3 ms·
From the article, superconductivity is already possible at "higher" temperatures (-200 Celsius). Why would 0 Celsius specifically make it "perpetual motion mach
by sysk 12y ago
From the article, superconductivity is already possible at "higher" temperatures (-200 Celsius). Why would 0 Celsius specifically make it "perpetual motion machine" like to you (in the sense of breaking some fundamental physical law)? If I recall correctly, 0 Celsius is not a very significant number apart for being the freezing point of water.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- corndoge 12y agoSTP[1] is 0 °C, 100 kPa. It's room temperature for science. Edit: The significance of this is that superconductors that operate at room temperature did not exist. If they come into existence, and mature, you can expect to see the development of technology which appears to be powered by magic. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_conditions_for_temperature_and_pressure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_conditions_for_temper...
- sysk 12y agoI understand that the practical implications of room temperature superconductivity would be huge. I simply found the "= perpetual motion machine" part strange given that such machines are known to be impossible while >0K superconductivity is known to be possible (and if superconductivity is impossible past a given temperature, it would be a surprising coincidence if that temperature happened to be 273.15K). Now that I read the comment again, the original commenter probably didn't mean it literally.
- Dylan16807 12y agoWell it is literally perpetual motion. And yes as far as exact temperature it's about qualitative differences, not quantitative ones. The first revolutionary hurdle is making it work on a desktop with a simple fridge-style cooling mechanism. The second hurdle is making it work around 40-50C, then your phone and almost everything can take advantage of it.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]