Yesterday (before this came up on HN) I came across in my daily paper chase a follow up paper from the lead author Ranga. Looks like the same fossil supercondu

Yesterday (before this came up on HN) I came across in my daily paper chase a follow up paper from the lead author Ranga. Looks like the same fossil superconductor, but they manage to add another sensational detail: the superconductor is composed of dissociated molecules(?!!!). Truly shades of another Hendrik Schon[0]. https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2022/cc/d2cc03170a https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2022/cc/d2cc0... So far, it has not been retracted. One wonders whether anybody at the journals ever glances at the maxim "If it's too good to be true, have someone check the data." [0]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sch%C3%B6n_scandal https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sch%C3%B6n_scandal Footnote added: the toogoodtobetrue bit in the original paper was that the transitions were a bit too sharp for a real superconductor. That was the main thing that got this started.