Analysis reveals flaws in previous arguments about the Meissner effect in superconductivity, suggesting further experimental exploration.
In Ref. Markos (2025), Markos and Hlubina argue that “contrary to the expectations of Hirsch” (Hirsch, 2020) the conventional theory of superconductivity correctly describes the dynamics of the Meissner effect. Here I point out the flaws in their arguments that render them invalid, and propose an experiment to shed further light on these issues. • Markos and Hlubina claim that the conventional theory of superconductivity describes the dynamics of the Meissner effect. • Their paper claims that Hirsch’s claim to the contrary is wrong. • I show that Markos and Hlubina’s argument is deeply flawed. • I propose an experiment that can decide who is right and wrong.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
J.E. Hirsch (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: