40 ms·
LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K
- zootreeves 3y agoWhy would other teams be observing floating at room temp? Is it possible to have a diamagnet that becomes a superconductor?
- baq 3y agoIt’s possible there are tiny bits of superconducting stuff at room temperature which connect into bigger and bigger bits as temperature drops, until it starts working as a whole at 110K. Maybe. Don’t quote me.
- dinosaurdynasty 3y agoThat would suggest that a very high quality sample would superconduct at room temperature.
- jacquesm 3y agoNot necessarily, but possibly.
- feoren 3y agoUnless the "low quality" part is actually causing the superconductivity. Remember the multiple simulations that showed Cu replacing Pb at a less favorable site (energetically) was better for superconductivity than at a more favorable site. It's possible "high quality" samples actually have less "imperfections", which seem important for the superconductivity.
- jacquesm 3y agoExactly it's quite possible that 'worse' is actually 'better' and vv. I'm sure that it won't be long before that will be resolved though, this is all happening so fast that such important answers will be sought by more than one team.
- progrus 3y agoDue to how these materials behave, this likely means you can manufacture a real-deal UFO in orbit…
- whimsicalism 3y agowhat? give me an effective field theory for that lol because that is not a thing
- baq 3y agoOf course I can't but https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-06707-y https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-06707-y maybe
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- guywithabowtie 3y agoIn the video, it says above 110K and not below, I got confused as well. I will add that a lot of people are deleting retweeting this. May be there is something more to it.
- WinstonSmith84 3y agoThe first comment tells (from the professor talking in that video): > In order not to misunderstand everyone, let me say that it is below 110K, and 0 resistance is observed at normal pressure. Google translation, but I think it's clear that it's below and not above. At least normal pressure ... that's disappointing but still an improvement
- psychphysic 3y agoI still don't understand what this is saying. There was 0 resistance below 110 Kelvin (-165celcius)? But not at room temperature?
- TylerE 3y agoYes. At 110 the resistance is 0.0001 ohms. At the highest point on the chart, 200k (Still 100 below 0 F) the resistance is up to 0.1 ohm.
- papercrane 3y agoIn their sample they measured no resistance below 110 Kelvin. After 110 Kelvin resistance increased, although there was a weird dip in resistance around 225-250K that they can't explain (maybe instrument error.)
- thecopy 3y agoIn the Resistance-Temperature graph (https://twitter.com/Lipez400/status/1686793608626663441/photo/4 https://twitter.com/Lipez400/status/1686793608626663441/phot...) the resistance starts increasing from 110K
- 3y ago
- SamPatt 3y agoAs I understand it, this is strong evidence of this being a novel new superconductor, but not at room temperature. That's still TBD but hasn't been replicated by anyone reputable yet.
- stonemetal12 3y agoIn American dollars that is -261.67F, a little chilly for room temp.
- azernik 3y agoBut on the warm side for a superconductor, and displaying some weird behavior just below water ice temperatures.
- declan_roberts 3y agoOne point in favor of a novel superconductor material, one strike against it being a superconductor at room temperature.
- zevv 3y agohttps://nitter.net/lipez400/status/1686793608626663441 https://nitter.net/lipez400/status/1686793608626663441
- chaimanmeow 3y agocredibility of LK99 claims is very very high. What are the medium term practical implications for all these potential applications?
- distortionfield 3y agoIt seems more and more like it's credible, but that synthesis is going to prove to be the issue. All these repro attempts are having too much success for there to be nothing behind the team's claims.
- monkeynotes 3y agoCan you explain why -160c is a measure of success when the claim was room temperature? A super conductor functioning at -160c would make MRIs simpler, but it's not world changing.
- BasedAnon 3y agobecause it's a very unexpected result, it shouldn't be levitating at room temperature and the random drop in resistance at certain temperatures doesn't make sense
- floxy 3y agoDoes anyone know what S.R. Hadden has been up to lately? A new high-temperature superconductor seems like the perfect cover story for a fraud scheme around room temperature superconductors.
- ianburrell 3y agoI don't think -160C would change much since it would still need cryogenic cooling. Liquid nitrogen is the most common and cheapest cryogenic. YBCO is liquid nitrogen cooled and has the advantage that can make in large quantities and has high field strengths. But if it was slightly warmer, over -153C, then it could use non-cryogenic refrigerants.
- 3y ago
- adad95 3y agoI want to believe.
- wilsynet 3y agoThe truth is out there.
- selimthegrim 3y agoThere’s a reason USO is a pun in Japanese.
- scarmig 3y agoInteresting. Some people are getting strong diamagnetism at RTP, and now someone is actually seeing zero resistance at a low temperature. I'd take this as mildly positive news. It would be a surprising material if it were a high Tc (only in the LN2 sense) superconductor that is also strongly diamagnetic at room temperature (though I'm not sure if that's more surprising than a RTP superconductor).
- jacquesm 3y agoIt's confusing. You'd expect both to be present or none, it is strange to have a material that is conducting and diamagnetic at room temperature and that shows super conductivity at much lower temperature. You'd expect the diamagnetism to disappear with the superconductivity.
- marshray 3y agoMultiple teams have said they had to produce 10 batches just to get one sample with properties worth reporting on. Perhaps the simplest explanation is that different teams are all ending up with different variations of a common material, with different impurities, crystal structure, etc. There's likely a whole zoo of interesting materials here!
- jacquesm 3y agoYes, I thought that that might be the case from day one. When they wrote that they had only a 10% success rate it was clear that they were not at all in control of sample purity. The big remaining question for me is what happens when they start traveling with the original sample to have another lab test their samples and how those results compare with both the original results and the independently recreated different samples. There is a good chance that there will be substantial differences between them.
- dv_dt 3y ago“Purity” is a really overloaded term here. There are vast set of material properties that simply don’t map to a definition “purity” as in some homogeneous concentration of a material. This is so early no one likely knows exactly what configuration of material to “purify” for the intended outcome. There will likely be years of not decades of looking at differences in the materials and performance of related materials to more fully explore this discovery.
- gchadwick 3y agoCertainly no expert here but if you take the original video and replications at face value it does exhibit strong diamagnetism at room temperature. Superconductors are diamagnetic due to the Meissner effect at their superconducting temperature. This would mean LK99 is a superconductor at low temperature and separately be strongly diamagnetic at room temperature (no Meissner effect if it's not super conducting). Would that be unusual?
- jacquesm 3y agoIt's all unusual because it is uncharted territory. My guess would be assuming that it all pans out that this is due to various impurities and that it will take a while before we have a sample that is pure enough that all of these properties can be nailed down for good. What's strange is that drop at higher temps, that's either a measurement anomaly or something really odd.
- adolph 3y ago> due to various impurities and that it will take a while before we have a sample that is pure enough that all of these properties can be nailed down for good. Do you think it will be "purity" or understanding material variance/specific impurity? It reminds me of Fogbank, the nuke material claimed to be "so secret they forgot how to make it." Part of the story of manufacturing difficulty was due to increased purity of modern materials/processes. In a bizarre twist, the new production facility and reverse-engineered production process yielded a version of Fogbank that was of a higher purity than it had been in the past, according to the article. The problem, however, was that for Fogbank to work as intended in existing warhead designs, that previous level of impurity was actually essential. NNSA had to revise the process to ensure the final product was just as impure. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32867/fogbank-is-mysterious-material-used-in-nukes-thats-so-secret-nobody-can-say-what-it-is https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32867/fogbank-is-myste...
- jacquesm 3y ago> Do you think it will be "purity" or understanding material variance/specific impurity? It could be either. As I pointed out in other comments, that's how radioactivity was discovered and it is very well possible that they blundered into something exceptional by accident, it is also possible that both parties got it wrong and there are yet other effects at play (see the big gap in the t/R curve, that really needs explaining).
- fgeahfeaha 3y agoThat's a failed repro then right? Below 110K is below -163.15 Celcius How would that compare to other superconductors?
- p1mrx 3y agoTc = 110 K would take the #4 spot on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_superconductors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_superconductors
- wthomp 3y ago#3 spot at atmospheric pressure
- rbinv 3y agoAt atmospheric pressure, no less.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- moffkalast 3y ago> HgTlBaCaCuO New band name. And band gap.
- jacquesm 3y agoIt is and it isn't. It's at ambient pressure (which is something useful), and there is something very odd happening much higher up that needs to be explained. They say their sample purity is higher than the one the Korean team had, so that would normally lead to better yield and easier confirmation of the superconductivity. But since it does show the Meissner effect in other samples as well at room temperature there is a lot that still needs explaining before we can say it is a failed reproduction.
- BasedAnon 3y agoperhaps an impurity caused the effect they're looking for
- notorandit 3y ago> below 110 K It is not room temperature, is it?
- MayeulC 3y agoRoom temp is 300K. Liquid nitrogen boils at 77K, though.
- brookst 3y agoNot Canadian, eh?
- motoboi 3y agoI suppose it is, if the room is in Mars.
- nmeagent 3y ago0 C is 273.15K, so room temperature is around 295 K. 300 K is a decent approximation to make back-of-the-envelope calculations easier, but I don't know anybody that actually keeps their room at 80 F.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- creatorpiece123 3y agoRead the graph, there is a sharp drop in resistance from 220K-250K. Its still not superconducting but it could be hinting something?
- valine 3y agoThat’s what I was thinking. In the video he brushes it off as a potential equipment malfunction, but perhaps it’s the effect everyone is looking for.
- jacquesm 3y agoI'm really curious what the eventual explanation of this is and whether other teams will observe this happening as well.
- pokey00 3y agoA sudden discontinuity like that but continuing the same curve and jumping back... that's equipment malfunction 99% of the time.
- valine 3y agoSeems reasonable, then again we're dealing with a potential superconductor where sudden discontinuity is the expected result.
- jacquesm 3y agoAnd yet, they published that instead of figuring out what is possibly wrong with their gear which in turn may invalidate the rest of the their results. I'm not going to second guess their motivations though, they probably know what they are doing but it is interesting and deserves explanation.
- baq 3y agoWhy publish this graph without running the measurements again though? Serious question since I’ve no idea about the effort needed to get this data. I’ve got a small hope that they actually did and found the effect didn’t go away. They’ll still say ’equipment malfunction’, there isn’t any downside, only upside if it gets reproduced somewhere else.
- jacquesm 3y agoFascinating and ultimately confusing result. What is happening in that higher temperature window where the resistance suddenly drops orders of magnitude?
- omgJustTest 3y agoThis appears to be a great result. "Room temperature" super conductor result? No. But this is basically showing there is some superconductivity in the sample, and cooler temperatures expose intrinsic band structures. Pretty exciting!
- hcks 3y agoHow is it exciting? It invalidates the original claim. We already have better SC.
- matsemann 3y agoIt doesn't invalidate the original claim, as they haven't been able to make a pure sample to test with, as I understand it. Or at least that there is some difference between their samples and the others, but still it shows promise.
- Palpatineli 3y ago[flagged]
- flumpcakes 3y ago> Purity does not affect Tc. Here's a lump of 100% Cu and another lump of 50% Cu and 50% "other". If purity doesn't matter, they must have the same properties? Why not just use 0.0001% copper in all our applications and save millions on material costs.
- amluto 3y agoI know nothing about the theory of superconductors, but purity can affect electronic properties. For example, pure silicon is quite a poor conductor. If you dope it with a little bit of an n- or p-type dopant (an impurity), it conducts better. Add a bit more, and it conducts more. There are other effects, too.
- 3y ago
- obituary_latte 3y agoThere are multiple mentions of "extraterrestrial super islands", is this a mistranslation of the Meissner effect? Great term nonetheless.
- jacquesm 3y agoYes, I saw that, there are some more obvious translation errors.
- rfoo 3y agoIt's the mistranslation of room-temperature superconductivity. "super islands" is likely translated from 超岛 which sounds the same as 超导 (superconductivity). I have no idea how 室温 (room-temperature) became extraterrestrial, must be extraordinarily bad speech to text model. edit: could be 室温 (shi4wen1) -> shi4wai4 -> 室外(outdoors)/世外(out of this world) -> extraterrestrial
- wg0 3y agoI wish I could learn CJK. Will take a lifetime to master.
- devindotcom 3y agoWhat a hilarious mistranslation. Somehow it is fitting though, as a totally unprecedented floating material.
- e63f67dd-065b 3y agoYou're exactly right on the extraterrestrial part: the speech to text transcribed it as "最近我们这个有关世外超岛的话题非常的火热"
- ansbalin 3y agoThe extraterrestrial super island of stability
- jacquesm 3y agoLet's break one rule at the time, please. I don't think I'm quite ready for heavy elements that are long lived, either at room temperature or any other, and even less so if they turn out to be non-radioactive... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_of_stability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_of_stability
- bilsbie 3y agoOk not sure how to phrase this: Could there be small pieces of RTSC inside the sample (causing the floating) But then enough impurities to not be able to complete a circuit through the sample? And cooling makes other parts of the sample super conducting?
- psychphysic 3y agoCould be insulated RTP superconducting crystals, grains, islands with the bulk being a high temperature superconductor?
- bilsbie 3y agoYes exactly.
- overnight5349 3y agoIt seems likely. Given that the copper atoms prefer to form a non-superconducting material, it makes sense that there would be regions where the energy is just right to form the correct structure, and you get the incorrect structure everywhere else. Given the way crystals grow, it then would follow that you'd get discontinuous crystals or grains within the material. If we're taking bets, my money is on this exact thing happening. It'd explain the inconsistent results we've seen so far.
- bigmattystyles 3y agoNovice question - does a material behaving as a superconductor occur all the sudden like a step function if resistance is plotted against temp and pressure - or does it ease into super conductor behavior? (edit) Also is it resistance (aka if I remember my EE degree correctly), DC only or also impedance where frequency also matters?
- weard_beard 3y agoall at once. It instantaneously expels the magnetic field. You can observe experiments on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RS7gyZJg5nc#t=32m30s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RS7gyZJg5nc#t=32m30s
- 4ad 3y agoOnly type-I superconductors expel significant magnetic fields. Virtually everything you see on YouTube is a type-II superconductor. type-I superconductors require liquid helium. Also, only type-II superconductors can hover in a stable configuration near magnets. Flux pinning is required for that.
- consilient 3y ago> (edit) Also is it resistance (aka if I remember my EE degree correctly), DC only or also impedance where frequency also matters? Just resistance. Impedance in an ideal BCS superconductor goes roughly as the square of the AC frequency.
- sema2 3y agoI do find that interesting... I found a graph of another HTSC's (YBCO) resistance vs temperature [1], and the function is much more discontinuous looking than the one shown in the article. That would lead me (someone not at all trained in the physics of superconductors) to believe that perhaps the purity of the sample is a factor here, with different parts of the sample having different critical temperatures, gradually decreasing resistance until an inflection point is reached at 110K. 1. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-electrical-resistivity-vs-temperature-curve-of-pure-YBCO_fig5_241713900 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-electrical-resistivi...
- 999ms 3y agoTOTK Sky Islands effect is what we're looking for.
- floxy 3y agoLooks like it still goes superconducting at a magnetic field of 9 Tesla. Does that seem like a really high critical field?
- klimt 3y agoYBCO which has a critical temperature of around 90K has a critical field in excess of 250T. So 9T is not expected to weaken superconductivity much for a sample with a critical temperature of 110K.
- hatsunearu 3y agoThe Fig 3a)b) graphs are not showing superconductivity. That just looks like the resistance dips below the ~1e-5 mark and goes goes deep into the noise. That just looks like a normal conductor that has a positive temperature coefficient. edit: to add speculation, I think they made something that's not quite LK-99, and it's behaving like a normal conductor with no superconductance.
- barbegal 3y agoThat would be my interpretation too. Usually you get a stronger transition to 0 at the critical temperature but I can't see this (although it could be hidden under the noise)
- floxy 3y agoAn excitation of 1mA and R = 1e-5 means the voltage is 10 nV (1e-8). Also the chart has a logarithmic y-axis.
- hatsunearu 3y agoI know, I'm just saying their test condition has a really high noise floor and once you dive into the noise floor there is no meaningful result.
- legulere 3y agoThe noise is probably just an artefact from measurement.
- hatsunearu 3y agothat's almost literally the definition of noise. I'm saying the results are useless because the noise floor is obscuring any interesting behavior (if any). Some people are saying "well, the Tc is 160K, so this result is invalid"--the way I see it, the Tc is not 160K because the test setup is so noisy so you're not really seeing any superconductivity at any temperature (not because it doesn't exist, but because their test setup is shitty)
- 3y ago
- barbegal 3y agoThis doesn't look superconducting at all to me, simply the sample is very small and below 110K the resistance of the sample is too small to be measured by their measurement equipment. I'm happy to be proved wrong but there should be a steeper transition at the critical temperature.
- gus_massa 3y agoNote that the graphic is in log escale. Also, it looks like it's more complicated https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Superconducting-transition-curves-of-the-microstructures-on-different-substrates_fig3_232244484 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Superconducting-transiti... Also, IIUC the method makes a lot of small grains with different composition, and they may become superconductors at different temperature, and make a dirtier curve. Also, not my research area, so I'm guessing a bit.
- modeless 3y agoTo me this is encouraging. 110K is really high! It's higher than YBCO which is what they make commercial "high temperature" superconducting tape out of. IMO if this is legit (I have no way of judging the source) then this is the first good third party evidence that the original researchers are not just doing some kind of fraud. A total fraud wouldn't have actually discovered a novel high-temperature, but not room temperature, superconductor. At worst it seems to me like they discovered a cool new superconductor that may have commercial applications. At best, they may have a variant of this material that really is a room temperature superconductor. Either way, there is an important scientific discovery here. I'm surprised the prediction markets don't seem to be reacting. Maybe the source isn't actually credible? Any Chinese speakers here know?
- saberdancer 3y agoI think most people are just seeing the headline 110K instead of realizing the implications (not a scam, not a mistake, hard to replicate). I was quite sceptical earlier today due to unconvincing videos but this finding pushes it heavily into "This might be it" territory.
- tootie 3y agoI'm still unclear. Why is the test limit 110K? If this is supposed to be usable at ambient temperature then this seems like not a useful finding. Is it just some artifact of how superconductivity is measured?
- danielheath 3y agoSome people say they can get it to work at room temperature, and others say they can't. Testing a sample at superconductivity-friendly temperatures helps figure out whether there's something to investigate here, since most materials do not superconduct at any useful temperature.
- golol 3y agoThe common understanding seems to be that producing true LK99 is very difficult as you need to get the crystal structure just right. Many samples probably have mixes of the correct and other structures. That's why some float and some don't. The sample might be quite "dirty", meaning the critical temperature is lower.
- uj8efdjkfdshf 3y agoThe one interesting thing I should note is that synthesis of the copper phosphide intermediate tends to result in a copper deficient product, so I wonder if the presence of lattice defects in this might have an effect on where the copper atoms intercalate in the lattice.
- ugh123 3y agoThe linked video mentions something about "outer space islands" in the subtitles. Is that just bad auto-translation or did they seriously discover something amazing?
- coolspot 3y agoThey found “islands” of superconductivity on the resistivity graph.
- proprietario 3y agosee this other comment[0] its most likely a translation issue [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36975492 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36975492
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- legulere 3y agoI'm curious why the resistance is dropping by a lot in figure 3 a) between around 230 and 260 K
- klimt 3y agoThe jump looks like bad contacts to me. The wires you attach undergo stress during the cooldown, and such artefacts can happen with small samples. Rewiring the sample should get rid of it.
- saberdancer 3y agoHuge news. This means it is not a scam as a discovery of this type of superconductor would be big enough. It also means it is unlikely they were measuring wrong for multiple years. My layman take is that Korean sample is just a better or different batch that is properly superconducting at room temperature.
- carabiner 3y agoAs a layman, how do you know this is huge?
- d1str0 3y agoAssuming they discovered a low cost, room temperature, room pressure, superconductor, there are many HUGE technological advancements that can be made that would impact your daily life. Possibilities include improved battery longevity in all devices(probably in an order of magnitude), low friction transport improvements (ie. cheaper high speed rail), and faster and higher bandwidth wired connections. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_applications_of_superconductivity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_applications_of_...
- carabiner 3y agoNo I mean why is this "huge" when each time that's happened it's been deflated within 12 hours: - initial LK-99 paper upload on Arxiv: HUGE, then it's probably nothing until replication (waiting) - DFT release: HUGE, then probably nothing (DFT has poor predictive power) - 110K SC: HUGE, then ... ? In every case it's been the laymen saying HUGE, then the experts saying it's probably insignificant. Then the laymen settle on what the experts said.
- tigershark 3y ago[flagged]
- 3y ago
- eunos 3y agoAlmost all replication attempts are done on Bilibili, which namesake Mikoto Misaka using Railgun which would be made by superconductors. Very beautiful.
- blkhp19 3y agoShouldn't the title say "above 110 K" ?
- Havoc 3y agoThe fact that result seem to be all over the place has me hopeful. If it was just straight up wrong/fraud it wouldn't be playing out like this. Perhaps with some finetuning we'll nail it down.
- QuadrupleA 3y agoCan someone with field expertise explain the implications if this material were real / replicable / cheaply manufacturable? I see a lot of breathless excitement in these comments, as if free energy and perpetual motion machines are right around the corner, but from the few details I've delved into it's more like the electric grid might get 10% more efficient, MRIs might get a little cheaper, etc. What are the exciting and apparently obvious applications that have everyone so excited? Is it a fusion / tokamak containment thing, that the cost of cooling current superconducting magnets is one of the big barriers to net energy generation?
- ijustlovemath 3y agoTransmission loss is a real and important reason why you can't, say, cover the Sahara with solar panels to get unlimited free energy for mainland Europe and Africa (barring all the logistical challenges of actually pulling something like that off). This is because you lose a significant amount of energy just by moving it from one place to another. With RTP superconductors, you get near perfect transmission from the site of energy production to the site of consumption. You could put wind turbine in remote sections of Montana and power up Chicago, something which previously would have been impossible.
- nazgulnarsil 3y agoSahara solar panels were economically viable according to multiple studies, and there have been some limited plans made, but it has turned out politically non viable so far. Transmission losses are smaller than often assumed.
- QuadrupleA 3y agoFrom what I've read, grid transmission losses are something like 5-10% - e.g. this page (https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=105&t=3 https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=105&t=3) cites 5% in the US. Fine and nice, but seems incremental, not earth shattering, and I wonder about the logistics / ROI of manufacturing thousands of miles of LK-99 cables to achieve that. But maybe I'm missing something.
- klimt 3y agoThis is my first comment on this material, because I've been skeptical, but this result shouldn't be understated. It basically confirms the existence of a new family of high-temperature superconductors, the first of its kind since the cuprates in 1986. And for context, in the initial paper on the cuprates the critical temperature was measured to be 36 K. By synthesising other members of the cuprate family and optimising the growth, it was possible to raise it to 127 K in the subsequent few years. The 110 K seen today for LK-99 sets a baseline, and it's a very good baseline at that. Confirm me as excited.
- nemo44x 3y agoMy intuition tells me that the theory here will be more interesting than the current application, LK99. If it pans out then thousands of brilliant minds will iterate on the theory to expand it and to refine applications of it.
- klimt 3y agoThe jump at 250K looks like bad contacts to me that fixed themselves during cooldown. Rewiring the sample and remeasuring should get rid of it. The field dependence is indeed a bit weird. One would expect the critical temperature to reduce with increasing magnetic field (magnetic field weakens superconductivity), but here you don't see that. It's expected that the superconductivity is very strong for such a high critical temperature and the fields applied are not strong enough, but with better measurements you should still see a small reduction in the critical temperature.
- danpalmer 3y ago> It basically confirms the existence of a new family of high-temperature superconductors, the first of its kind since the cuprates in 1986. Specifically, it seems, a family based on a novel superconductivity mechanism. If this a real effect, there's not only significant scope to improve LK-99 synthesis, but also scope to find new materials that could use the same mechanism that operate at even higher temperatures, are easier or cheaper to produce, or that can move more current.
- distortionfield 3y ago
- coryfklein 3y agoWhy are all these materials confirmations coming from Chinese speaking scientists? Do scientists in the US not do materials science so much?
- tigershark 3y agoI guess that you can thank the DEA for this specific case…
- username332211 3y agoWhat about European or Japanese scientists? And about Korean scientists not part of the original team? The last should also be able to get their hands on a sample provided by the original team and won't have to do reproduction attempts, right?
- tigershark 3y agoWho told you that they are not attempting the reproduction? Even US labs are attempting it, some of them explicitly in the open like the Argonne National Laboratory. Here you can find a non-comprehensive list of reproduction attempts: https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/claims-of-room-temperature-and-ambient-pressure-superconductor.1106083/page-11?post=94266395#post-94266395 https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/claims-of-room-tempe...
- username332211 3y agoOh, so there are finally Korean labs in that list! Last time there were 1 American, 1 Indian and 5 Chinese labs which I thought very weird. Hopefully the Korean labs can get an original sample.
- xdennis 3y agoThe Drug Enforcement Administration? What does that have to do with physics?
- manav 3y agogood not great.
- e63f67dd-065b 3y agoThe actual video is here: https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1pM4y1p7u5 https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1pM4y1p7u5 Short summary (not a physicist and consume most of my science in English, so may be slightly wrong): - The material is fragile, and hard to form into a regular shape - There's a weird drop in resistance around 230K; could be an artefact of the measurement process or instrument - On 1 Aug they found a sample with almost 0 resistance, which got them really excited and led to them searching for more - They tested 6 samples, only one of which exhibited zero resistance at below 110K Basically, results are inconclusive, but it's promising.
- crakenzak 3y agoJust FYI, the wikipedia page for LK-99 has a very useful tracking grid of replication attempts with sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LK-99 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LK-99
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- m3kw9 3y agoThis so far is saying this stuff isn’t room temp superconductor, but a high temp superconductor which means the paper is mistitled and didn’t deserve all the hype
- whimsicalism 3y agoIncredibly poor showing on HN around these issues. Lay people vastly over estimate their ability to reason/comment on physics issues.