9 ms·

The second paper's "semiconductor" claim is no less than the first.

• joefigura 3y ago
  In general I'd agree with you, but in this case I think the second group very likely didn't reproduce the first group's material. The measured electrical properties of the two groups aren't even close to each other. I think that strongly suggests the two groups were measuring different materials, and that the structure of the second group's material differed in some way. A more convincing failed replication would find mostly similar electrical properties and reproduce the levitation that the first group found, but explain it with a phenomenon other than superconductors