3 ms·
The reason I don't think this is the case is that they have literally been working on this thing for a quarter of a century. While the people involved are not f
by jjallen 3y ago
The reason I don't think this is the case is that they have literally been working on this thing for a quarter of a century. While the people involved are not full on superconductor experts, they are also not super stupid and realize that their claim is a huge one.
How could you work on something for years and years and years, make a claim that it is the first room temperature SC and be _totally_ wrong about it. Even if they only worked on it for ten years, I don't think they are totally wrong.
I think what has happened is that they rushed to publish the paper and the reason it has not been replicated is that they don't even know how to reliably make the material yet. This is why the methods to make it are not in the paper -- because they don't even know how to do it.
Remember they were forced to publish this paper by a rogue former employee.
- blharr 3y agoBeing wrong in such a complicated field is always possible. Your personal experience and expertise can only go so far.
- verisimi 3y agoCan you really be working with a material for a quarter of a century AND not know how to make the material?
- kaba0 3y agoWhile I have no expertise in material science, it is definitely not some minecraft crafting - depending on the procedure, you may get only few percents of useful output that you may have no way to further purify. At least for chemistry, it is often a completely different paper that introduces an efficient way for actually mass-producing the given chemical. The first one is more like a proof of concept throwaway code, if we want an analogy.