Why band theorists have been so successful in explaining and predicting novel superconductors?

TL;DR

Band theorists have been highly successful in predicting and explaining superconductors due to their practical application of existing theories and computational methods, contrasting with the more elegant but less predictive approaches of some theoretical physicists.

Contribution

The paper highlights the practical success of band theorists in superconductivity research and discusses reasons for their effectiveness compared to more theoretical approaches.

Findings

Band theorists excel in applying existing ideas to real materials.

Theoretical physicists have contributed elegant but less predictive models.

Practical computational methods have driven progress in understanding superconductors.

Abstract

In this contribution to the J. Phys. memorial issue in honor of Sandro Massidda I reflect on a phenomenon Sandro had been a part of. While theoretical condensed matter physicists have made, over the years, exciting and most elegant contributions to the theory of superconductivity (which, in and by itself, is one of the most beautiful constructs in theoretical physics), some of them of utmost importance, they have had less success in predicting and explaining superconducting states and mechanisms in specific materials. More down-to-earth computational materials scientists, who often go by the moniker "band theorists", have been much more successful in applying (usually other people's) ideas in such circumstances. In this essay I give some examples, largely drawn from my own experience, and speculate on their meaning.