 1 atmosphere of pressure. When you boil water on your stove,
the temperature of the boiling water remains at 100 °C no matter how
much heat you apply. The temperature will only rise once all the water
has been converted to steam. This is because energy is required to
convert the water to steam once the water has reached its boiling
temperature. This energy is known as the latent heat. In the case of the
He I/He II transition, no latent heat is required. Once helium reaches
the lambda line, it instantaneously and completely converts between
He I and He II.
Other unusual behaviors started to be observed in the He II phase.
In 1936, Keesom, working with his daughter Ania, found that He II
transferred heat very efficiently, more than 1000 times better than
copper.1 Additionally, in 1936, B.V. Rollin at the
 University of Leiden observed that a thin film of helium covered the
inside of vessels that contained He II. Such a film did not exist upon
transition to He I. Clearly, something was different about He II.
Viscosity is a fundamental property of fluids that in effect describes
the ease with which a fluid will flow when subjected to a force. Fluids
with high viscosity, such as molasses, do not flow easily, while those
with lower viscosities, such as water, flow more easily. Measurements of
the viscosity of liquid helium were made at the University of Toronto in
1935 by E. Burton, J. Wilhelm, A. D. Misener and A. Clark. They found
that the viscosity of He II was more than 1000 times smaller than that
of He I. However, the measured viscosity was still above zero, and they
did not take this result to mean that He II was fundamentally different
kind of fluid. The technique used for these measurements was to
observe the slowing down of a solid cylinder rotating in He II. This is a
classical approach to measuring viscosity.
In the fall of 1935, Jack Allen, who earned his doctorate in physics
from the University of Toronto, arrived in Cambridge to conduct
research in liquid helium. In 1937, he recruited A. D. (Don) Misener
from Toronto to Cambridge and together they continued measurements
of the viscosity of He II. This time, however, a different measuring
technique was used. Allen and Misener determined the He II viscosity
by measuring the pressure drop of He II as it moved through very small
diameter capillary tubes. Now, they observed that the viscosity was
vanishingly small (less than 10−5 Poise) and that the relationship
between pressure and helium velocity was inconsistent with commonly
understood laws of fluid behavior.
Simultaneously, and independently, Peter Kapitza was measuring
the viscosity of He II in his laboratory in Moscow and was getting
similar results by looking at the flow of He II through a very narrow slit.
In the January 8, 1938 issue of the journal Nature, two articles, one
by Kapitza and one by Allen and Misener, described the vanishingly
small viscosity off He II. In his article, Kapitza used the term
“superfluid”. This was not only the first time this term was used for He
II but also the first time it was applied to ANY fluid.
He II was clearly something very different. However, what was it?
Why did it appear to have near zero viscosity and a very efficient heat
transfer mechanism? Why, for that matter, did the measured viscosity
appear to be small but nonzero when measured via the damping of a
rotating cylinder but apparently zero when measured via flow through
capillaries or narrow slits?
Before we answer some of these questions in the next chapter, there
are two interesting asides about some of the people in the story thus
far.
Jack Allen continued to perform ground breaking work in He II and
cryogenics. He eventually moved to the University of St Andrews in
Scotland. He was greatly interested in using visual media to explain
scientific concepts. As part of this effort, he created a film
demonstrating and describing the behavior of He II. The film, narrated
by Allen, can be found at https://​www.​youtube.​com/​watch?​v=​lEPc-
rBMAuU. This film is meant for the general public and nicely illustrates
many of the features of He II described in this book. It is highly
recommended viewing.
During the Second World War, Francis Simon worked on the project
to build the atomic bomb, first in England and then in the USA. He made
significant contributions to the technique of gaseous diffusion that was
used for uranium enrichment. Among his contributions, which earned
him a knighthood after the war, was the conceptual design of the large
gaseous diffusion plant built in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Klaus Clusius, the
German physicist who assisted Willem Keesom in mapping the
boundary between the He I and He II liquid states, returned to Germany
after his work with Keesom and started a university career. During the
Second World War, he also worked on the problem of uranium
enrichment but on the German side. Thus, we have two scientists, both
of whom made important contributions to the study of He II, working
on the same (noncryogenic) problem on opposing sides of the war.

Footnotes
1 This was reported as a measurement of the thermal conductivity but as we will
see, this result is explained by an entirely new method of transferring heat.
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023
J. G. Weisend II, Superfluid
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42652-0_4

4. Explaining He II: Quantum Mechanics

and the Two-Fluid Model
J. G. Weisend II1
(1) Dept of Industrial Production, Lund University, Accelerator
Division, European Spallation Source, Lund, Sweden

Keywords Quantum mechanics – Fermions – Bosons – Quantization –

Bose-Einstein condensation – Two-fluid model

Quantum mechanics is the physics of the microscopic. It explains the

behavior of atoms, atomic nuclei and subatomic particles such as
electrons, neutrons, protons and quarks. You don’t need quantum
mechanics to build bridges, trains or airplanes, or to predict planetary
motion. However, quantum mechanics is needed to understand and
build lasers, particle accelerators, semiconductors or nuclear reactors.
It’s not a coincidence that the theory of quantum mechanics was
developed in the early twentieth century just as experimental studies of
atoms, nuclei and subatomic particles started. The observations from
these experiments frequently cannot be explained by classical physics.
Generally, the effects of quantum mechanics are only observed on a
microscopic level, although the technology based on these effects, such
as computers or lasers, is certainly macroscopic. He II is a rare example
where we can directly observe the effects of quantum mechanics using
only our eyes. To understand the behavior of He II and its resulting
technological value, we must understand something of quantum
mechanics.
The good news is that while quantum mechanics is a complicated
theory explaining the behavior of all known matter at microscopic
sizes, we only need to know a few concepts to tell the story of He II.
The first is quantization. This means that for particles—atoms,
nuclei, electrons, protons, neutrons and so on—physical parameters
such as energy or momentum are not continuous. As an example, the
electrons in an atom cannot possess any amount of energy but instead
can only occupy certain distinct (quantized) energy levels. More
generally, we speak of quantum states, which are a set of physical
parameters that describe the condition of the particle at a given
moment. It is the existence of these quantized states and the transition
of particles such as electrons between these states that underlies
technology such as semiconductors.1
The next concept is the distinction between fermions and bosons,
which is related to the quantum property of spin – a description of
angular momentum. Fermions are particles whose spin is quantized in
half integers (1/2, 3/2…) while the spins of bosons are quantized in full
integers (0,1,2,3…). Examples of fermions include electrons, protons
and nuclei with odd mass numbers, and examples of bosons include the
Higgs boson and nuclei with even mass numbers. Significantly, the most
common isotope of helium, 4He, is a boson.
A key difference between fermions and bosons is that a single
energy level (or quantum state) of a quantum system can contain only
one fermion—this is known as the Pauli exclusion principle—while
there is no restriction to how many bosons you can have at a given
quantum energy level. Einstein and others recognized that it was, in
theory, possible for a large number of bosons in a system to drop into
the lowest energy (or ground) quantum state. This effect is known as
Bose–Einstein condensation and prior to the discovery of He II had
never been observed experimentally.
With this background, we now go to Fritz London and Laszlo Tisza
in Paris in 1937. Both London and Tisza were refugees. Laszlo Tisza
was a Hungarian physicist who had previously been working at the
Ukrainian Physico-Technical Institute with Lev Landau, about whom we
will hear more later. Tisza was a member of the Communist Party, but
Stalin’s purges had made him lose faith in the party, and he left the
USSR for Paris. Before leaving the USSR, however, Tisza had begun to
develop a theory of liquid helium. Fritz London, also a theoretical
physicist, was the brother of Heinz London (Chap. 3) and, along with
him, moved to the Clarendon Laboratory at Oxford University in 1933.
In 1935, Fritz London moved to the Institut Poincaré in Paris, where he
met Tisza.
When the discovery of superfluidity in He II was announced in
January 1938, London proposed that this effect could be explained if
one assumed that a fraction of He II had undergone Bose–Einstein
condensation. Tisza realized that if London’s proposal was true, one
could then model He II as two separate fluids. One of these fluids
known today, as the normal fluid component, has its own density (mass
divided by volume), its own velocity and a small but finite viscosity. The
normal fluid component represents the fraction of helium atoms that
are in the higher energy quantum states (or levels). The superfluid
component with its own density and velocity but zero viscosity
represents the fraction of helium atoms that have condensed into the
ground quantum state. The total density of He II at any time is the sum
of the normal component density and the superfluid component
density. These densities change with temperature, and more
importantly, the ratio of the superfluid and normal fluid densities varies
with temperature, as shown in Fig. 4.1. Note that this shows that near
the lambda point, almost all the He II is in the normal fluid component,
while below 1 K, almost all the He II is in the superfluid component.
This reflects the fact that as the temperature of He II is lowered, an
increasing number of helium atoms condense into the ground state.
The two components can interact with each other under certain
conditions.
Fig. 4.1 Relative densities of superfluid and normal fluid components in He II as a
function of temperature. Note that He II approaches 100% normal fluid near Tλ and
100% superfluid below 1 K. (From Helium Cryogenics – Van Sciver)
It’s useful to pause and point out the two-fluid model is just that; a
model that explains physical behavior. While there is a real distribution
of the atoms in He II between the ground and higher energy (or excited)
quantum states, there aren’t actually two kinds of fluid. For example, we
cannot directly measure the normal fluid density. Nor does the two-
fluid model directly use the fundamental equations of quantum
mechanics. The test of such a model in physics and engineering is
whether it can be used to explain observed behavior and properly
predict behavior yet to be observed.
In this regard, the two-fluid model of He II is very powerful. Using it,
one can write the equations of conservation of mass, momentum and
energy for each component, including terms that describe the
interaction between components under certain conditions.
Experiments have shown that these equations accurately predict the
behavior measured in He II. While not a complete model (more on this
later), the two-fluid model is still used today to predict and explain
much of the behavior of He II.
There were a few early victories for the two-fluid model. Recall from
Chap. 3 that when the viscosity of He II was measured by the slowing
down of a rotating cylinder, it was found to be smaller than that of He I
but nonzero, while measurements made by flowing He II through
capillary tubes showed a zero viscosity. The two-fluid model explains
this discrepancy. In the case of the rotating cylinder, both the normal
fluid and superfluid components are in contact with the cylinder, and
the cylinder is slowed down by the viscosity of the normal fluid
component. However, in the case of the capillary technique, only the
nonviscous superfluid component is able to flow through the small
openings, and thus, the technique only measures the zero viscosity of
the superfluid component. The two-fluid model also explained the
observed fountain effect and predicted the yet-to-be-observed
phenomena of second sound. Both of these effects are described in
more detail in Chap. 7.
A distinction is frequently made between the transport properties
and the state properties of a material. Transport properties are those
that are associated with the transport of heat, mass and electricity.
Examples include viscosity, thermal conductivity and electrical
resistivity. State properties are not directly associated with the
movement of mass or heat and are independent of the volume or mass
of the material. Examples of these properties include specific heat,
internal energy and the special thermodynamic properties of entropy
and enthalpy. The two-fluid model explained the transport behavior of
He II but was less useful in describing the state properties of He II. In
addition, as mentioned earlier, the two-fluid model was only loosely
linked to the fundamental equations of quantum mechanics. Both of
these deficiencies were addressed by a complimentary model
developed by Lev Landau, but he first had to get out of prison.
Lev Landau was a brilliant and productive theoretical physicist. He
made significant contributions in a wide range of subjects, including
cryogenics, fluid mechanics and plasma physics. His ten-book series on
theoretical physics, written with Evgeny Lifshitz, remains one of the
standard works of the field. During his leadership of the theory
department of the Ukrainian Physico-Technical Institute, Landau
recruited a number of talented colleagues, including as seen above,
Tizsa. In 1938, however, Landau, now working in Moscow, was accused
of subversion during the Stalin era purges and locked up in Lubyanka
Prison. Recall that it was these purges that dismayed Tisza and caused
him to leave the USSR for Paris.
 With the discovery of He II, Peter Kapitza in Moscow wanted
Landau to come and develop a fundamental explanation for He II.
Kapitza wrote a letter to the Soviet authorities, vouching for Landau
and explaining that he needed him for important work. Such was both
Kapitza’s and Landau’s reputations that this came to pass, and Landau
was released to come and work on the He II problem.
Fully describing Landau’s He II model requires an understanding of
quantum mechanics that is beyond the scope of this book; a few key
points can, however, be discussed. Recall that in quantum mechanics,
there are only a certain number of allowed excited states. Landau
defined, based partly on experimental data, some fundamental excited
states that the He II atoms that were not condensed into the ground
state could occupy. Based on these definitions and existing quantum
physics, Landau was then able to correctly calculate state properties
such as specific heat and entropy for He II. As in the case of the Tizsa’a
model, Landau divided the helium atoms into a ground state and
excited states. Today, Landau’s more fundamental model published in
1941 is recognized as the correct microscopic model of He II. Landau
was awarded the Nobel Prize in physics in 1962 principally for this
work.
While Landau’s model is more fundamental, it’s complicated and
not terribly useful for predicting the transport properties of He II. It is
these properties that in many cases make He II so useful in engineering
applications, and for the remainder of this book, Tizsa’s two-fluid
model will be used to explain He II behavior.
Paris at the start of the Second World War was not a good place for
people fleeing totalitarian governments, and thus, both Fritz London
and Lazlo Tisza moved again, this time to the United States. Both had
long and productive academic careers, Tisza at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology and London at Duke University. Both Kapitza
and Landau remained in the Soviet Union and continued to do
important work in a number of fields, including cryogenics.
Thus, by the end of the 1930s, He II had been discovered, a basic
understanding of why it existed was reached, and two models of its
behavior, one more fundamental than the other, had been developed.
There were significant research programs on He II underway in Leiden,
Oxford, Cambridge and Moscow. In the next chapters, we will see that
He II has other fascinating behaviors, including those that make it so
valuable for big science projects.

Footnotes
1 In a very real sense, it is quantum mechanics that allows you to post cute pictures
of your dog on the internet.
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023
J. G. Weisend II, Superfluid
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42652-0_5

5. What If You Had a Bucket?

J. G. Weisend II1
(1) Dept of Industrial Production, Lund University, Accelerator
Division, European Spallation Source, Lund, Sweden

Keywords Rotation – Rotating bucket – Quantized vortices – Mutual

friction – Turbulence

Suppose you had a bucket of He II. Suppose further that He II was at a

temperature of 1 K, where the vast majority of He II was in the
superfluid component (see Fig. 4.​1). What would happen if you rotated
the bucket? Since the superfluid component has no viscosity and it’s
viscosity that in effect makes a fluid interact with a solid surface, you
could reasonably expect that He II composed mostly of the superfluid
component would stay still while the bucket rotated.1 However, an
experiment performed by D.V. Osborne in 1950 at Cambridge
University showed this not to be the case. His observations showed that
a rotating bucket of He II at 1 K behaved very much as if He II were a
regular fluid with normal viscosity.
While rotating a bucket of liquid helium at 1 K sounds like the kind
of thing you might do after a few beers on a Friday evening, Osborne’s
experiment had a very real and serious motivation. Researchers had
observed cases in heat transfer (Chap. 6), film flow (Chap. 7) and even
in measurements of viscosity where the superfluid component starts to
interact with the normal fluid component. These interactions began to
occur at a certain velocity of the superfluid component, now known as
the critical velocity. Osborne’s experiment was an attempt to create a
situation in which He II would act as an ideal, i.e., nonviscous fluid.
 Understanding the results of the rotating bucket experiment brings
up two additional features of He II (quantized vortices and mutual
friction). These features are not only important to understanding He II
but also play (as we will see in the next chapter) an important role in
making He II useful in big science projects.
Circulation or vorticity in the superfluid component of He II is
quantized. Just as electrons in atoms can only occupy discrete energy
levels, so too can the circulation of the superfluid component only
occupy discrete levels of angular momentum. This was mentioned as a
brief footnote in a paper by L. Onsager of Yale in 1949, but the theory
was really worked out by Richard Feynman in 1955. Feynman showed
that not only was the circulation of the superfluid component quantized
but that it would be possible for these quantized vortices to arrange
themselves in a regular array within a rotating bucket, as shown in Fig.
5.1.

Fig. 5.1 Schematic of an array of quantized vortices in a container of He II rotating

at a constant speed. From W.F. Vinen, Advances in Cryogenic Engineering, Vol. 35, 1990

The quantized vortices are microscopic, and in this case, all rotate in
the same direction as the bucket. Looking carefully at Fig. 5.1, one can
see that the rotations of adjacent vortices in the body of the fluid cancel
each other out, but at the wall of the container, this cancellation does
not occur; thus, while the bulk of the superfluid is irrotational, at the
wall of the container, the superfluid component rotates with the
container.
Recall, however, that Osborne’s experiment implied that all the
helium in the bucket was rotating. The answer to this is mutual friction.
As mentioned before, researchers had observed that at a certain
superfluid component velocity, the normal fluid component and the
superfluid component started to interact with each other. In 1949, C.
Gorter and J. Mellink of Leiden University developed a mathematical
expression for this force between the superfluid and normal fluid
components. They based this on experimental data and the two-fluid
model. They coined the term mutual friction for this force. We now
know that mutual friction occurs when the normal fluid component
starts to interact with the quantized vortices of the superfluid
component. So, in the rotating bucket experiment, the superfluid
component against the wall rotates with the wall, while mutual friction
ties together all the quantized vortices with the normal fluid
component and thus with each other. The result is that almost all the He
II rotates with the bucket, as seen in the experiment.
Feynman’s theory was published in 1955. In 1956, William (Joe)
Vinen, a student of Osbourne working together with H.E. Hall indirectly
detected quantized vortices by using their interaction with second
sound (Chap. 7). In 1961, Vinen used a very clever experiment that
involved a vibrating wire in a rotating container of He II to directly
capture and measure quantized vortices. His results showed that
Feynman’s theory was correct.
If quantized vortices and mutual friction were only important for
rotating buckets, they would not be very interesting. However, it turns
out that these phenomena have a much larger role in He II. Quantized
vortices will form whenever the velocity of the superfluid component
exceeds its critical velocity, and once formed, these vortices will
interact with the normal fluid component via mutual friction. This
critical velocity can be reached in a number of ways, say during the
forced flow of He II by a pump, or importantly, as we will see in the next
chapter, during the transfer of heat in He II. vortices formed outside of
the carefully controlled rotating bucket experiment do not line up in a
regular array but rather form a twisted clump or “ball of string”, as
shown in Fig. 5.2. Quantized vortices are turbulence in the superfluid
component. Significant efforts, including much research by Joe Vinen,
have been carried out using He II to conduct fundamental studies of
turbulence in fluids.2

Fig. 5.2 Computer simulation of a tangle of vortices in He II at 1.6 K. Reproduced

from William F. Vinen, Russell J. Donnelly; “Quantum turbulence”. Physics Today 1
April 2007; 60 (4): 43–48. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1063/​1.​2731972; with the permission
of the American Institute of Physics
Experiments over the years have shown that the critical velocity is
proportional to the inverse of the typical diameter of the system being
studied. Practically speaking, this means that for almost all the large
scale applications of He II that we will discuss later, both quantized
vortices and mutual friction will be present.
Figure 5.3 shows another version of a rotating bucket experiment.
Here, electrons from a radioactive source have been passed through the
helium, and some of them have been captured by the cores of quantized
vortices. Figure 5.3 shows the detection of these electrons (and thus the
quantized vortices) looking down into the rotating bucket. Note that as
the speed of rotation increases, so does the number of vortices. The
vortices in this figure are not seen in a regular array, as they are moving
through the helium.
Fig. 5.3 Direct observation via an electron trapping technique of quantized
vorticies in a rotating bucket of He II. The speed of rotation increases from a – c.
(From “Photographs of Quantized Vortex Lines in rotating He II”, G.A. Williams, R.E.
Packard, Physical Review Letters, Vo. 33, Number 2 (1974)
With this background of quantized vortices and mutual friction, we
can now turn to the transfer of heat in He II.

Footnotes
1 This is me thinking like an engineer. The more fundamental physics explanation for
the superfluid component being irrotational (i.e., not able to rotate) comes from the
quantum mechanical properties of the Bose–Einstein condensation and was first
predicted by Landau.

2 Turbulence in fluids is one of the last great mysteries in classical physics. We can
create turbulence models based on experimental data sufficient for many
engineering applications, but describing turbulence from fundamental physical laws
has yet to be done. There are still many mysteries in so called “modern physics”
involving topics such as relativity, quantum mechanics, and fundamental particles.
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023
J. G. Weisend II, Superfluid
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42652-0_6

6. Moving Heat
J. G. Weisend II1
(1) Dept of Industrial Production, Lund University, Accelerator
Division, European Spallation Source, Lund, Sweden

Keywords Heat transfer – Internal convection – Kapitza conductance

– Heat transfer limits – Mutual friction

We are all familiar in everyday life with the three most common ways
that heat is transferred from a warm location to a cold one. Conduction:
heat transfer through a solid material explains why the metal handle of
a pot on a stove becomes hot. Convection: heat transfer via a moving
fluid explains why you feel cool when the wind is blowing. Lastly,
radiation: heat transfer via electromagnetic waves explains why
wearing a hat helps keep you comfortable on a sunny day. These three
mechanisms along with some variations in them (boiling heat transfer,
for example, is a variation in convection) explain almost all heat
transfer in the universe.
However, there is a fourth mechanism that is not only unique to He
II and a macroscopic manifestation of quantum mechanics but is also
one of the main reasons that He II is so useful to us. This is known as
internal convection.
Figure 6.1 shows a tube of He II at 1.8 K. One end of the tube has a
heater on it, and the other end is connected to a bath that is maintained
at the saturation pressure corresponding to 1.8 K helium.
Fig. 6.1 A schematic representation of internal convection. The normal fluid
component (Vn) moves away from the heat source and is replaced by the superfluid
component (Vs) moving toward the heat source
An aside is necessary here about saturation (or boiling)
temperature and pressure. Not only is this needed to understand Fig.
6.1 but it is also useful in understanding applications of He II. Look
again at Fig. 2.​1 which shows the helium phase diagram. Note that there
is a line that separates the vapor phase from the liquid He I phase and
from the liquid He II phase. This is the boiling or saturation curve, and
it represents where the liquid and vapor phases are in equilibrium, that
is, where the liquid boils into vapor. Notice that for each point on this
curve, there is a unique temperature, known as the saturation
temperature, and a corresponding pressure known as the saturation
pressure. A liquid at its saturation temperature and pressure is said to
be a saturated liquid. A liquid whose temperature is lower than the
saturation temperature of its current pressure is said to be subcooled,
while a vapor whose temperature is higher than the saturation
temperature of its current pressure is said to be superheated. The
saturation temperature of helium at 1 atmosphere pressure is 4.2 K.
Thus, He II at 1 atmosphere and 1.8 K is a subcooled liquid.1
The saturation pressure of He II at 1.8 K is 0.016 atmospheres, and
in a cryogenic system, this subatmospheric pressure is maintained by
pumping on the vapor above the liquid.
Note that throughout this book, we will use atmosphere as the unit
of pressure. An atmosphere equals 14.7 pounds per square inch and is
the nominal air pressure at sea level. While an atmosphere is not a
metric unit, for our purposes, it is the most intuitive.
Returning to Fig. 6.1, if we add heat via the heater, it will convert
some of the superfluid component into a normal fluid component (the
heat moves the helium from the ground state to excited states). This
normal fluid component moves away from the heater to the bath, while
the additional superfluid component helium moves from the bath to the
heater to replace the normal fluid component moving away. The heat
transferred from the heater to the bath causes vapor to evaporate at the
surface of the bath, and the vapor is then pumped away. As long as we
apply heat, we have set up a continuous flow of the normal fluid
component away from the heater and the superfluid component toward
the heater. This new heat transfer mechanism, only found in He II, is
called internal convection.
Since the flow of the normal component is compensated by the flow
of the superfluid component, there is no net mass flow in this process.
A flowmeter installed into the tube in Fig. 6.1 will show no movement
of the helium.
There are two types of internal convection described by different
mathematical equations. The difference comes from quantized vortices.
The velocity of the normal and superfluid components in internal
convection increases with the amount of heat applied. Once the velocity
of the superfluid component exceeds the critical velocity at which
quantized vortices form, the resulting quantized vortices will interact
with the normal fluid component via mutual friction. This type of
internal convection heat transfer is known as the mutual friction
regime. Recall from Chap. 5 that the critical velocity at which the
quantized vortices form is inversely related to the typical size of the
system. Thus, in most large-scale applications of He II, internal
convection occurs in the mutual friction regime. Figure 6.2 shows the
property that describes this mutual friction heat transfer regime as a
function of temperature and pressure. Note that this heat transfer
mechanism is highest at approximately 1.95 K. This fact will be
reflected in many practical applications of He II.
Fig. 6.2 Heat conductivity function for the mutual friction regime of internal
convection in He II as a function of temperature. Note that the heat conductivity
function, and by extension, the effectiveness of the internal convection process peaks
at approximately 1.95 K. From Helium Cryogenics, S.W. Van Sciver, Springer (2012)
Internal convection heat transfer is amazingly efficient. When
engineers speak of efficient heat transfer, they mean that a large
amount of heat can be removed from the heat source without a large
temperature difference between the heat source and the coolant. This
means that significant heat can be removed without the heated surface
becoming too hot; generally, the point of cooling it in the first place.
How efficient is internal convection? IF Fig. 6.1 represented a tube
of He II 12 cm long and 0.25 cm in diameter with the heated end at 2 K
and the cold end at 1.8 K, internal convection would transfer 133
milliwatts of heat. While that may not seem like a lot, conduction
through a copper rod of the same size with the same temperatures
would only transfer 163 microwatts of heat or almost a thousand times
less than internal convection in He II. The efficiency of internal
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 21; Tit. i. the Grecian
5; Jos. Archipelago.
Life, 76; (Grove’s B. I.)
13 Ant. iv.
39; 17
Ant. xii. 2;
2 Wars vii.
1
CYPRUS Acts iv. 36; Cyprus — See O. T. S.
xi. 19, 20;
xiii. 4; xv.
39; xxi. 3;
16; xxvii.
4; 1 Ant.
vi. 1; 13
Ant. x. 4;
xii. 2, 3;
16 Ant. iv.
5; 20 Ant.
ii. 5; 2
Wars vii. 2
CYRENE Matt. xxvii. el Krenna — The chief town
32; Mark of the district,
xv. 21; now Tripoli,
Luke xxiii. lying between
26; Acts ii. Carthage and
10; vi. 9; Egypt.
xi. 20; xiii. (Grove’s B. I.)
1; Jos.
Life, 3, 76;
14 Ant. vii.
2; 16 Ant.
vi. 1, 5; 7
Wars xi. 1
DALMANUTHA Mark viii. Not — See Conder’s
 10 identified Handbook,
322.
DALMATIA 2 Tim. iv. A district in
10; 2 Illyricum, east
Wars xvi. of the Adriatic
4 Sea. (Grove’s
B. I.)
DAMASCUS Acts ix. 2– Dimeshk 4 The ancient city
27; xxii. esh Sham now called
5–11; xxvi. Dimeshk esh
12, 20; 2 Sham. One of
Cor. xi. the cities
32; Gal. i. included in the
17; Jos. Decapolis. See
Life, 6, O. T. S.
etc., etc.
DECAPOLIS Matt. iv. 25; 7 The name
Mark v. applied to a
20; vii. 31; confederation
Jos. Life, of ten cities
65, 74; 3 which lay to
Wars ix. 7 the south-east
of the Sea of
Galilee, viz.,
Scythopolis,
Hippos,
Gadara,
Philadelphia,
Pella, Gerasa,
Dion, Canatha,
Damascus,
Raphana. All
except the first
are on the east
of the Jordan.
 (Conder’s
Handbook, 36;
Primer, 146.)
DERBE Acts xiv. 6, Ambarrarasi — Ambarrarasi,
20; xvi. 1; west of Eregli,
xx. 4 in Asia Minor.
EMMAUS Luke xxiv. Kh. el — The village of
13 Khamaseh Emmaus (Luke
(?)* xxiv. 13) was,
Kulonieh according to
(?) A.V., 60
el furlongs from
Kubeibeh Jerusalem,
(?) and according
Urtas (?) to the Sinaitic
160. Kh. el
Khamaseh, 8
miles south-
west of
Jerusalem,
proposed by
Captain
Conder.
(Handbook
and Mem. III.
36; Sh. XVII.;
Q. S. 172,
1876; 105,
1879; 46, 237,
1881.)
Kulonieh, 4½
miles west of
Jerusalem.
(Grove’s B. I.)
el Kubeibeh,
 7½ miles
north-west of
Jerusalem,
was
recognised by
the Crusaders.
(Mem. III. 131;
Sh. XVII.)
Urtas, 7 miles
south of
Jerusalem,
proposed by
Mrs. Finn.
(Q. S. 53,
1883; 243,
1884. See also
1885, 1886.)
EGYPT Matt. ii. 13– See O. T. S.
19, etc.,
etc.
EPHRAIM, or John xi. 54 Taiyibeh (?) 14 See Conder’s
APHARAIM Handbook,
O. T. S. and
Q. S. 1872,
1877, and
1881.
EPHESUS Acts xviii. Ephesus — A city of Ionia in
19, 21, 24; Asia Minor,
xix. 1, 17, near Smyrna.
26, 35; xx. The seat of
16, 17; 1 one of the
Cor. xv. seven
32; xvi. 8; Churches of
Ephes. i. Asia. See
1; 1 Tim. i. Smith’s D. of
 3; 2 Tim. i. B. and
18; iv. 12; Baedeker’s
Rev. i. 11; Handbook.
ii. 1; 14
Ant. x. 3,
16; xii. 2,
3, 4; 16
Ant. ii. 2;
vi. 7
ETHIOPIA Acts viii. 27 — See O. T. S.
FAIR HAVENS, Acts xxvii. — On the south
The 8 side of Crete,
4 or 5 miles
east of Cape
Matala.
(Grove’s B. I.)
GABBATHA John xix. Not — The ‘pavement’
13 identified in Jerusalem.
Believed to
have been in
the citadel of
Antonia.
GALATIA Acts xvi. 6; — A province of
xviii. 23; 1 Asia Minor.
Cor. xvi. 1;
Gal. i. 2; 2
Tim. iv.
10; 1
Peter i. 1
GALILEE, Matt. ii. 22; — See O. T. S.
Upper iii. 13; iv.
GALILEE, 12, 15, 23,
Lower 25; xvii.
 22; xix. 1;
xxi. 11;
xxvi. 32;
xxvii. 55;
xxviii. 7,
10, 16;
Mark i. 9,
14, 28, 39;
iii. 7; vi.
21; ix. 30;
xiv. 28; xv.
41; xvi. 7;
Luke i. 26;
ii. 39; iii. 1;
iv. 14, 31,
44; v. 17;
viii. 26;
xvii. 11;
xxiii. 5, 6,
49, 55;
xxiv. 6;
John i. 43;
ii. 11; iv. 3,
43, 45, 47;
vii. 1, 9,
41, 52; xii.
21; xxi. 2;
Acts i. 11;
v. 37; ix.
31; x. 37.
Very
frequently
mentioned
in
Josephus
GALILEE, Sea Matt. iv. 18; Bahr — See Recovery
of xv. 29; Tŭbarîya of Jerusalem,
Mark i. 16; Conder’s
vii. 31; Handbook,
John vi. 1 215; Tent
Work, 36;
Q. S. 1877,
1878, 1879,
and 1881.
GAZA Acts viii. Ghŭzzeh 13 See O. T. S.
26; 1 Ant. and Q. S.
vi. 2; 5 1869–1875,
Ant. i. 22; 1878. (Mem.
ii. 4; viii. III. 248; Sh.
10; 6 Ant. XIX.)
i. 2; 7 Ant.
iv. 1; 9
Ant. xiii. 3;
11 Ant.
viii. 3, 4;
13 Ant. v.
5; xii. 2, 4;
xiii. 1, 2,
3; xv. 4;
14 Ant. iv.
4; v. 3; 15
Ant. vii. 3,
9; 17 Ant.
xi. 4; 1
Wars iv. 2;
vii. 7; xx.
3; 2 Wars
vi. 3; xviii.
1; 4 Wars
xi. 5
GENNESARET, Luke v. 1; 5 Bahr 6 Another name
Lake of Ant. i. 22; Tŭbarîya for the Sea of
13 Ant. v. Galilee. In the
7; 3 Wars Old Testament
x. 1, 7, 8 Chinnereth,
and in
Josephus Lake
of Genesareth.
GENNESARET, Matt. xiv. el Ghuweir 6 The plain of ‘el
Land of 34; Mark Ghuweir,’ north
vi. 53 of Magdala, on
the western
shore of the
Sea of Galilee.
Extent 3 miles
long by 1¼
mile broad.
GERGESENES, Matt. viii. Kersa, or 6 Possibly the
or 28; Mark Khersa (?) present ruin
GERASENES v. 1; Luke Kersa, on the
City of viii. 26 eastern shore
and 37 of the Sea of
Galilee. In
Matt. viii. 28
Gergesenes;
Mark v. 1,
Luke viii. 26
and 37
Gadarenes
(A.V.) In Matt.
viii. 28
Gadarenes;
Mark v. 1,
Luke viii. 26
and 37
Gerasenes
 (R.V.)
Recovery of
Jerusalem,
Schumacher’s
Jaulan, 1888.
Conder’s
Handbook.
GETHSEMANE Matt. xxvi. 14 Probably at or
36; Mark near the
xiv. 32 enclosed olive
garden, still so
called, in the
Valley of
Jehoshaphat.
GOLGOTHA Matt. xxvii. 14 The knoll
33; Mark outside of the
xv. 22; Damascus
John xix. Gate proposed
17 by Captain
Conder, has
lately received
many
supporters.
Luke xiii. 33
Calvary (A.V.),
The Skull
(R.V.). See
Recovery of
Jerusalem.
Conder’s
Primer, 160;
Q. S. 198,
1879; 109,
1880; 69, 148,
 1883; 78,
1885.
GOMORRHA Matt. x. 15; Not — The Gomorrah
(R.V. Mark vi. identified of the Old
GOMORRAH) 11; Rom. Testament.
ix. 29; (See O. T. S.
Jude 7; 2 and Memoirs
Pet. ii. 6 of Eastern
Survey.) The
name is
omitted in
Mark vi. 11 in
the R.V.
GREECE Acts xx. 2
HIERAPOLIS Col. iv. 13 Pambûk — Now called
Kalessi Pambûk
Kalessi.
(Grove’s B. I.)
ICONIUM Acts xiii. Konieh — Now the
51; xiv. 1, modern
19, 21; Konieh.
xvi. 2; 2 (Grove’s B. I.)
Tim. iii. 11
IDUMÆA Mark iii. 8; 14 The Greek form
4 Wars iv. 21 of Edom. See
1–7, etc. O. T. S.
ILLYRICUM Rom. xv. — A district on the
19 east coast of
the Adriatic
Sea. (Grove’s
B. I.)
ITALY Acts xviii. —
 2; xxvii. 1,
6; Heb.
xiii. 24
ITURÆA Luke iii. 1; Jedûr 7 The present
13 Ant. xi. district of
3 Jedûr,
extending from
Hermon
towards the
Lejah.
(Conder’s
Handbook,
316; Recovery
of Jerusalem,
416.)
JACOB’S John iv. 6 Bîr Yʾakûb 10 At the foot of
WELL Gerizim, where
the Vale of
Shechem joins
the plain of
Moreh, is
Jacob’s Well,
70 feet deep,
and at times
containing
water. There is
a vault over it
now, and
remains of an
ancient
church. For
plans and
sketches and
detailed
accounts see
 Recovery of
Jerusalem.
(Mem. II. 172;
Sh. XI.; Q. S.
71, 1873; 72,
1877; 9, 1878;
87, 1879; 195,
1881.)
JERICHO Matt. xx. Eriha 14 Jericho. See
29; Mark O. T. S.; Q. S.
x. 46; 1869, 1870,
Luke x. 1874.
30; xviii.
35; xix. 1;
Heb. xi.
30.
Frequently
mentioned
by
Josephus
JERUSALEM Very el Kuds — Memoirs, Jer.
frequently Vol.; Recovery
mentioned of Jerusalem,
etc.
JOPPA Acts ix. 36– Yâfa 9 The Japho of
43; x. 5, 8, Joshua, xix.
23, 32; xi. 46. See
13 O. T. S.
JORDAN Matt. iii. 5, esh — See O. T. S.
6, 13; iv. Sheriʾah
15, 25;
xix. 1;
Mark i. 5,
9; iii. 8; x.
 1; Luke iii.
3; iv. 1;
John i. 28;
iii. 26; x.
40
JUDAH, or Matt. ii. 1, — See O. T. S.
JUDEA 5, 22, etc.,
etc.
LAODICEA Col. iv. 13, near Denislu — In Asia Minor.
15; Rev. i. Was the seat
11; iii. 14; of one of the
1 Wars xi. seven
7 Churches of
Asia.
LASEA Acts xxvii. Lasea — A ruin of that
8 name in Crete.
(Grove’s B. I.)
LIBYA Acts ii. 10; — The part of
1 Ant. vi. Africa west of
2; 10 Ant. the Delta.
x. 1; 12 Mentioned by
Ant. x. 5; Josephus
14 Ant. i. under the form
4; 16 Ant. of Libya,
vi. 1; 2 Libyia, Libyan
Wars xvi. Pentapolis.
4; xviii. 8; See O. T. S.
3 Wars v.
7; 4 Wars
x. 5; 7
Wars xi. 1
LYCAONIA Acts xiv. 6, — A district of Asia
11 Minor.
LYCIA Acts xxvii. — A district in Asia
5 Minor,
opposite
Rhodes.
LYDDA Acts ix. 32, Ludd 9 The ancient
35, 38; 14 ‘Lod.’ See
Ant. xi. 2; O. T. S.
xv. 3; 20
Ant. vi. 2;
1 Wars xv.
6; 2 Wars
xii. 6; xix.
1; xx. 4; 3
Wars iii. 5;
4 Wars
viii. 1
LYSTRA Acts xiv. 6, Khatûn — Khatûn Serai,
8, 21; xvi. Serai east of Konieh.
1, 2; 2
Tim. iii. 11
MACEDONIA Acts xvi. 9, Macedonia — The country to
10, 12; the north of
xviii. 5; Greece. In the
xix. 21, Apocrypha
22, 29; xx. Chittim. See
1, 3; Rom. O. T. S., under
xv. 26; 1 head Chittim.
Cor. xvi. 5;
2 Cor. i.
16; ii. 13;
vii. 5; viii.
1; ix. 2, 4;
xi. 9;
Philip iv.
15; 1
 Thess. i.
7, 8; iv.
10; 1 Tim.
i. 3; 12
Ant. i.; 14
Ant. xii. 3
MADIAN Acts vii. 29 — The Greek form
of Midian. See
O. T. S.
MAGDALA Matt. xv. 39 Mejdel (?) 6 The present
(R.V. village Mejdel,
MAGADAN) north of
Tiberias.
(Mem. I. 365,
369; Sh. VI.;
Q. S. 121,
1877.)
Magadan
might (if
correct)
represent
Megiddo. See
O. T. S.
MELITA Acts xxviii. Malta — The island on
1 which St. Paul
was wrecked.
MESO­- Acts ii. 9; — Country
POTAMIA vii. 2 between the
(frequently Euphrates and
mentioned Tigris. See
in O. T. S.
Josephus)
MILETUS Acts xx. 15, — A city of Asia
 17; 2 Tim. Minor, south of
iv. 20 Ephesus.
(Grove’s B. I.)
MITYLENE Acts xx. 14; Castro — The chief town
15 Ant. x. of Lesbos.
2; 16 Ant. (Grove’s B. I.)
ii. 2
MYRA Acts xxvii. Dembra — A city of Lycia.
5
MYSIA Acts xvi. 7, — A district in the
8; 1 Wars north-west of
xxi. 11; 4 Asia Minor.
Wars x. 6;
7 Wars iv.
3; v. 3
NAIN Luke vii. 11 Nein 10 The village
Nein, west of
Endor. (Mem.
II. 86; Sh. IX;
Q. S. 115,
1878.)
NAZARETH Matt. ii. 23; en Nâsirah 6 The town en
iv. 13; xxi. Nâsirah, in
11; Mark i. Lower Galilee.
9; Luke i. For various
26; ii. 4, descriptions,
39, 51; iv. see Mem. I.
16, 34; 275–279; Sh.
xviii. 37; V; Tent Work,
John i. 45, 57; Primer,
46 147 (Conder);
Q. S. 1869,
1870, 1873,
 and Dean
Stanley’s Sinai
and Palestine,
365.
NEAPOLIS Acts xvi. 11 Kavalla — See Philippi.
NICOPOLIS Titus iii. 12 — Thought to be
Paleoprevêsa,
west of the
Bay of Actium.
(Grove’s B. I.)
NINEVEH Matt. xii. 41 — On the left bank
of the Tigris,
opposite
Mosul. See
O. T. S.
OLIVES, Matt. xxi. 1; Jebel et Tôr 14 The hill called
Mount of xxiv. 3; Jebel et Tôr on
OLIVET, The xxvi. 30; the east of
Mount Called Mark xi. 1; Jerusalem.
xiii. 3; xiv. See O. T. S.
26; Luke ‘Five furlongs
xix. 29, from the city’
37; xxi. (20 Ant. viii. 6);
37; xxii. ‘six furlongs
39; John from
viii. 1; Jerusalem, on
Acts i. 12; the eastern
7 Ant. ix. side of the
2; 20 Ant. Cedron Valley’
viii. 6; 2 (5 Wars ii. 3).
Wars xiii.
5; 5 Wars
ii. 3; iii. 5;
 xii. 2; 6
Wars ii. 8
PAMPHYLIA Acts ii. 10; — A district on the
xiii. 13; south coast of
xiv. 24; xv. Asia Minor
38; xxvii. between Lycia
5; 11 Ant. and Cilicia.
viii. 1; 14 (Grove’s B. I.)
Ant. xiv. 3;
1 Wars
xiv. 3; 2
Wars xiv.
4
PAPHOS Acts xiii. 6 Bafo — A town at the
south-west
end of Cyprus.
PATMOS Rev. i. 9 Patmo — In the Ægean,
near Samos.
Now Patmo.
(Grove’s B. I.)
PERGA Acts xiii. Eski-Kalesi — A city of
13; xiv. 25 Pamphylia,
now called
Eski-Kalesi,
situate on the
river Cestus.
PERGAMOS Rev. i. 11; Bergama — Now Bergama.
(R.V. ii. 12; 1 The seat of
PERGAMUM) Wars ix. 3; one of the
xxi. 11 seven
Churches of
Asia.
PHENICE Acts xi. 19; See the next.
 xv. 3
PHENICIA Acts xxi. 2. — The maritime
(R.V. Frequently portion of
PHŒNICIA) mentioned country
in containing
Josephus Tyre and
Sidon. The
limits are
variously
stated by
ancient writers.
PHILA­DELPHIA Rev. i. 11; Alla Shehr — A city on the
iii. 7 confines of
Lydia and
Phrygia. Now
called Alla
Shehr. Was
the seat of one
of the seven
Churches of
Asia. (Grove’s
B. I.)
PHILIPPI Acts xvi. Near — A city of
12; xx. 6; Bereketli Macedonia, its
1 Thess. seaport
ii. 2 Neapolis is
now called
Kavalla.
(Grove’s B. I.)
PHRYGIA Acts ii. 10; — In west central
xvi. 6; Asia Minor.
xviii. 23;
Ant. iii. 4;
16 Ant. ii.
 2; 4 Wars
xi. 1
PISIDIA Acts xiii. — In Asia Minor,
14; xiv. north of
24; 13 Pamphylia.
Ant. xiii. 5 (Grove’s B. I.)
POTTER’S Matt. xxvii. — The traditional
FIELD, THE 7 site is at
Aceldama,
which see.
PRÆTORIUM Matt. xxvii. — The head-
(R.V. THE 27; Mark quarters of the
PALACE) xv. 16; Roman
John xviii. Governor at
28, 33; Jerusalem.
xix. 9; The Common
Acts xxiii. Hall, or Hall of
35; Philip Judgment.
i. 13
PTOLEMAIS Acts xxi. 7; Akka 6 The modern
Jos. Life town of Akka.
22, 24, 43, The Accho of
65, 74, Judges i. 31
etc., etc. and the
Talmud. See
O. T. S.
PUTEOLI Acts xxviii. Pozzuoli — On the west
13; Jos. coast of Italy,
Life 3; 18 near Naples.
Ant. vi. 4
RAMA Matt. ii. 18 Not — See Ramah (1)
(R.V. RAMAH) identified of Benjamin,
O. T. S.