4 ms·

Uniformed opinion. It takes a week to bake/whatever a test sample. Which is why this is playing out so "slowly". So, they had an idea and have been baking/tes

by jvm___ 3y ago

Uniformed opinion. It takes a week to bake/whatever a test sample. Which is why this is playing out so "slowly". So, they had an idea and have been baking/testing/refining samples for decades. Science and funding takes a while. What idea they started with and why they kept at it for 20 years is beyond me, that's a long time to chase an idea of you didn't have results or a hint that your idea would work. Maybe they had a weird sample that came from some other process in 1999 and have spent the intermediate time convincing funding people and doing the repetitive lab work required to get it to this point.

mptest 3y ago
Speaks to a supreme confidence in the theory, surely? I'm a layman but imagine everyone is going to want to hear every wild idea these guys could think up if this works out. They might have been sitting on this for 20 years? Probably why I'm not, but If I were any vc person I'd be busting down their door trying to give them all my money
- yetihehe 3y ago
  How would you find such researchers if they didn't have plausible real-world results yet? I have a theory for new high performance heat engine which I developed over 15 years already, but I don't think anyone would give me ANY money for making a prototype (which may not work in reality), so I have to somehow do it in the limited time after working two jobs (I had to earn enough to have a home with a proper garage). Do you have any tips for someone like me?
  - fragmede 3y ago
    Get involved with your local community of makers, get them intrigued by your idea and its potential, connect with people that will help you build it. Patent it, and then raise funds via the Internet to try and build it. Seek out local VCs. I know that's a lot to ask, on top of two jobs, but I didn't organize our economy.
    - yetihehe 3y ago
      Thanks for reply, I appreciate it a lot. > Get involved with your local community of makers, get them intrigued by your idea and its potential, connect with people that will help you build it. This will prevent me from patenting it. I can also make first prototype myself, I've started last year, will try to finish this year. Funding would just let me drop one job and make it faster. > Patent it, and then raise funds via the Internet to try and build it. Seek out local VCs. I know that's a lot to ask, on top of two jobs, but I didn't organize our economy. I don't have enough money for patenting something that might not work. That's why I need to make a prototype. That prototype will be MUCH cheaper than a proper patent but takes some time which I also don't have too much (but working on it slowly). When I'm sure it works, I already have enough connections to make it actually happen. At this moment, funding my prototype would just benefit humanity with earlier knowledge of whether it works, so of course no one sane will fund it, that's the sad reality with human priorities. > I know that's a lot to ask, on top of two jobs, but I didn't organize our economy. Yeah, I've only asked for tips just in case you have some, I don't blame you or anything. Thank you! This thread also describes WHY those LK-99 researchers sat on their invention for so long, they just couldn't find enough people interested in their material. Of course I could just publish my idea, but it's possible that no one would be interested in this and I would like to have some money from this to pursue some other ideas without begging people for support.
      - xorbax 3y ago
        I think I'd ask you what I'd ask L/K - why do you think it works? They're experimentalists: they didn't find the material from first principles, they appear to have made it and decided to continue. So did you make the engine and notice it's efficiency, or did you find it using first principles where no one else did?
        yetihehe 3y ago
        > So did you make the engine and notice it's efficiency, or did you find it using first principles where no one else did? I found it from first principles, I still don't know why no one else thought about it, but it requires sort of splitting and reversing a normal stirling engine inside-out. Since then I've found several attempts at going in that directions which I took, but no one connected all those pieces yet as far as I know. This doesn't require any advanced materials, just a new configuration of existing inventions. For 15 years I've thought why it should not work, but I can't find a flaw in my reasoning, so now I need to verify it with actual working machine, because I know I still might be wrong. If I'm right - this will change energy generation and storage (no more steam turbines and will replace PV panels). If I'm wrong - someone will potentially lose about $10k.
  - mptest 3y ago
    >have any tips Unfortunately I don't. You raise a really good point though lol. Everyone's idea might seem good as these guys' to probably even experts in the domain itself. I have been profoundly lucky from my spawn point to my current career so I can't give any earnest advice about that. I did briefly work at a semiconductor startup company that similarly had a "crazy brilliant" research idea and did find some funding. It didn't go great. Like I said, there's a reason I'm not in charge of any VC stuff and I largely don't invest myself lol. I wish you the best of luck with your invention though, please never give up and never stop dreaming. People like you even if you never produce it push us ALL forward. Thanks for what you do
xorbax 3y ago
I have the same thought: "25 years? Why the fuck. Buy a new salt and publish a fucking paper." I suppose they saw something favorable in that 99 sample and nobody else knew. The vagaries of chemical synthesis helped. But it doesn't seem like they could have had a worse sample than what they fucking have now, while getting data that made them waste a quarter-century. As much as people hype and have 'reproduced' it, I...dunno. If it's real, the autobiography will be worth an expensive translation.

by jvm___ 3y ago

mptest 3y ago

Speaks to a supreme confidence in the theory, surely? I'm a layman but imagine everyone is going to want to hear every wild idea these guys could think up if this works out. They might have been sitting on this for 20 years? Probably why I'm not, but If I were any vc person I'd be busting down their door trying to give them all my money

yetihehe 3y ago
How would you find such researchers if they didn't have plausible real-world results yet? I have a theory for new high performance heat engine which I developed over 15 years already, but I don't think anyone would give me ANY money for making a prototype (which may not work in reality), so I have to somehow do it in the limited time after working two jobs (I had to earn enough to have a home with a proper garage). Do you have any tips for someone like me?
- fragmede 3y ago
  Get involved with your local community of makers, get them intrigued by your idea and its potential, connect with people that will help you build it. Patent it, and then raise funds via the Internet to try and build it. Seek out local VCs. I know that's a lot to ask, on top of two jobs, but I didn't organize our economy.
  - yetihehe 3y ago
    Thanks for reply, I appreciate it a lot. > Get involved with your local community of makers, get them intrigued by your idea and its potential, connect with people that will help you build it. This will prevent me from patenting it. I can also make first prototype myself, I've started last year, will try to finish this year. Funding would just let me drop one job and make it faster. > Patent it, and then raise funds via the Internet to try and build it. Seek out local VCs. I know that's a lot to ask, on top of two jobs, but I didn't organize our economy. I don't have enough money for patenting something that might not work. That's why I need to make a prototype. That prototype will be MUCH cheaper than a proper patent but takes some time which I also don't have too much (but working on it slowly). When I'm sure it works, I already have enough connections to make it actually happen. At this moment, funding my prototype would just benefit humanity with earlier knowledge of whether it works, so of course no one sane will fund it, that's the sad reality with human priorities. > I know that's a lot to ask, on top of two jobs, but I didn't organize our economy. Yeah, I've only asked for tips just in case you have some, I don't blame you or anything. Thank you! This thread also describes WHY those LK-99 researchers sat on their invention for so long, they just couldn't find enough people interested in their material. Of course I could just publish my idea, but it's possible that no one would be interested in this and I would like to have some money from this to pursue some other ideas without begging people for support.
    - xorbax 3y ago
      I think I'd ask you what I'd ask L/K - why do you think it works? They're experimentalists: they didn't find the material from first principles, they appear to have made it and decided to continue. So did you make the engine and notice it's efficiency, or did you find it using first principles where no one else did?
      - yetihehe 3y ago
        > So did you make the engine and notice it's efficiency, or did you find it using first principles where no one else did? I found it from first principles, I still don't know why no one else thought about it, but it requires sort of splitting and reversing a normal stirling engine inside-out. Since then I've found several attempts at going in that directions which I took, but no one connected all those pieces yet as far as I know. This doesn't require any advanced materials, just a new configuration of existing inventions. For 15 years I've thought why it should not work, but I can't find a flaw in my reasoning, so now I need to verify it with actual working machine, because I know I still might be wrong. If I'm right - this will change energy generation and storage (no more steam turbines and will replace PV panels). If I'm wrong - someone will potentially lose about $10k.
- mptest 3y ago
  >have any tips Unfortunately I don't. You raise a really good point though lol. Everyone's idea might seem good as these guys' to probably even experts in the domain itself. I have been profoundly lucky from my spawn point to my current career so I can't give any earnest advice about that. I did briefly work at a semiconductor startup company that similarly had a "crazy brilliant" research idea and did find some funding. It didn't go great. Like I said, there's a reason I'm not in charge of any VC stuff and I largely don't invest myself lol. I wish you the best of luck with your invention though, please never give up and never stop dreaming. People like you even if you never produce it push us ALL forward. Thanks for what you do

xorbax 3y ago

I have the same thought: "25 years? Why the fuck. Buy a new salt and publish a fucking paper." I suppose they saw something favorable in that 99 sample and nobody else knew. The vagaries of chemical synthesis helped. But it doesn't seem like they could have had a worse sample than what they fucking have now, while getting data that made them waste a quarter-century. As much as people hype and have 'reproduced' it, I...dunno. If it's real, the autobiography will be worth an expensive translation.