3 ms·

> Combined with the slipshod methodology, doesn't this make you feel like it was silly to release the arXiv paper when they did? Well, the LK-99 team agree As

> Combined with the slipshod methodology, doesn't this make you feel like it was silly to release the arXiv paper when they did? Well, the LK-99 team agree As I understand it, the 99 in the name is because they first discovered it in 1999. Seems to me that if you didn't manage to nail down the process in 24 years, it's probably time to publish and let someone else have a go.

londons_explore 3y ago
And if this technology is on the critical path to solving world hunger/curing cancer or ending wars, then those things have been delayed 24 years, and millions of people are dead, all so these guys could have a shot at a paper in Nature. Humans really are selfish sometimes.
- simmerup 3y ago
  Assuming the worst of people is bad for your mental health
guerrilla 3y ago
It sounds like you don't know the history. They were doing other unrelated things in the meantime, not working in this.
- michaelt 3y ago
  I'm aware of that. But if I was an early-career researcher looking to establish myself, secure funding and maybe a tenure-track position, and I had a nobel-prize-winning discovery up my sleeve, I can't imagine many things that would take precedence. I mean, obviously whatever happened happened. It just seems strange to simultaneously claim to have discovered something 24 years ago, and to have been rushed into publishing prematurely.
  - guerrilla 3y ago
    > It just seems strange to simultaneously claim to have discovered something 24 years ago, and to have been rushed into publishing prematurely. They had to get other jobs to survive. Somone else forced their hand with the publication. There's nothing incosistent about that.
    - lolinder 3y ago
      There was no one who would be willing to fund their research into a room temperature semiconductor? Even though they had a sample that passed the basic tests?
      - guerrilla 3y ago
        You make it sound like that is easy while not knowing much about them or their circumstances. There still isn't. Look at their shitty rented lab. Obviously there are aspects to their situation that not everyone here is aware of.
      - paulmd 3y ago
        the world is filled with quacks looking for funding for superconductor research, I can definitely imagine that 20 years ago it would have been difficult to find funding for blue-sky research in superconductivity even with a modest amount of evidence in-hand
  - Qem 3y ago
    > mean, obviously whatever happened happened. It just seems strange to simultaneously claim to have discovered something 24 years ago, and to have been rushed into publishing prematurely. Probably there was a big team. Somebody with a low rank worked his/her ass off on the breakdown, but then noticed their names would be filled off or put only in acknowledgements section, to be replaced with some senior lab manager that did just administrative paperwork and barely knew the work. So they said screw it and just published whatever they could before the laurels were stolen.

londons_explore 3y ago

And if this technology is on the critical path to solving world hunger/curing cancer or ending wars, then those things have been delayed 24 years, and millions of people are dead, all so these guys could have a shot at a paper in Nature. Humans really are selfish sometimes.

simmerup 3y ago
Assuming the worst of people is bad for your mental health

guerrilla 3y ago

It sounds like you don't know the history. They were doing other unrelated things in the meantime, not working in this.

michaelt 3y ago
I'm aware of that. But if I was an early-career researcher looking to establish myself, secure funding and maybe a tenure-track position, and I had a nobel-prize-winning discovery up my sleeve, I can't imagine many things that would take precedence. I mean, obviously whatever happened happened. It just seems strange to simultaneously claim to have discovered something 24 years ago, and to have been rushed into publishing prematurely.
- guerrilla 3y ago
  > It just seems strange to simultaneously claim to have discovered something 24 years ago, and to have been rushed into publishing prematurely. They had to get other jobs to survive. Somone else forced their hand with the publication. There's nothing incosistent about that.
  - lolinder 3y ago
    There was no one who would be willing to fund their research into a room temperature semiconductor? Even though they had a sample that passed the basic tests?
    - guerrilla 3y ago
      You make it sound like that is easy while not knowing much about them or their circumstances. There still isn't. Look at their shitty rented lab. Obviously there are aspects to their situation that not everyone here is aware of.
    - paulmd 3y ago
      the world is filled with quacks looking for funding for superconductor research, I can definitely imagine that 20 years ago it would have been difficult to find funding for blue-sky research in superconductivity even with a modest amount of evidence in-hand
- Qem 3y ago
  > mean, obviously whatever happened happened. It just seems strange to simultaneously claim to have discovered something 24 years ago, and to have been rushed into publishing prematurely. Probably there was a big team. Somebody with a low rank worked his/her ass off on the breakdown, but then noticed their names would be filled off or put only in acknowledgements section, to be replaced with some senior lab manager that did just administrative paperwork and barely knew the work. So they said screw it and just published whatever they could before the laurels were stolen.