Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I'm not super interested in watching Joe Rogan and RFK, is there a particular bit where they talk about bikes?
Is it RFKs voice? I find it a little difficult to listen to as well.
Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be
191–200 of 501 posts
Re: Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be
#192Raise your hand if you contacted Aldritch about the two pre-cursor materials :-)
This is an excellent summary and like Derek I have high hopes (but low expectations) that by the end of this week we'll see some tentative confirmation. This stuff isn't particularly hard (or expensive!) to make so that should really make for interesting news and some very fun products if it is proven out.
Re: Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be
#193I've been saying for years we are one "future technology" away from savings our asses from our world collapsing.
Here is hoping this is that breakthrough.
Re: Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't require the kind of equipment that you have to justify to accountants and run at full capacity. And while the reactants are things that I believe most labs won't have at hand, they are the kind of thing anybody can buy on the web to arrive this week. Whether people will stop what they are doing to verify it is literally a matter of people stopping what they are doing. University labs are usually quick on t…
One of the elements used here is phosphorus (P) which is regulated by the DEA in the United States, and can't just be purchased online
Probably ATF, not DEA. DEA regulates controlled substances. ATF regulates explosives.
Re: Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is made out of lead. Even if it is useful for transmission, the difficulty of working safely with lead in a factory may mean it is impractical. Or it make leach lead into the real world making it not safe to deploy. Lead is still routinely used in many applications today, either in metallic form, from ICE car batteries, to fishing or hunting gear, or as chemical compound in different kinds of glass. And the sa…
In particular, lead is still extremely common in radiation shielding, possibly because the drop in demand for other applications made it so cheap. Lead-lined drywall is the default approach for setting up a radiography, fluoroscopy or CT suite.
> possibly because the drop in demand for other applications made it so cheap
Maybe a little bit. But I think it is more that it is a material with heavy atomic nuclei and high density, and thus effective at blocking radiation. And it is also relatively cheap.
Re: Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If it super conducts, but it isn't useful in the real world, then we will be waiting for theory to - hopefully - give us some insight into how to improve things to useful. This only can carry a small amount of current. Thank you for this. > This is made out of lead. Even if it is useful for transmission, the difficulty of working safely with lead in a factory may mean it is impractical. Have you been to a hardware…
[flagged]
Nah. We have a reasonable understanding of fluids. It's just that the two things we say as simple explanations (the plane pushes air downwards causing an equal and opposite reaction to push the plane up; faster flow on top of the wing "sucks the plane upwards") are both only partial truths.
Sometimes you get arguments between partisans for each of these two simplified explanations, but really both are bogus.
Re: Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be
#197This 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…
> sudden resistivity changes at a critical temperature (bizarrely high though that is in this case)
How high? Just wondering if it might eventually be possible to use it in some power/clocking distribution layers of a semiconductor chip without bulky cooling.
Re: Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Has there been any commentary on that? German, but nevertheless: http://blog.fefe.de/?ts=9a3f8740 "I work in the field [...] we don't believe a word of this. [...] The data set in Fig. 4(b) is also a treat. It is VERY unusual when the heat capacity decreases again at high temperatures. This can happen at low temperatures, but not at high temperatures. [...] My personal assumption is that the authors measured an ins…
Nice find.
Not really, it’s just more speculation about the experiment. It’s worth as much as anyone else’s salt about the matter.
Re: Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be
#199Lots of people are saying there should be a quick turnaround time here for trying the replication. I wonder how much it would cost to try and replicate this, in materials, labor costs, and vacuum furnace time/costs. My naive thought is that that labs in general aren't just going to drop everything to try an replicate every instance of someone declaring they've discovered room temperature superconductivity. Seems more…
From what I recall of the original paper, 1-2 hours of actual labor with equipment and reagents many labs already have on hand--although it required 24-48hours in the furnace at each step which is the only reason for the delay and why the article author mentions we should see results tomorrow. So, trivial enough most people in similar labs already spent more time discussing the implications than actual labor/investme…
If it really is as easy as you say then surely every YouTuber with a metal furnace dropped everything to make that 100M view video.
Re: Superconductor news: What’s claimed, and how strong the evidence seems to be
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Nah. We have a reasonable understanding of fluids. It's just that the two things we say as simple explanations (the plane pushes air downwards causing an equal and opposite reaction to push the plane up; faster flow on top of the wing "sucks the plane upwards") are both only partial truths. Sometimes you get arguments between partisans for each of these two simplified explanations, but really both are bogus.
I’ve never understood how this battle could possibly persist, considering that planes can fly upside-down. The fact that Bernoulli’s Principle creates a low-pressure zone on the top of the aerofoil just gives you laminar flow at higher angles of attack.
It really isn’t that mysterious, unless you insist that only a single physical law is allowed to come into play.