4 ms·

I think it comes down to a lack of knowledge. I was pretty skeptical of the original claim, since RT has been a goal for a long time and no one has achieved it

I think it comes down to a lack of knowledge. I was pretty skeptical of the original claim, since RT has been a goal for a long time and no one has achieved it . So far all the repro attempts I have seen mention temps around 100K. I don't follow SC so 100k sounds "really cold" to me. It matches with my shallow understanding of SC "it is really cold". Maybe that is really warm in SC land. Either way there hasn't been a near freezing repro so I have grown more skeptical of the original claim.

cthalupa 3y ago
100K is very cold. But if this result pans out, it's a very good thing for the possibility that LK99 really is an RTAPS. There are a lot of explanations as to why they might not see bulk superconductivity at room temp - impurities in the sample (or the impurities being the SC) being the big one. If LK99 is a superconductor at all, but not a RTAPS, it would be quite strange for the South Korean team to have made a mistake. It's quite difficult to accidentally cool something down to 100K, and if they were just getting false positives on their testing for superconductivity, it would be a massive coincidence that it happened to actually be one at 100K. We're also seeing a lot of videos that show strong diamagnetism - this doesn't mean it's a superconductor, but all superconductors are perfect diamagnets. We have some unverified videos that seem to show things beyond just diamagnetism, with the material being stable in suspension over a single magnet, which a regular diamagnetic material cannot do. These pieces of material are too small to have been cooled down to 100K and stay there for the duration shown, as well as no frost appearing, etc., which would be quite difficult at that temperature in an environment with any humidity. I think the bigger concern is around whether or not this is a valid result at all - the Real Deal scientists discussing it seem to have mixed thoughts there, particularly around the noise floor of the instrumentation equipment, etc. Some say that that doesn't matter, others say that it does, particularly since we don't see the kind of on/off drop you would in other superconductors, etc. At worst, this replication attempt's result is from a misunderstanding of how their equipment works in this condition. At best it provides evidence in favor of LK99 being an RTAPS.

cthalupa 3y ago

100K is very cold. But if this result pans out, it's a very good thing for the possibility that LK99 really is an RTAPS. There are a lot of explanations as to why they might not see bulk superconductivity at room temp - impurities in the sample (or the impurities being the SC) being the big one. If LK99 is a superconductor at all, but not a RTAPS, it would be quite strange for the South Korean team to have made a mistake. It's quite difficult to accidentally cool something down to 100K, and if they were just getting false positives on their testing for superconductivity, it would be a massive coincidence that it happened to actually be one at 100K. We're also seeing a lot of videos that show strong diamagnetism - this doesn't mean it's a superconductor, but all superconductors are perfect diamagnets. We have some unverified videos that seem to show things beyond just diamagnetism, with the material being stable in suspension over a single magnet, which a regular diamagnetic material cannot do. These pieces of material are too small to have been cooled down to 100K and stay there for the duration shown, as well as no frost appearing, etc., which would be quite difficult at that temperature in an environment with any humidity. I think the bigger concern is around whether or not this is a valid result at all - the Real Deal scientists discussing it seem to have mixed thoughts there, particularly around the noise floor of the instrumentation equipment, etc. Some say that that doesn't matter, others say that it does, particularly since we don't see the kind of on/off drop you would in other superconductors, etc. At worst, this replication attempt's result is from a misunderstanding of how their equipment works in this condition. At best it provides evidence in favor of LK99 being an RTAPS.