461–470 of 906 posts
Guys, even if everything in this paper is true, the material as it is might have limited applications. From what they show, the critical field and critical current seem very low. 2500 Oe is like 0.25 Tesla. Even REBCO at 77K is >1T. And 2500 Oe is not even at critical temperature but much lower. From skimming through the article I couldn't find the sample size of the current measurement to get the critical current de…
I don't have any proof of this other than "vibes", but I read through the Korean website for their research lab and I'm getting major scam vibes: https://qcentre.co.kr/ Hard to put it into words, but there's something that just doesn't feel right--I'd be very skeptical of these results.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The actual picture of (poor) levitation in the paper you linked is pretty compelling. This isn’t a complex, noisy measurement showing something that’s related to superconductivity — this is a magnet and a supposed superconductor repelling each other. As far as I know, that’s possible with permanent magnets (and it would be weird, but not impossible, if the group instead synthesized a novel ferromagnet and didn’t noti…
>As far as I know, that’s possible with permanent magnets (and it would be weird, but not impossible, if the group instead synthesized a novel ferromagnet and didn’t notice) As far as I know a stable arrangement of permanent magnets levitating is impossible without a baring surface to keep them aligned. (i.e. free floating levitation is not possible without active control)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03048...
And many others besides. Halbach arrays are fascinating.
Everyone is so excited, and it is exciting, but I guess I don't see how this will "change the world". It doesn't seem applicable for transmission lines (it's brittle and cannot conduct large amounts of current), which is what I would imagine would be the biggest world changing thing. Maybe it could make maglev trains a more common reality? But we seem to have trouble building trains of any sort. If you could use the…
We don't know what we will know in the future, or else we would already know it.
Everyone is so excited, and it is exciting, but I guess I don't see how this will "change the world". It doesn't seem applicable for transmission lines (it's brittle and cannot conduct large amounts of current), which is what I would imagine would be the biggest world changing thing. Maybe it could make maglev trains a more common reality? But we seem to have trouble building trains of any sort. If you could use the…
Even this paper doesn't claim to have a particularly good superconductor as far as overall performance is concerned. It's not particularly close to the state of the art in critical field or current. But if it does turn out that their hypothesis claiming that the internal stress of the material allows it to bypass the current need for extremely high pressures / low temperatures, then perhaps there can be new materials developed that are better superconductors while still overcoming the current limitations presented by REBCOs and other leading superconductors. Also, that's not even mentioning that LK-99 has no particularly exotic materials. REBCOs rely on rare earth elements like Yttrium, but this just uses lead, copper, and phosphorus.
Everyone is so excited, and it is exciting, but I guess I don't see how this will "change the world". It doesn't seem applicable for transmission lines (it's brittle and cannot conduct large amounts of current), which is what I would imagine would be the biggest world changing thing. Maybe it could make maglev trains a more common reality? But we seem to have trouble building trains of any sort. If you could use the…
Superconducting computing is a big one - even if we stick to classical computers (i.e. not quantum computers), there are estimates that superconducting computers could be ~1000x more energy efficient than state-of-the-art semiconductor computers.
One of the authors in a related paper[1] is Hyun-Tak Kim. He has many publications in peer-reviewed journals[2]. One even has > 1500 citations[3]. I can't tell if there is a catch anywhere, this seems pretty legitimate. Also, unlike some previous claims that required sophisticated setup to reproduce, this seems dead simple. I think we will hear from other researchers very soon. 1. Superconductor Pb10-xCux(PO4)6O show…
Guys, even if everything in this paper is true, the material as it is might have limited applications. From what they show, the critical field and critical current seem very low. 2500 Oe is like 0.25 Tesla. Even REBCO at 77K is >1T. And 2500 Oe is not even at critical temperature but much lower. From skimming through the article I couldn't find the sample size of the current measurement to get the critical current de…
For some reason, there’s a contingent of people that think that by poking holes and pooh-poohing things, it gives them clout. It happens far too often in tech and I hate it. Look how often the post has “can’t” or “couldn’t”.
Instead of giving reasons why something sucks, how about being supportive and talking about why it’s awesome and what possibilities this opens up?
Guys, even if everything in this paper is true, the material as it is might have limited applications. From what they show, the critical field and critical current seem very low. 2500 Oe is like 0.25 Tesla. Even REBCO at 77K is >1T. And 2500 Oe is not even at critical temperature but much lower. From skimming through the article I couldn't find the sample size of the current measurement to get the critical current de…
It would be super cool, without being supercool
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are the failure modes for a superconductor MRI? Could it cause a resonance cascade?
I think "superconductor MRI" is redundant. The failure modes would mostly be the same as for the big ones: sucking in metal chairs if you're not careful.