8 ms·
How close are we to the holy grail of room-temperature superconductors?
- fnord77 4y agoum, never since it violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics
- gus_massa 4y agoAs far as I know, there are no theoretical reasons against room temperature and pressure superconductors. There is no theoretical barrier between liquid nitrogen temperature (where we have many superconductors at normal pressure) and room temperature (were we don't have, IIRC here are a few that are (not very) close, but require a high high high pressure).
- fnord77 4y agonot without some sort of energy being added to the system. otherwise an ambient temperature superconductor would be a perpetual motion machine
- ggm 4y agoIt's like a corollary of Beveridge's law of headlines: if it's about a scientific discovery around the corner and mentions fusion.. it's a long way round the corner.
- bawolff 4y agoThe article doesn't mention fusion even once. Byt yes, major science breakthroughs don't happen in a day or even a year, or 10.
- nextaccountic 4y ago> Byt yes, major science breakthroughs don't happen in a day or even a year, or 10. Sometimes they happen in a day. But major engineering breakthroughs, now that's hard, because you have to build the thing.
- jacquesm 4y agoThey take a long time to set up and then they can happen quite quickly but they are usually incremental and tend move the needle only bit-by-bit as we go forward in spite of being a revolutionary science breakthrough. Take flight as an example. People had been experimenting with it probably since the first human saw a bird and wanted to be able to do that. That went exactly nowhere until someone built a kite large enough to support the weight of a (light) human. And since then every few hundred years there was some kind of 'breakthrough', each of which building on probably hundreds or even thousands of failures in the intermediate. Until finally the Wright Brothers made their first powered flight and then we were off to the races. If not for all those failures and all of those baby steps the revolution wouldn't have happened when it did. The Wrights had a number of pre-requisite inventions at their disposal and as much as theirs was the true breakthrough without those other inventions they'd be sitting on a beach playing in the sand. It's layer upon layer of failure, the occasional step of real and measurable progress and even rarer a real breakthrough.
- canadianfella 4y ago[dead]
- mhb 4y agoJust like how Hemingway went bankrupt.
- anonylizard 4y agoThe definition of breakthroughs is that nothing happens for 10 years, and then suddenly everything happens and is possible. AI was wandering in the wilderness just like fusion, a theory without results or practicality. But first alexnet in 2012, then transformers in 2017, and we are now at the stage where "AI is moving too fast and we must pause it!!!" Who knows, maybe the alexnet of superconductors is lurking somewhere.
- sublinear 4y ago> we are now at the stage where "AI is moving too fast and we must pause it!!!" I disagree. The problem isn't the technology, but that for once we have something that demands more deliberate use. LLMs directly confront the literacy gap between the most and least educated members of the public, and I really do mean that in all senses of the word "literacy".
- anshumankmr 4y agoWe have all grown up reading about how inventions were the sole genius of one person. Take the case of Edison's light bulb. Even he admitted he tried 10,000 varieties before getting it right. And even his invention probably came of the back of many others before who probably did research for producing glass at an industrial scale, research into various materials and elements (which could be used for filaments) and so on so forth. It will be quite a while before we get super conductors produced reliably.Of course the prerequisite is that a true super conductor is really created, in a lab condition, is going to take quite some time.
- agumonkey 4y agoElectromagnetic control of liquid crystals is from 1927 (and original research on the chemistry/material side being from 1888) .. things did take a long time to evolve. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fr%C3%A9edericksz_transition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fr%C3%A9edericksz_transition
- danabrams 4y agoThe breakthrough of Edison in the case of the light bulb is less the filament (which he did try thousands of materials for) but the innovations: 1. He figured out that the filament wouldn’t immediately burn out in a vacuum 2. Built machinery to blow glass to the right shape and form the vacuum inside (so he figured out how to make the glass on an industrial scale) 3. Most importantly, figured out how to build a commercially viable system of power generation and distribution in Manhattan so his bulbs would be of use. Yes he worked incrementally. He also invented ways to manufacture and create markets for his novel inventions.
- HansHamster 4y ago> It will be quite a while before we get super conductors produced reliably.Of course the prerequisite is that a true super conductor is really created, in a lab condition, is going to take quite some time. We do have working super conductors produced at scale, some of which are just 'boring' alloys. The problem is that the cryogenics required for operation are expensive and complex, making them not very appealing for widespread use.
- marginalia_nu 4y agoThere's a sort of bermuda triangle of notorious physics vaporware that's been 20 years into the future ever since they were first conceived. * (useful) Fusion * Room Temperature Superconductors * (useful) Quantum Computers There's always breakthroughs but nothing seems to ever come out of it. Will they ever happen? Maybe. That said I've got a degree in theoretical physics and I'd bet against all three within my lifetime.
- Retr0id 4y agoDon't forget next-gen battery chemistries!
- mecsred 4y agoI want to preface this: I'm not trying to be snide, genuinely curious. What kind of person gets a degree in "theoretical physics", something that is by definition speculative, if they also bet against any of the speculation panning out?
- marginalia_nu 4y agoTheoretical physics isn't speculative physics, but physics focusing on mathematical modelling rather than experimentation.
- mecsred 4y agoIf it's not validated by experiment, it's speculative. That's the fundamental principal of science.
- dotnet00 4y agoThe point is that they specialize in the theoretical side, not that they don't try to validate it. The difference is that their validation focuses on math rather than physical experimentation. Eg there's no way to verify Hawking radiation in person (because well, good luck getting near a black hole to do so). But it's still supported by existing models of physics, thus it is science and not mere speculation. Another recent example would be that the idea of time crystals was a theoretical physics result, backed by existing physics. That backing made it more than just speculation, leading to the investment of resources that eventually led to them actually being created. Of course probably the most famous example of a theoretical physicst would be Einstein. Lots of stuff typically goes through theoretical physicists before experimentalists determine how to test the idea. For example, all the particle accelerators, synchrotrons etc are initially designed by theoretical physicists via simulations etc to meet certain goals before putting in the billions of dollars it costs to actually translate those designs into something that can be built and used.
- HPsquared 4y agoMajor science breakthroughs in a given field also aren't guaranteed to even happen.
- janmarsal 4y agoI've been trained like a Pavlov's dog to ignore any news article with the word "may" in the title as it allows journalists to write about any kind of bogus that may or may not be true. Makes me wonder how many innocent, truthful and insightful articles I've ignored because of this.
- jacquesm 4y agoLikewise. Especially for: solar power, wind power, nuclear fusion, super conductivity, battery technology, cures for cancer. If a had one $ for every article that I saw over the years that didn't pan out I'd be able to retire instantly.
- tonmoy 4y agoSolar, wind, battery and cures for cancer had significant incremental improvement for the last 20 or so years. What kind of claims wrt to these technologies don’t you think panned out?
- jacquesm 4y agoThe key is incremental. The problem is that every news article about any of that stuff invariably hails things as 'may be revolutionary' and they never are. But I'm perfectly happy with the incremental stuff. I just can't stand the way the news gets hyped.
- jholman 4y agoExactly. To elaborate on my agreement with you.... There's a fundamental tension between "news" and "incremental". Which means that in many many important areas of human enterprise (and progress), the "news" model is fundamentally counterproductive. So don't consume the news. Instead, read a new textbook every year (or however often you can afford to).
- Cardinal7167 4y agoI typically agree but I also have to remind myself that change happens very slowly, then all at once.
- tetris11 4y agoThe Temperature by Year graph of the compounds was nice, but I'd like to see Temperature by Pressure graph for some of these
- codethief 4y agoThe graph does mention the pressure, though, even if it's not a separate axis.
- bblpeter 4y agoIf you see a headline like this you know we’re not close at all
- orwin 4y agoI know the response is 'not close at all', but even a -50° lightly pressurized (less than 10 atmosphere let's say) semi would do wonder for on-site energy storage, fusion. Anything twice as good as what I described and our world change again. It's a better silver bullet than fusion (and would unlock fusion too).
- Sharlin 4y agoAnything not-super-exotic, preferably not-brittle that only needs nitrogen boiling point temps (and yeah, a reasonable pressure) would be a big deal. Currently known high-temp SCs tend to be difficult to make practical things out of.
- dsq 4y agoFor a non physicist, what in room temp superconductors would be the holy grail? That is, what would open up that is currently off limits? Is it “only” better transport of electricity, or would completely new things become possible?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- dermesser 4y agoMRIs or anything with very high magnetic field requirements become a lot easier to build once you don't need to cool them down as much. Inversely, Generators etc. would benefit. Magnetic levitation (Meissner-Ochsenfeld) would also not require such low temperatures. Even Quantum computing using superconducting qubits might become easier (although there, superconductivity is not the main reason for low temperatures). "Only" better conductivity is a big deal, after all.
- willbudd 4y agoAlong the same line of thought, but flywheel energy storage would become quite appealing when the rotating mass can maintain stable levitation without any energy input (in the form of electromagnets or refrigeration as needed today).
- wolfram74 4y agobetter electric motors in general, they can be smaller when they have less waste heat to worry about, and higher torques. The navy was playing around with miniaturization of vessel motors more than a decade ago[0] but I haven't run into how that projects gone in the intervening years. [0]https://www.powermag.com/superconductor-motor-for-navy-passes-full-power-test/ https://www.powermag.com/superconductor-motor-for-navy-passe...
- Turskarama 4y agoFlywheels main problem is already just energy density, they're more similar to a capacitor than a battery. There are situations where they would certainly be better, but as it is for the situations where they are useful I don't think the very low rate of power loss the best ones currently have is that big a deal.
- hoelle 4y ago[flagged]
- marginalia_nu 4y agoDoes any of its answers actually make sense though?
- hoelle 4y agoUm, yes. It gave me a handful of good leads for related open source projects to check out. Why the negativity?
- vxNsr 4y agoBecause generative AI isn’t creating new ideas, it’s just remixing existing ideas. This is exactly the type of thing AI is useless for.
- nullc 4y agoIf you define "creating new ideas" widely enough to make your statement true about generative AI it's also true about most engineering and science carried out by humans.
- hoelle 4y agoI don't need AI to "generate" new ideas. Here I'm using it as a search to point me to things I can research. Why the negativity?
- drowsspa 4y agoPretty sure the people studying in this field already know how to google papers.
- hoelle 4y agoSure, as an outsider curious about getting involved, a high level summary is exactly what LLMs are good at. Why the negativity?
- FpUser 4y agoI remember some discussions about room temp superconductivity being "just around the corner" and I think it was at the very end of 80s.
- chriskanan 4y agoNote that the 2020 Nature paper they mention was retracted: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2801-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2801-z
- jvandonsel 4y agoThis is a surprisingly well-written science article for a business magazine. It helps that a physicist wrote it.
- wrycoder 4y agoIndeed, I didn’t expect to learn some physics in Fortune. Hm, he has a blog [0], but it’s on Medium. [0] https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang
- lovemenot 4y ago>> In a world of finite energy resources, the elimination of any inefficiencies can benefit everyone: energy providers, distributors, and consumers at all levels Furthermore, a super-conducting belt around the Earth would greatly mitigate solar and wind energy's Achilles heel; intermittency. Renewable power, generated elsewhere, could become accessible in the calm of a windless night. Grid storage? Thanks, no need.
- contravariant 4y agoFor a moment I thought you were saying it would mitigate solar wind. Which it won't, far from it.
- wrycoder 4y agoConsider a superconducting belt laid under the oceans, carrying a large fraction of civilization’s power needs. Consider what would happen if the technology failed, and it suddenly transitioned to normal conduction. Sounds like a great SF story, even if the actual effect is minimal. (I haven’t done the back of the envelope calculation :)
- Gud 4y agoPresumably the relay protection would trip the breaker for over current. Essentially they would function like HVDC cables, and we already operate plenty of those.
- BobbyH 4y agoThis is actually the plot behind Larry Niven's Ringworld! A gigantic civilization has created a Ringworld (a rotating wheel artificial world), until a superconducting plague (https://news.larryniven.net/concordance/main.asp?alpha=S#superconductorplague https://news.larryniven.net/concordance/main.asp?alpha=S#sup...) destroys the material that enables room-temperature superconductivity, thus reducing the entire Ringworld to the dark ages...
- nullc 4y ago> generated elsewhere, Why generated elsewhere? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energy_storage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energ...
- 4RealFreedom 4y agohttps://archive.ph/7LVAW https://archive.ph/7LVAW
- 1bent 4y agoMy favourite exploration of the potential novel applications of room temperature superconductors is Larry Niven's Ringworld.
- iandanforth 4y agoAnswer: Not close. "However, it seems that practical applications remain significantly far off. Achieving superconductivity at mundane temperatures but extreme pressures is not significantly more accessible than achieving it at mundane pressures but extreme temperatures;"