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

411–420 of 501 posts

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

#411

Post by throwawaymaths »

ethn wrote: post #275
akjssdk wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They made a synthetic a priori prediction proven by experiment. In science, that's the strongest type of claim.

The strongest type of claim is when an a priori claim is called absurd, someone goes to make observations to disprove it and comes back convinced of your theory.

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

#412

Post by MVissers »

intrasight wrote: post #265
local_issues wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/new…

We don't know how photosynthesis works but we know a ton about GROWING things. And life as we know it depends on photosynthesis.

I thought we had a pretty good understanding of this up until the molecular and electron level.

Am I missing something?

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

#413

Post by zarzavat »

foven wrote: post #152
carabiner wrote: post #92

Researcher on reddit thinks it's probably spurious measurement artifacts, not superconductivity: > I would say they are not faking it, but instead they just don’t understand what they are looking at. Based on what measurements they are doing, as well as how they are doing them, they do not have a good understanding of the standard processes to characterise a superconductor. Also, based on their analysis/discussion, t…

Agreed, this looks bogus. Some suspicious points: In the first paper, they claim to measure zero resistance (on a scale of microvolts), but are very careful not to show full RvT curves - in the second paper, we can still see significant changes below Tc where they include more complete curves. How can the resistance change significantly in the superconducting (zero resistance) state? We can actually see significant n…

> if you just made a groundbreaking discovery like this, wouldn't you care?

Hell no! If I had made a discovery of similar magnitude I would have done exactly what they’ve done: push out a rough preprint ASAP to reserve my Nobel prize, then take a deep breath, relax and take my time dotting ‘i’s and crossing ‘t’s for the real paper in Nature.

That doesn’t mean they’re correct, but there’s nothing inherently suspicious about the way this has unfolded.

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

#414

Post by nemo44x »

fh973 wrote: post #343
distortionfield wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, it’s just more speculation about the experiment. It’s worth as much as anyone else’s salt about the matter.

It's from a guy of the Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research.

He sounds rather bitter and arrogant. He basically just called them idiots. As if none of the researchers would have noticed the measurement error. Perhaps he’s right - we’ll know in a few days I assume. I do hope they are right though not only because it would be a huge leap but also because I’d love to see this guys reaction.

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

#415

Post by MVissers »

RyanAdamas wrote: post #404

What if the team itself did create LK-99 that is a superconductor, but they aren't able to reproduce it and only have the sample left that works. Hence, they aren't able to make more of it to prove their success, but rather decided to release the paper and method so that others can try to reproduce it. Given the amount of interest, they could put hundreds of labs to work trying to recreate what they themselves can't,…

The most likely explanation based on the authors in the two articles is infighting, where one researcher decides to publish an uncomplete manuscript with his name as the third author.

He’s omitted from the second author.

I do believe they believe they have something nobel-prize worthy.

They offered to help with replication in other labs, which is a good sign.

Could still be measurement error, we just need to wait until it gets replicated.

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

#416

Post by SkyBelow »

doctorwho42 wrote: post #315
BizarroLand wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what learning the specific system by which bikes are balanced would teach us about the world or human beings? It's such a banal thing to be so fascinating.

It's the reason I got a degree in physics, if you have good professors - discussions like this cause you to break down the problem quite quickly in your head in a working model. Think force diagrams, but with a ton more math backing it up. I actually find the ice skate a better example than a bike. We have all the physics solved for bikes, it's a complicated system but so is everything in motion. Hence we assume a sp…

>We have all the physics solved for bikes, it's a complicated system but so is everything in motion. Hence we assume a spherical cow for the sake of the problem.

This depends upon the question one is trying to answer. If one is trying to create a bicycle that can self balance, that involves considering different factors compared to trying to determine why certain injuries result in a person losing the ability to balance on a bicycle while others do not. Is the focus the bicycle or the human?

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

#417

Post by stu255 »

doctorwho42 wrote: post #316
burtonator wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want ONE breakthrough like this in my lifetime. Something completely game changing.

Live to see SPARC turn on, there are some pretty smart people with models actually showing it breaking Q>3. Turns out the hardest part about productive fusion is the sustained high compression, and HTC tape really helps increase the compression by a large amount. (See their 20 Tesla test at the start of the pandemic)

Neutron damage is the real filter for fusion.

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

#418

Post by jeepers6 »

fbarred wrote: post #368

If this is real, what about this discovery that made it happen now? Is it a case that some technology is now available that unlocked this? Or is this trying something and seeing if it works? Could this discovery have been made 10-20 years ago?

COVID.

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

#419

Post by jeepers6 »

soligern wrote: post #48
floxy wrote: post #4

Lots 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…

I’m sure this is on Applied Science’s (a YouTube channel) radar. He recently went on a deep dive on making YBCO superconductors so it’s right up his alley.

https://nitter.net/BenKrasnow/status/1684431462643437569#m
Post reply on HN