Solid-state physicists are simple people. They believe that basic research is best carried out on chemically simple materials. Traditionally they have focused on inorganic elements, alloys, and other straightforward compounds. This approach has provided some notable successes. For example, any physicist over 35 will remember the huge fuss surrounding the discovery of high-temperature cuprate superconductors in 1986, which led to the infamous "Woodstock of physics" meeting the following year.
Just before the cuprates were discovered, however, an alternative view had begun to emerge. Physical chemists such as Klaus Bechgaard, Peter Day, Gunzi Saito, Viktor Schegolev and Jack Williams were suggesting that the "simple-materials-are-best" assumption was misplaced. They argued that some of the most exciting studies in solid-state physics can - and should - be attempted on crystalline organic materials. Although chemically complex, such materials are beautifully simple in other ways, and they can, for example, provide much more information about basic phenomena like superconductivity and magnetism than supposedly simple materials.
Physicists eventually embraced these materials with enthusiasm, and the number of papers on crystalline organic metals overtook those on the high-temperature cuprate superconductors three years ago. The gap has widened ever since, and the fact that God and a billion years of evolution have produced a processor based on three-dimensional arrays of molecules, rather than silicon or gallium-arsenide chips, is taken as a good omen by those working in the field.
In the January issue of Physics World, John Singleton of Oxford University and Charles Mielke of Los Alamos National Laboratory explore the recent explosion in the field of organic superconductors.