Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 501 posts

Re: Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be

#71

Post by mrandish »

Exuma wrote: post #55

So where do we stay up to date with whether it's valid or not.

TFA notes that it should be quick to replicate and it's definitely gotten enough attention. If the right lab has the needed materials readily available, I expect we'll start seeing credible people posting excited tweets implying initial confirmation as soon as Friday afternoon/evening (assuming it replicates on the first go). If we don't see anything by the end of next week I'd guess that either it's not replicating or, at minimum, it's more finicky than it first appears.

Re: Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be

#72

Post by krastanov »

swader999 wrote: post #27
orblivion wrote: post #18

So what kinds of cool stuff could be built with a room temperature superconductor? Better levitating trains?

Nuclear fusion much easier, quantum computing, lossless electricity transmission, insane batteries. Dirt cheap MRIs, Basically welcome to the Jetsons. Much easier to mitigate climate change to the point where we can just deal with it.

Room temperature superconductivity does not help with quantum computing. The transmons or atoms or ions need to be cold so that they do not get "flipped", not because of the need for superconductors.

Re: Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be

#74

Post by scarmig »

hovering_nox wrote: post #70
jonplackett wrote: post #11

If this material does just what they say it does, what would it revolutionise? Or as the article talks about, is this just a pointer at other possibilities that would be the real game changers?

Here's a few from the top of my head: - A global power net. No solar power during the night? Just produce it on the other side of the planet. - A superconducting computer. Less resistance when pushing bits around = 500x less power consumption. - A Superconducting magnetic battery. Store power indefinitely with high efficiency.

Most power loss in a computer comes from MOSFETs, not resistive loss. Which isn't to say that RTP superconductors wouldn't open up wild new possibilities.

ETA: wrong

Re: Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be

#75

Post by RC_ITR »

jonplackett wrote: post #11

If this material does just what they say it does, what would it revolutionise? Or as the article talks about, is this just a pointer at other possibilities that would be the real game changers?

A lot of people are talking about very cool practical use cases, but I'm here just thinking 'all of our trains could float, wouldn't that be neat?' [0]

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCMaglev

Re: Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be

#76

Post by nemo44x »

algo_trader wrote: post #8

> (as well as an obvious instant Nobel prize). South Korea has been waiting for a (real, STEM) Nobel prize for decades. These guys will be worshipped as gods if they deliver

> These guys will be worshipped as gods if they deliver

And rightfully so. Humanity is moved by great people and these would be great people. We would build monuments to them to symbolize their importance.

Re: Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be

#78

Post by local_issues »

akjssdk wrote: post #54
mmastrac wrote: post #12

This is an extremely useful summarization of the original paper. > The authors believe that the modified/strained structure of their material creates a large number of “quantum wells” between particular lead atoms and the adjacent oxygens of the phosphate groups bound to them, in effect making a two-dimensional “electron gas”. They propose that electron tunneling between these quantum wells, which are between 3.7 and…

I don't think the actual proposed superconductivity mechanism is the relevant part of this paper. It is much easier to prove that this is superconducting than to prove why. And in a sense it is a bit less relevant. Although developing a working theory for room temperature is also probably worth a Nobel prize, so I am willing to bet some theorists are also running to their blackboards as we speak.

Ding ding ding! We still don't know how bikes work, we have a pretty good but incomplete model for lift on airplanes, and no one has the faintest why Tylenol works.

We should figure that out! But we can definitely keep using all the applications until then. (Except for Tylenol, we keep learning how bad that stuff is)

EDIT: It won't let me post more, so here's the answers to responses.

For sure!

https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/science-of-cycling-still-mys...

http://www3.eng.cam.ac.uk/~hemh1/gyrobike.htm

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22730370-400-how-does...

It's a fun little fact. We know a ton about BUILDING bikes, which is a more useful tool anyway

Re: Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be

#79

Post by p_l »

NotYourLawyer wrote: post #51
swader999 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nuclear fusion much easier, quantum computing, lossless electricity transmission, insane batteries. Dirt cheap MRIs, Basically welcome to the Jetsons. Much easier to mitigate climate change to the point where we can just deal with it.

This would only solve one of the more minor problems with fusion. And what would it do for batteries?

Battery grid storage would be dead in the water, as we already use Superconducting Magnetic Energy Storage for grid stability and ultra-clean power in certain industries - except suddenly a huge chunk of issues involved in making large power SMES will disappear.

They won't replace portable batteries soon, but room temperature superconducting will greatly increase efficiency in all areas of electricity, including higher power motors (the efficiency gains are good enough that superconducting motors and generators have been attempted despite needing supercooling). Also, a simple SMES could easily buffer future BEV truck charging station despite projected 1MW connection per charging truck.

Post reply on HN