> but if I understand correctly the new material is just a new type of superconductor wire that is more efficient than the current wires, it is not a supercondu

> but if I understand correctly the new material is just a new type of superconductor wire that is more efficient than the current wires, it is not a superconductor magnet. If they have better wires, they can make better electromagnets, but it is confusing. Also is not clear if they have tested the new kind of magnets or it is just a theoretical application. Both: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkpqA8yG9T4&t=32m35s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkpqA8yG9T4&t=32m35s This work is being done by the head of MIT's Nuclear Science department, in collaboration with most of the top grad students there. You can go look through all the publications that have resulted. They're going into great detail with practical engineering concerns, not just vague concept. It's really disappointing and frustrating to me to see all the shallow dismissals here. The original article/press release didn't have much concrete information. But instead of making the reasonable assumption that some of the best people in the field actually know what they're talking about, and the article is poor, instead HN commenters are deciding their zero content, zero knowledge, shallow dismissals are more likely than what the experts are saying. Nearly all the information about the ARC project is out there in the literature. If you don't want to read it that's fine, just try to have some awareness that you can't dismiss things without actually knowing what they are.