3 ms·

Can we please change the meaning of “high temp superconductors” to “material that start being super conductors and high temperature and low pressures” ? Everyon

by molyss 7y ago

Can we please change the meaning of “high temp superconductors” to “material that start being super conductors and high temperature and low pressures” ? Everyone agrees that these records don’t mean anything in term of direct applications. I agree that they give us a way to check our theoretical models, which might help getting to usable stuff, but all the “record shattering” language is really not making science look very smart IMO.

qcj 7y ago
I think this argument is quite facile. These people are scientists trying to understand superconductivity at a basic level, and this theoretical research (as well as the experimental results posted on this forum earlier this week) are a genuine advancement in that field. You are judging this research based on how it is directly applicable to making handheld devices with room temperature superconductors when that is not what these people are attempting to do at all. The fact that a superconducting state can be maintained at these temperatures at all is, indeed, "record shattering". We do not have the ability to simply engineer a material that can superconduct at ambient temperature and pressure at will. I don't mean to be to confrontational, but reading the comments on these articles it really pisses me off to see the hard work of actual scientists judged by the rubric of whatever science fiction garbage internet commenters think should be possible.
- asdfman123 7y ago
  Yeah, it sounds like the only downside to calling them "high temperature superconductors" is it briefly misleads you when skimming HN headlines. I don't think scientists should change their entire domain-specific language to improve your web browsing experience.
  - molyss 7y ago
    And that attitude is in my opinion what will increasingly get in the way of science being disregarded

by molyss 7y ago

qcj 7y ago

I think this argument is quite facile. These people are scientists trying to understand superconductivity at a basic level, and this theoretical research (as well as the experimental results posted on this forum earlier this week) are a genuine advancement in that field. You are judging this research based on how it is directly applicable to making handheld devices with room temperature superconductors when that is not what these people are attempting to do at all. The fact that a superconducting state can be maintained at these temperatures at all is, indeed, "record shattering". We do not have the ability to simply engineer a material that can superconduct at ambient temperature and pressure at will. I don't mean to be to confrontational, but reading the comments on these articles it really pisses me off to see the hard work of actual scientists judged by the rubric of whatever science fiction garbage internet commenters think should be possible.

asdfman123 7y ago
Yeah, it sounds like the only downside to calling them "high temperature superconductors" is it briefly misleads you when skimming HN headlines. I don't think scientists should change their entire domain-specific language to improve your web browsing experience.
- molyss 7y ago
  And that attitude is in my opinion what will increasingly get in the way of science being disregarded