19 ms·
Room temperature, ambient pressure superconductivity – this time for real?
- escot 3y ago+1 for use of the term “Diamond Anvil Cell” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_anvil_cell https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_anvil_cell
- mijoharas 3y agoSo, has anyone seen any of the replication studies start coming in yet? From what I've read we seem to be waiting on those. (and I think they're likely coming today or tomorrow?)
- anonymouse008 3y agoI'm following this fellow: https://twitter.com/andrewmccalip https://twitter.com/andrewmccalip Seems to have the right energy [edit thanks folks] https://nitter.net/i/status/1684433849781202944 https://nitter.net/i/status/1684433849781202944 Here’s a more colorful play by play as well: https://nitter.net/8teapi/status/1684586672917565443 https://nitter.net/8teapi/status/1684586672917565443
- ericbarrett 3y agoCan you summarize his position? Can't see X posts without a login.
- RC_ITR 3y agoHe’s just some guy at an aerospace startup who is trying to make some lol. Problem with his approach is that the synthesis requires some materials that are restricted to academic/scientific labs (like red phosphorus), so he’s probably not going to be first to replicate.
- aardvarkr 3y agoLooks like he found a lab willing to hook him up. https://twitter.com/thedanaddison/status/1684587778959618048?s=46&t=pFHe20zOOKvcKxtZMrcxBg https://twitter.com/thedanaddison/status/1684587778959618048...
- otherjason 3y agoYou can see the full thread via alternative Twitter clients like Nitter: https://nitter.net/i/status/1684433849781202944 https://nitter.net/i/status/1684433849781202944
- mikenew 3y agoIs this guy posting anywhere besides Twitter (or... X)? I can't view without an account.
- MayeulC 3y agoYou can use the nitter frontend: https://nitter.net/andrewmccalip https://nitter.net/andrewmccalip
- psychoslave 3y agoLOL they really renamed it X? I see they even bought x.com which surely they paid some ridiculous amount for, and yet they wasn’t able to spend any cent on original logo, at least X.org logo as an orange O.
- Mockapapella 3y agoElon has personally owned x.com for a number of years now. Timeline as I remember it is Elon bought it in the late 90's, it changed hands when paypal merged with Elon's payment company, then he bought it back in 2017ish
- psychoslave 3y agoStill make me laugh. I doubt the 2017 transfer costed $10. Let’s just recall all the more that domains are never really own, and that seems all the more crazy to my mind. Though I guess that when you let single individuals able to claim indefinitely large amount of ownership, that’s unavoidable waste of resources.
- yreg 3y agoBuying x.com domain name is the last thing I would critisize on elon.
- psychoslave 3y agoI don’t criticize any individual for simply implementing what the social structure lead them to do. That is, my messages were not meant into "name and shame" any specific person. That’s really the overall social game that I found laughable.
- AndrewKemendo 3y agoThis is amazing thank you for the link. Absolutely wild time to be alive
- scarmig 3y agoI love the colorful play-by-play. It could almost be a kdrama. It's also kind of crazy that one of the authors did over 1000 experiments until he found LK-99, regardless of whether it checks out. Talk about a grind mindset.
- techdragon 3y agoMaterial science can be like that … you’re pretty sure your theory works and your results don’t wildly invalidate it, but they aren’t good enough or are missing a property or something… and it turns out you could very easily have made a bad batch, poorly aligned fibers, badly mixed epoxy, or any number of possible issues… so you try again and again to get it right… sometimes it’s for very little incremental progress in state of the art… other times it might be a Nobel prize winning superconductor.
- scarmig 3y agoIn undergrad, I spent countless hours with a mortar and pestle, sintering, and annealing to research a particular superconductor, never getting much sleep because I had to wake up every couple hours to make sure nothing had gone awry... It tickles me that they were doing the same thing. Hoping that they get the big win here, for all of our sakes.
- fizx 3y agoYup. Also tickles me that I might have had better equipment than this team, though we still had to source sample carriers from McDonalds. The multi-million-dollar measurement apparatus required us to put samples in disposable tubes that cost about a dollar each. They turned out to have the exact same physical properties as a McDonalds straw, so once a week someone made a food run and grabbed a handful on the way out.
- scarmig 3y agoFor the SQUID? Now that brings back even more memories. We got ours from the dining halls.
- ncann 3y agoSo the authors are disciples of a professor specialized in superconductor, their own Master and PhD were about superconductor, then they created a lab/company specifically for researching superconductor. This is contrary to my earlier belief that they were just normal chemists/physicists that happened to stumble upon an interesting material. Unless they're lying through their teeth, it's hard to believe they would not recognize an actual SC when they see one.
- lamontcg 3y agohttps://twitter.com/8teapi/status/1684571913908293633 https://twitter.com/8teapi/status/1684571913908293633 Lee was stuck as an adjunct professor for 19 years. Kim thinks that physicists all have their head up their ass and he knows the shortcut to discovering superconductivity. And nature wouldn't publish their paper. Combined with their inability to accurately measure Tc and a lot of skepticism already out there that their graphs show what they say they do this looks like poor science. Which is not to accuse them of lying. It looks like they're just not very good, but think they're geniuses.
- saberdancer 3y agoAnd what of Kwon and HT Kim?
- 11101010001100 3y agoHe didn't say anything about a shortcut. He said trial and error.
- sudosysgen 3y agoThat graphic isn't saying there's a shortcut, it's basically saying that physicists need to work harder and try many many many many more materials than they do. Not quite trial and error since the classes of materials should be informed by some theory, but far more - multiple thousands per individual.
- bluerooibos 3y ago
- Natsu 3y agoIt's amazing to think that this might be replicated using equipment they put googly eyes on and named "Sucky McSuckface." I look forward to this historical footnote leading to many clickbait articles in the future.
- tux3 3y agoThere are several rumors from zhihu.com posts that various Chinese labs are racing to replicate it (which is not unexpected). Some claims that "The Institute of Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences has successfully synthesized the sample". Many labs around the world are capable of synthesizing the material (which is not that hard, relative to the baseline for superconductor candidates). We should expect to see early chatter and observation from replication attempts within double digit number of hours.
- sergiotapia 3y agoThere's a dude on twitter who's replicating it himself first-hand. He has the know-how and the process is "trivial" in his own words. https://twitter.com/andrewmccalip https://twitter.com/andrewmccalip
- pushkine 3y agoIf you scroll far enough he says he can't purchase Red Phosphorus without a DEA license or waiting weeks for a permit
- Fordec 3y agoToday might be a bit soon. We only caught wind of this Tuesday and there's about two days of cooking to be done in the process. Friday if someone is basically livestreaming and literally had everything on hand. My guess is more likely Monday for the aggressive builders that get it right the first time (if it's able to be got right). Then Wednesday/next Thursday for attempt number 2 to complete out for some people.
- Helmut10001 3y agoThere is really nothing new reported on the site. They seem to cite a lot of HN comments from previous posts.
- jansan 3y agoDoesn't matter, we need a new thread because if there are too many comments things on HN become unusable. Or is there a way to sort by most recent comments that I am not aware of?
- 23B1 3y agoJust for fun: Am I the only one who thinks there's connection between this and the UAP news that's coming out? RTSC would probably enable a lot of incredible energy & maneuverability capabilities... Sorry, indulging in a little off-topic conspiracy theorizing.
- willis936 3y agoIt is fun to joke about alien technology. But they are unrelated in reality. In fact they are pretty uncorrelated in terms of timeline. This material has supposedly been waiting in the wings for a while.
- moffkalast 3y ago> has supposedly been waiting in the wings for a while I'm not sure if that holds, the tic tac UFO has no actual wings :P
- johncalvinyoung 3y agoidiom stems from waiting in the wings of the stage... i.e. just out of sight of the audience.
- Cthulhu_ 3y agoRumours about UFOs being hidden by the US government have also been in the wings for a while - like 70, 80 years.
- carabiner 3y ago[flagged]
- bradhoffman 3y agoCan someone explain why this is a big deal? The author cites that it doesn't need an explanation, but I definitely need one lol.
- phyrex 3y agoYou could look at any of the other threads where that has been discussed to death
- misnome 3y agoConduct electricity with zero resistance. This has been possible at cryogenic temperatures (powers supermagnets, MRI etc) but running at room temperature _and pressure_ means in theory that you don’t need expensive support machinery. Has been the holy grail for the field. If true, this specific case is only low current, but demonstrates such a thing is possible - almost certainly winning an instant Nobel Prize.
- 8n4vidtmkvmk 3y agoDoes this mean there would be no heat waste? And devices like phones and computers wouldn't get hot?
- alangibson 3y agoYes, among many other things. There's many vast amounts of electricity wasted due to transmission losses. Magnets for fusion plants would become much cheaper.
- zparky 3y agoCorrect
- _joel 3y agoand faster
- Tuna-Fish 3y agoComputers would still get hot, because the main cause of heat is not resistance in wires, it's that when a transistor switches with charge in the gate, you need to dump that charge, and when you do this it turns to heat. They would get less hot, because there are plenty of transmission losses too.
- jacknews 3y ago"this may spark a revolution in electronics as significant as the invention of the transistor, vacuum tube, and induction motor." How, exactly?
- bhaak 3y agoMaglev trains, fusion power plants, fanless super computers in your pocket that charge in a minute and don't get hot. Basically utopia.
- DrBazza 3y agoMaybe it will be the thing that gives the US a nudge towards building a high speed train network. Commodity maglev would be generational leap over existing high speed rail. It would be an economic driver for the US, and take a lot of planes out of the sky, and even freight off the roads.
- rcpt 3y agoUltra efficient super fast maglev trains between our most important cities? Not in MY backyard!
- bick_nyers 3y agoYou want to bury a power cable connecting my city to a solar farm in the Sahara desert? Not in MY backyard!
- zardo 3y agoOh you say it's made out of lead, well in that case could you run my drinking water through it?
- psychoslave 3y agoWhile these are all cool applications, I can perfectly see them used in the most awful dystopian world imaginable.
- gitfan86 3y agoI'm leaning towards this being mostly legit. It may not be a perfect solution to the problem, but it may put us on a path to a solution. If this wasn't real, I would have expected someone who works in the area to have data about something similar and why it isn't real.
- naillo 3y agoYou can tell when someone shouldn't be listened to online if they feel a need to give a "take" to this piece of news. Just wait until we get actual results if you don't have a physics phd at minimum no need for any rushed take otherwise.
- dang 3y agoYou're asking people not to be people. Having reactions and opinions and shooting the shit is what we do, and part of how we learn. HN is an internet watercooler. It's natural and fine for people to talk about the latest interesting things—that's what this place is for, and there's no need to be right all the time.
- naillo 3y agoYou're right dang
- ChemSpider 3y agoMy issue here is: This new material is essentially standard "high temperature" YBCO superconductor material just slightly modified, or? The authors are not doing anything dramatically new, like a new chemistry. How likely is it that all the other 1000s of labs doing research on this topic just missed this lucky combination of baking, cooling and whatnot?
- gene-h 3y agoThe space of possible combinations of just three different elements of the periodic table is huge. This is before you get into added dimensions of processing, ratios of each element to the others, different possible crystal structures, etc.
- whimsicalism 3y agoIt’s not a standard matrix and what do you mean by no new chemistry?
- ChemSpider 3y agoTo create such a dramatic increase in critical temperature, I would expect you need a dramatic change in chemistry (as in: formula, materials,...) as well.
- kadoban 3y agoI mean it's not even the same basic elements. How much more of a dramatic change were you thinking?
- ChemSpider 3y agoWell, last time I had some hope for room temperature superconductors that was with doped fullerenes (C60 and friends). That was a truly novel approach.
- jansan 3y agoEven if it is very unlikely, they still may have missed it. Let's be patient, we will soon know more, give them two more weeks.
- phoenixstrike 3y agoI am going to attempt to address the common nitpicks in one fell swoop: 1. Rushed publication, plot quality, grammar, etc. Get over yourselves. This is a pre-print for an instant-Nobel, next-tier-of-civilization level discovery. The proper publication will come in due time. Waiting for a more complete verification is a sheltered view. Being first matters. Things changed after the J/Psi discovery in 1974. For those that don't know, Sam Ting discovered it first, yet sat on it for months waiting for a complete verification. Then Richter's group also discovered it months later and Ting was forced to publish at the same time and share the Nobel. This changed the publication attitude in the field significantly. Being first matters. 2. "Terrible science." Again, get over yourselves. Just because the preprint doesn't match your taste specifically doesn't mean it's bad science. You can't satisfy everyone- there will ALWAYS be someone who complains about some missing measurement or plot they view as essential. Most of the time, the 'missing' component is directly related to their own work. In other words, people want to see what they understandd as being important to them, also reflected in other publications. That does not mean it's a valid criticism. It's nitpicking. The most realistic timeline is 2-3 months for a positive verification. 6 months for a negative verification. If it works, it will be quicker because a positive reproduction needs less work. A negative verification needs to be more thorough and will take more time.
- bloopernova 3y agoWhat do you think the chances are of it being a measurement/instruments error? Edited to add: I am not a physicist. I don't know the subtleties of measuring experiments, and it was not my intention to state that there was a measurement error. I just wanted to ask someone for their assessment of the chances it was an error. It's a little depressing that people are so quick to assume the worst of others, but I get why. The online flamewars fought over every announcement of this type would definitely put people on guard. Heck, on the UAP thread yesterday I immediately leapt to snarking about extraordinary announcements being bogus and I feel bad that I probably attacked it for no reason other than to feel cool: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36886221 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36886221
- phoenixstrike 3y ago
- febed 3y agoA source (German) attributed to the Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research thinks the paper is bogus [0] [0] https://blog.fefe.de/?ts=9a3f8740 https://blog.fefe.de/?ts=9a3f8740
- TheRealPomax 3y agoQ: Das Layout sieht Scheiße aus! A: Jo, das ist das historische Default-Layout. solid.
- l33t233372 3y agoMy German is poor. Does this say: Q: The layout is very shitty! A: No, it’s the historically default layout.
- schnuri 3y agoJo translates more to Yes or Yeah
- Tepix 3y agoNo, it says: A: Yes, that's the historic default layout
- omnibrain 3y ago"Jo" is "yupp"
- CoastalCoder 3y agoThanks! I've casually studied German, but I'd never come across "Jo". "Jo" kind of reminds me of Dutch vs. German, where many corresponding words are just slightly different.
- ccppurcell 3y agoJo (pronounced a bit like your without the r sound) is affirmative in lots of European languages, including Finnish and Czech (it's spelled joo in Finnish iirc)
- TheRealPomax 3y agoOh man I look forward to this only needing 5 more years before we build one!
- Philpax 3y agoI understand where you're coming from - breakthroughs in the lab often take years or decades to make their way into the public space, if they do at all - but to clarify: the synthesis procedure for LK-99 is simple enough that many labs can make a sample in a week. In fact, there are several parties attempting synthesis in public as we speak. If this is real, you're going to know about it very soon.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- donaldcuckman 3y ago[dead]
- RyanAdamas 3y agoWhat if the team itself did create LK-99 that is a superconductor, but they aren't able to reproduce it and only have the sample left that works. Hence, they aren't able to make more of it to prove their success, but rather decided to release the paper and method so that others can try to reproduce it. Given the amount of interest, they could put hundreds of labs to work trying to recreate what they themselves can't, hoping someone will find what they found and have an actual process for doing so? Is that even possible?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- alangibson 3y agoThey would just say that in the paper. The effect would be the same: half the labs in the world falling over themselves to reproduce first.
- RyanAdamas 3y agoOk, but if they said as much why then would people shift resources to try and 'rediscover' something that may take years? Not saying it, means people will pursue the fabrication more readily. I heard your point nonetheless. It was just a question I asked in the larger thread and wanted more input. Thanks.
- inasio 3y agoI think it's unlikely in this case. They seem to have gone out of their way to show a method that can achieve replication using very common materials and pretty much medieval-grade technology (except for the vacuum pump, maybe).
- RyanAdamas 3y agoOk, if that's the case, why the imperfect demonstration? Why not dozens and dozens of videos showing such a monumental success in action? The lack of clear evidence, especially with social media frenzies, is a red flag in my opinion.
- djhope99 3y agoInteresting thread, looks like a lot of labs are on the charge to replicate this https://twitter.com/alexkaplan0/status/1684554551481835520?s=46&t=KAw8VCFAbjndf2K7KD3AtQ https://twitter.com/alexkaplan0/status/1684554551481835520?s...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- yreg 3y agoI've been following this twitter user since this started and he is very much on the hype side.
- dang 3y agoThe major threads so far: Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36881808 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36881808 - July 2023 (434 comments) The first room-temperature ambient-pressure superconductor? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36864624 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36864624 - July 2023 (858 comments)
- in3d 3y agoLinkedIn post from one the authors: https://twitter.com/8teapi/status/1684571913908293633 https://twitter.com/8teapi/status/1684571913908293633
- nemo44x 3y agoThat's extremely hilarious if real. He basically just told the guys at the Max Plank institute they're lazy theoreticians that don't understand chemistry and can't be bothered to put in the work like he has. (over 100 attempts at making this!)
- colechristensen 3y agoThis is a great kind of rivalry between theory folks and applied folks. When good natured it can be a lot of fun. It’s also important to have these two kinds of groups annoyed with each other poking holes in each others methods.
- Exuma 3y agowow, this is the kind of content I'm here for!
- bluerooibos 3y agoSo it took them 1000 times to get a good result from this experiment over 19 years, and two steps in the process require a stroke of luck? That doesn't inspire confidence.
- Affric 3y agoHave you ever had a difficult goal? It's learning a craft, constant refinement, iteration, failure, and eventual success. And then luck, that which is out of your control, gets you over the line. I am more likely to believe that the group to get room temperature superconductivity first (if anyone ever does) will have been learning the hard way about how to maximise that within their control so all that is left to succeed is that outside their control. I am not saying that I am 100% sold on this being it. It's not 20 years of failure. It's 20 years of refinement.
- mrbonner 3y agoI’m a noob when it comes to SC. Sorry to ask this question here and hope someone could explain. I can’t get any answer from Google. What is the excitement around seeing floating magnets? My understanding is that we can have 2 regular magnets float if position them in opposite polarity, right?
- ceejayoz 3y agoLevitation demonstrates the superconductivity, but that's not all it's useful for. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_applications_of_superconductivity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_applications_of_...
- golergka 3y agoBasically, all of the electronical devices humanity uses, from nuclear power plants to smart watches, are about to get efficiency improvements in double digits. This is trillions of dollars per year, and a couple of degrees in average Earth temperature.
- AdamH12113 3y agoUnfortunately, this is not even close to correct. Resistive losses in wires are not the only cause of wasted energy, and in most battery-powered devices they aren't very important at all. How is a superconductor supposed to help with e.g. switching losses in a buck converter, or reduce the amount of energy stored in a transistor's gate capacitance?
- jacquesm 3y ago> How is a superconductor supposed to help with e.g. switching losses in a buck converter That one I can answer for you: because it would reduce the time to go from 'on' to 'off' due to the much more rapid flow on account of reduced resistance. The currents in a buck converter can be very high because they are short, but that is also exactly where you'll find the losses: in the transition from 'off' to 'on' and vice versa. So this won't do anything for the MOSFET losses but it could seriously shrink inductor losses and those are the other major factor.
- bandyaboot 3y agoIf this confirms, I really hope that the current limitation can be overcome. That would be brutal to actually find a ambient temperature and pressure SC only to have its usefulness for big real world applications be nerfed.
- slashdev 3y agoI think the most important thing is it proves it can be done. At one point it was thought impossible to run a 4 minute mile. There were all kinds of scientific sounding explanations why it just couldn’t be done. Then someone did it. Shortly after that, lots of people did it, because now people knew it was possible. If this is for real, it proves it can be done. Tons of money, work, and innovation will follow once people know the problem can be solved.
- jncfhnb 3y agoI’ve heard this repeated. I vaguely recall it at least being a point of discussion in the novel Misery. But… that seems like such a stupid idea. What evidence could they possibly have suggested?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- zimpenfish 3y agoI think over time it's developed into one of those Just So stories whereas the reality is probably a bit more prosaic[0] [0] https://www.scienceofrunning.com/2017/05/the-roger-bannister-effect-the-myth-of-the-psychological-breakthrough.html https://www.scienceofrunning.com/2017/05/the-roger-bannister...
- rasz 3y agoDont know about the mile thing, but I can bring another anecdote - modem speeds and breaking 33.6Kbit barrier on ~3.5KHz BW limited wires. Oral History of Brent Townshend (inventor of 56Kbit PCM modem mode) [Computer History Museum] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqudP6ojEDI&t=6049 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqudP6ojEDI&t=6049. Transcript: they've been trying to get modems to go faster and there's this whole thing called shannon information theory which says theoretically given all the parameters of that copper line and what's going on that the maximum speed would be 35 kilobits per second you can't go faster than that it was theory they're you know 95 percent of the way to the theoretical limit and michael had this engineer that worked with him andy norrell which is like a genius engineer um he's really amazing understands modems and everything perfectly and and michael recounted you know every six months or so you talk to andy and say you know you're sure there's no way that we can go faster andy would say no you can't go faster than that this is the limit there's not any way and so so michael was on the phone with me and i said i have a way of going faster and you know well you know a lot of people think so but we think it's max p and i say well i've got these credentials i've been working at Bell Labs he said wait a second i got to get somebody else in the room too i get andy and you know andy comes in on the conference call and michael asking you know is there any way to go faster than 33 he says no 35 is the limit and you know theoretically and i said well you can do it like this you know i say in like three sentences you could do this and this and this and then he says oh yeah that would work
- sibeliuss 3y agoPeople are quick to dismiss astrology, but the last time Pluto entered Aquarius (which will happen for the next 20 years starting in Dec) we had the Industrial Revolution. The time before that we had the Scientific Revolution. Things are right on track with this discovery.
- alexb_ 3y agoCorrelation is not causation. Why would the position of the planets have anything to do with the discovery of revolutionary technology?
- sibeliuss 3y agoThat's a great question that nobody knows the answer to. Again, the last time this planet was positioned as such radical technological world-changing innovation happened (Industrial Revolution). Rewind a few hundred years, and we see it happen again (Scientific Revolution). Another revolution is incoming.
- alexb_ 3y agoI doubt I'm going to convince you of anything. But it is nonsensical to think that the position of the planets have any effect on people. You see a correlation in two data points and are extrapolating it, despite having no explanation as to why that would be the case. If you have an explanation as to why the position of Pluto would affect the development of technology, I would love to hear it.
- usednet 3y ago[flagged]
- jtsiskin 3y agoYou could also achieve this with 30 random sine waves of different amplitude and frequencies. You could find patterns like “when wave B intersects wave K, there’s a global pandemic within 5 years”! https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
- AlanYx 3y agoThe Wikipedia article on LK-99 now references a Korean source claiming that this was submitted to Nature in 2020 but that the paper was rejected.
- giarc 3y agoFrom other comment in this thread. synapsomorphy 4 minutes ago | prev | next [–] The lead author says (translated): “In 2020, I submitted my research results to Nature for the first time, but Nature felt burdened about publishing the paper because of Professor Dias’ case, and asked for it to be published in other professional journals first.” https://n.news.naver.com/article/366/0000920152 https://n.news.naver.com/article/366/0000920152
- synapsomorphy 3y agoThe lead author says (translated): “In 2020, I submitted my research results to Nature for the first time, but Nature felt burdened about publishing the paper because of Professor Dias’ case, and asked for it to be published in other professional journals first.” https://n.news.naver.com/article/366/0000920152 https://n.news.naver.com/article/366/0000920152
- badman2001 3y agoRecent W&M Condensed Matter Physics Grad. Worked closely with HT Kim, not on this project. He is a trustworthy guy, knows his stuff. I think he is right when he calls the paper very sloppy, I am confused why there is no phase diagram and the sample purity seems suspect. These are things I think would have been addressed in peer review and would give me more confidence overall. Probably not fraud, but doesn't mean it's superconductivity. Not optimistic about replication in the next week too, Solid State Synthesis seems "easy" but in my experience can be problematic. Not an expert in that part though
- foven 3y agoGlad to see a realistic take on HN. Endlessly frustrating to see people be like "this will be replicated in days". Yeah, sure, let every other lab just drop what they're doing, order all the reagents on express, do a thorough characterization making sure they understand the impurities and crystal phase, then perform good airtight measurements in a couple days. Crystal growth always has complications many times outside of your control - the most minor of things can cause ridiculous problems. Especially when they admit to having phase impurities, and it's not really clear how they've gone from bulk sample to measurement sample (are they really measuring just the superconductor or the impurity phase?). Needs addressing, especially when the Cu2S phase impurity seems to have a phase transition of it's own at or around 370K (suspiciously close to where some of their Tc measurements are).
- HDThoreaun 3y agoI mean being thorough will obviously take a long time, but if a decent number of research groups decide to drop what they're doing and attempt a replication I don't think it would take that long for one of them to at least partially succeed if the claim is true. That doesn't mean they're publishing a sister paper, but it might mean we see some tweets saying "my group synthesized LK-99 and we have reason to believe it may be a rtp superconductor"
- nemo44x 3y agoTo me the biggest mystery is why they didn't make multiple samples and send them to a few places that could verify their claims immediately. I understand that the papers were published before they really wanted to but they've also apparently have had samples for awhile it sounds like? So assuming it's not BS (and I doubt that it is) it would lead me to believe that making the material is difficult to get right? The video they've produced uses a sample that isn't particularly elegant, to be sure. I guess it's all conjecture at this point and healthy skepticism is warranted. A press conference would be nice.
- MobiusHorizons 3y agoCan someone help me understand what it means for a superconductor (which should have zero resistance) to have such a low current capacity? Does this mean it's possible to have a voltage drop across the superconductor? Does that voltage drop somehow not result in power dissipation? Is it something like capacitive or inductive reactance?
- timerol 3y agoSuperconductors aren't always superconducting. There is a set of circumstances in which superconduction happens. If the current is below this limit, voltage is 0. If current is above this limit, then voltage is more accurately predicted from bulk resistivity numbers. This image is on it's side from a normal I-V curve, but accurately describes the relationship: https://i.stack.imgur.com/5Irds.jpg https://i.stack.imgur.com/5Irds.jpg. At Ic the material stops superconducting. Note that there are temperature and magnetic field effects on the value of Ic, which in every other currently-known material is 0 at 300 K.
- MobiusHorizons 3y agoThanks that explanation makes a lot of sense.
- magicalhippo 3y agoIn superconducting magnets, this sudden loss of superconductivity is called a quench[1] and can be destructive. The LHC recently suffered from this, discussed here[2], and is undergoing repairs. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnet#Magnet_quench https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnet#Magnet_... [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36811018 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36811018
- tersh 3y agoThe median prediction for whether this gets independently confirmed is sitting at 25%: https://www.metaculus.com/questions/18090/room-temp-superconductor-pre-print-replicated/ https://www.metaculus.com/questions/18090/room-temp-supercon...
- tcmb 3y ago... whether it gets confirmed by _the first_ independent attempt.
- giarc 3y agoPredicted by random people on the internet as well.
- ddp26 3y agoNow down to 19%. Starting to stabilize, at 143 forecasters.
- alexose 3y agoThe 'nays' getting lots of traction on twitter right now https://twitter.com/alexkaplan0/status/1684642852616192000 https://twitter.com/alexkaplan0/status/1684642852616192000
- it_citizen 3y agoCan someone ELI5 if the video with the magnet levitating is supposed prove something? Is this visual result only possible with superconductors? If so, why?
- svachalek 3y agoMagnets can also levitate over other magnets, so it's not only possible with superconductors. But it does happen with superconductors. The magnet will induce a current in the superconductor, which creates a magnetic field, which repels the magnet.
- eesmith 3y ago> Magnets can also levitate over other magnets Earnshaw's theorem describes why a free-floating (paramagnetic) magnet cannot levitate over another such magnet. There must be at least one stable axis which is not from a magnet. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earnshaw%27s_theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earnshaw%27s_theorem > The magnet will induce a current in the superconductor That's a different sort of levitation. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrodynamic_suspension https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrodynamic_suspension . We know it's not the same because you can see a magnet floating above a superconductor even though there's no motion. The relevant reason is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdiamagnetism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdiamagnetism . ] Superconducting magnetic levitation is due to superdiamagnetism, which repels a permanent magnet which approaches the superconductor, and flux pinning, which prevents the magnet floating away. ] Superdiamagnetism is a feature of superconductivity.
- it_citizen 3y agoSo does that mean the video would exclude honest mistakes from the researchers? Either it is indeed a superconductor at room temperature or the makers of video actively faked the result.
- eesmith 3y agoI'll quote from the linked-to page: > In both of these magnetic repulsion videos, keep in mind that magnetic repulsion and/or levitation are not, by themselves, probative of superconductivity: a diamagnetic material such as pyrolytic graphite [16], can be made to levitate [19] in a magnetic field without being superconductive. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_levitation#Diamagnetic_levitation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_levitation#Diamagneti... .
- worik 3y agoThis really reminds me of "cold fusion" We all really wanted that to be true, too. Patience, is all that is available to us that do not have a lab able to replicate
- out_of_protocol 3y agoActually, cold fusion exists! Even energy-positive at that. It's just not positive enough - current production method is too wasteful to be of practical use (creating muon is too expensive atm). See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon-catalyzed_fusion https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon-catalyzed_fusion
- amelius 3y agoSo much for lead-free electronics.
- fredsmith219 3y agoHave Pons and Fleischmann confirmed the results yet?
- mrlonglong 3y agoLead? Improbable.
- elisbce 3y agoHistory always repeats itself. Anytime a potential groundbreaking result is announced with one or some of the following characteristics, more likely than not something fishy or problematic ensues. 1. Paper submitted hastily without all authors in agreement or even knowing. (Check, two separate papers were submitted with collaborators in the US missing in one paper) 2. Not all due diligence and checks were done, e.g. missing tests or providing half-assed "proofs". (Check, missing phase transition results, provided video proof for superconductivity shows imperfect samples and diamagnetism, no full levitation, no pinning effect in superconductivity. You would imagine they could have made good samples instead of broken ones and completed all necessary tests since the material was obtained at least 3 years ago) So in all, they seem to be rushing to conclusions and public fame than being cautious and scientific.
- carabiner 3y agoMIT alum claims that one of his MIT profs is in Korea now working with the original researchers to test the material: https://twitter.com/jesuslares_me/status/1684542737142657024 https://twitter.com/jesuslares_me/status/1684542737142657024
- bentt 3y agoWhy is replication of material production the focus when the material ostensibly exists and can just be tested for superconducting properties?
- p_l 3y agoBecause this ensures repeatability of the material, that it wasn't some accidental dopant, that the samples weren't doctored, etc. Essentially, a clean room check on all claims.
- brucethemoose2 3y agoIf any chunk of material can be shipped around and shown to be a room temperature superconductor at independent labs, that would be a revolution. Then they can worry about reproduction, as every materials science lab on the planet would be trying to reproduce it at that point.
- HDThoreaun 3y agoWhy do we need evidence of repeatability? At this point just evidence that a rtp superconductor exists, even if we can't create anymore of it, would be a nobel.
- p_l 3y agoQuite obviously, given the patent on the material, the inventors want to commercialize it.
- andersa 3y agoIt seems a third paper was just found an hour ago. Original paper: http://journal.kci.go.kr/jkcgct/archive/articleView?artiId=ART002955269 http://journal.kci.go.kr/jkcgct/archive/articleView?artiId=A... Translation: https://www.docdroid.net/UiUrs8c/kci-fi002955269-1-pdf https://www.docdroid.net/UiUrs8c/kci-fi002955269-1-pdf Translation source: https://twitter.com/andrewmccalip/status/1684700783852556288 https://twitter.com/andrewmccalip/status/1684700783852556288 <insert "I want to believe" picture>
- elisbce 3y agoThe first sentence already raises a big red flag. "This paper examines the way of thinking and limitations of physicists regarding the phenomenon of superconductivity". Stop these ridiculous presumptuous claims about "limitations of physicists" before the work is actually verified and proven.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- carabiner 3y agoKoreans have a mean and antagonistic streak, that's why they're so good at making dramas, but still outrageous opener lol. I wonder if Korean academic culture is different from ours.
- Lewton 3y ago“Just found” It was linked in the original hacker news thread
- andersa 3y agoImagine if this website had a way to sort comments by new so threads with more than 100 comments weren't basically unusable.
- seamaster 3y agoNile red should replicate the steps and debunk the mysterious.
- seamaster 3y agowe need Nile Red to show the steps on his YT channel.