> I really need someone to bring me down a notch. This is too exciting! It's on arXiv, which is a preprint journal, which means it has no peer-review; and is t

> I really need someone to bring me down a notch. This is too exciting! It's on arXiv, which is a preprint journal, which means it has no peer-review; and is therefore generally less trustworthy (especially when the paper has no connection to a technical conference or is not being published elsewhere, and is in a non-computer science or mathematics field). In addition to this, claims of room-temperature superconductors have been mired in controversy or otherwise proven false: - http://www.superconductors.org/roomnano.htm http://www.superconductors.org/roomnano.htm (2004) - https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2012.11443 https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2012.11443 (2012) - https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-superconductor-scandal-scientists-question-a-nobel-prize-worthy-claim/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-superconductor-... (2018) - https://www.quantamagazine.org/room-temperature-superconductivity-claim-falls-apart-update-20201014/ https://www.quantamagazine.org/room-temperature-superconduct... (2020) - https://forbetterscience.com/2023/03/29/superconductive-fraud-the-sequel/ https://forbetterscience.com/2023/03/29/superconductive-frau... (2022-2023) Considering that many fraudulent claims of room-temperature superconductivity have gotten into Nature and other top-tier publications, I would wait for multiple independent recreations of the results in the paper.