4 ms·
I think you are missing the point: a typical ohmmeter would have metal probes, so with a superconductor you would just be measuring the resistance of those prob
by chmod600 3y ago
I think you are missing the point: a typical ohmmeter would have metal probes, so with a superconductor you would just be measuring the resistance of those probes. Any attempt to overcome that problem probably introduces a lot of chances for error or noise, or require some huge sample of the superconductor.
- spiderfarmer 3y agoZero resistance would be hard to proof this way, but why can't you compare measurements of LK99 with known conductors?
- foven 3y agoYou absolutely can, and as you can see in this paper it is absolutely do-able to measure the resistance of these materials. They measure an insulator with something on the order of 10^6 ohm m. For reference, copper has a resistivity of ~ 10^(-8) ohm m, so there are about 14 orders of magnitude of difference. This does make the contact resistance pretty negligible in this case too.
- 1970-01-01 3y agoI have the same thoughts. I think it's because they are not EEs and want to play with the material. A sensing resistor is trivial. https://www.digikey.com/en/articles/fundamentals-of-current-measurement-part-1-current-sense-resistors https://www.digikey.com/en/articles/fundamentals-of-current-...