Majorana fermions in semiconducting nanowire and Fulde–Ferrell superconductor hybrid structures
Jia Liu , Chun Fai Chan , Ming Gong
Front. Phys. ›› 2019, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (1) : 13609
Majorana fermions in semiconducting nanowire and Fulde–Ferrell superconductor hybrid structures
The novel idea that spin-orbit coupling (SOC) and an s-wave pairing system can lead to induced pwave pairing with a strong magnetic limit, has stimulated widespread interest in searching for Majorana fermions (MFs) in semiconductor-superconductor hybrid structures. However, despite major advances in the semiconductor nanotechnology, this system has several inherent limitations that prohibit the realization and identification of MFs. We overcome these limitations by replacing the s-wave superconductor with the type-II Fulde–Ferrell (FF) superconductor, in which the center-of-mass momentum of the Cooper pair renormalizes the in-plane Zeeman field and chemical potential. As a result, MFs can be realized in semiconductor nanowires with small values of the Landé g-factor and high carrier densities. The SOC strength directly influences the topological boundary; thus, the topological phase transition and associated MFs can be engineered by an external electric field. Theoretically, almost all semiconductor nanowires can be used to realize MFs by using the FF superconductor. However, we find that InP nanowire is more suitable for the realization of MFs compared to InAs and InSb nanowires. Thus, this new scheme can take full advantage of the semiconductor nanotechnology for the realization of MFs in semiconductor-superconductor hybrid structures.
Majorana fermion / topological transition / Pfaffian / FF-superconductor / hybrid structure
| [1] |
|
| [2] |
|
| [3] |
|
| [4] |
|
| [5] |
|
| [6] |
|
| [7] |
|
| [8] |
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
|
| [11] |
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
|
| [16] |
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
|
| [19] |
|
| [20] |
|
| [21] |
|
| [22] |
|
| [23] |
|
| [24] |
|
| [25] |
|
| [26] |
|
| [27] |
|
| [28] |
|
| [29] |
|
| [30] |
|
| [31] |
|
| [32] |
|
| [33] |
|
| [34] |
|
| [35] |
|
| [36] |
|
| [37] |
|
| [38] |
|
| [39] |
|
| [40] |
|
| [41] |
|
| [42] |
|
| [43] |
|
| [44] |
|
| [45] |
|
| [46] |
|
| [47] |
|
| [48] |
|
| [49] |
|
| [50] |
|
| [51] |
|
| [52] |
|
| [53] |
|
| [54] |
|
| [55] |
|
| [56] |
|
| [57] |
|
| [58] |
|
| [59] |
|
| [60] |
|
| [61] |
|
| [62] |
|
| [63] |
|
| [64] |
|
| [65] |
|
| [66] |
|
| [67] |
|
| [68] |
|
| [69] |
|
| [70] |
|
| [71] |
|
| [72] |
|
| [73] |
|
| [74] |
|
| [75] |
|
| [76] |
|
| [77] |
|
| [78] |
|
| [79] |
|
| [80] |
|
| [81] |
|
| [82] |
The topological gapless phase III is still topological protected because it is impossible to adiabatically tune this phase to a trivial phase without closes the energy gap at zero momentum, see ReF. [56]. |
| [83] |
DetHBdG(kx) = A2+α2k2x , where A=h¯x2+h¯y2−k4/(4m*2)−Δ2−μ¯2+k2(α2+μ/m*), so the energy gap can close only at the critical boundary; see also discussion in ReF. [22]. |
| [84] |
|
| [85] |
|
| [86] |
|
| [87] |
|
| [88] |
|
| [89] |
|
| [90] |
|
| [91] |
|
Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |