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

LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor

forums.spacebattles.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 659 posts

Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor

#531

Post by willis936 »

danbruc wrote: post #318

As I learned from the Dave's EEVBlog video [1], their demonstration video [2] says in the description that the material was deposited onto a copper plate which could probably explain the interaction with the magnet. And as I just noticed, the description has since been changed and now says »The sample was thermally deposited on a enriched uranium 235 plate.« EDIT: Correction, I got the link to the video saying deposi…

"Their demonstration video" makes it sound like there is only one.

No smug takedowns of the video that made the rounds first:

https://sciencecast.org/casts/suc384jly50n

The most people have been able to say is "it might be the most diamagnetic material anyone has ever seen by a remarkable amount".

Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor

#532

Post by jiggawatts »

dom96 wrote: post #513

I feel like I am out of the loop on this one. But everything I am seeing makes me skeptical, can anyone explain why I should be excited about this being anything more than just a fake paper?

Multiple authors instead of a single quack. Former leader (now sadly deceased) was a respected superconducting material researcher. They ran the essential tests, albeit not very well. They were at it for years in silence, and it was only after this current material's synthesis that they were tripping over each other to publish, with the apparent firm belief that they were onto a Nobel Prize level discovery. The theory they proposed -- while perhaps wrong -- also makes intuitive sense.

Cold fusion had many of those elements also, but the difference is that superconductivity is easier to verify.

Many people like the overall concept of using doped crystals to produce compressed or stretched lattices, which seem to be one of the enablers for superconductivity.

Compare with cold fusion, where there was no reasonable theory to explain how the palladium lattice would bring hydrogen nuclei close together.

Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor

#533

Post by Vicinity9635 »

FriedPickles wrote: post #515

Everybody's talking about reproducing the material which is great, but will take time. Why don't the authors supply their existing material to an independent lab for earlier confirmation?

Devil's advocate: If the existing material and the process to make it can't be replicated, who really cares? Well, aside from the people who might deserve a Nobel. The rest of the world doesn't because we can't all share it like some kind of magical medallion.

Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor

#534

Post by [deleted] »

psychphysic wrote: post #519
r0m4n0 wrote: post #491

I’m just curious as a layman, why aren’t the paper authors helping in this race whatsoever? It seems a lot of folks are guessing on the recipe. I haven’t seen any communication from the LK from LK99. Seems like radio silence

If they have this unicorn superconducter. Then they have it next week, and next year. And it's patented. There's no rush for them. If they are faking, then there's still no rush.

[deleted]

Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor

#535

Post by jiggawatts »

psychphysic wrote: post #523
WaffleIronMaker wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Highlighting this tweet in particular: > Here's a chunk of pyrolytic graphite on the same magnet with the same stick. Even with less density and more surface normal to field.... It doesn't lift off. If it's diamagnetism it's a fucking absurdly strong one https://twitter.com/iris_IGB/status/1685804254718459904 Her findings, and suggestions of manufacturing process improvements, are very interesting.

Seems silly to compare to that absolute chunk of pyrplytic graphite. Shouldn't it be a similar size spec?

AFAIK the chunk will levitate irrespective of size up to some maximum. Diamagnetism is a property of the material, not the shape.

Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor

#537

Post by cthalupa »

Vicinity9635 wrote: post #533
FriedPickles wrote: post #515

Everybody's talking about reproducing the material which is great, but will take time. Why don't the authors supply their existing material to an independent lab for earlier confirmation?

Devil's advocate: If the existing material and the process to make it can't be replicated, who really cares? Well, aside from the people who might deserve a Nobel. The rest of the world doesn't because we can't all share it like some kind of magical medallion.

I'm on the "Probably a nothingburger" side of things but just getting confirmation that it is possible and some understanding of what the process involved is is a massive jump for science.

If it's actually superconducting we've got a wide variety of ways to inspect what LK99 actually is that will shed a whole lot of light on how to create more of it, or more of a similar superconductor. It'll be one of the most important scientific achievements in our lifetimes regardless of whether or not it can be replicated with the process in the paper.

Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor

#538

Post by euazOn »

danbruc wrote: post #520
godelski wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can someone explain why you'd use the 235 isotope? I know there are different magnetic properties but it still seems an odd choice to use something that is highly controlled, difficult to produce, and rather dangerous. It seems like there would be far better choices unless you absolutely need that mass or they very weak valance electrons. And those videos being identical is also suspicious. [2] Uploaded 2 days ago, c…

I just assumed the uranium one is a joke created after this story started by some third party and made to look like the original one, so I also did not look any deeper. But the channel being created in 2012 then makes no sense. Someone just sitting on that channel name? Or can you rename a YouTube channel?

Yes you can rename, probably just trolling.

Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor

#539

Post by CoastalCoder »

psychphysic wrote: post #524
FriedPickles wrote: post #515

Everybody's talking about reproducing the material which is great, but will take time. Why don't the authors supply their existing material to an independent lab for earlier confirmation?

If they really believe they have the only sample they won't let it out of their sight most likely. It'll be superconducting tomorrow if it's really superconducting today.

Is that necessarily true?

I'm 200% not a physicist, but it is possible that during transit, minor bumps / temperature changes / ionizing radiation / oscillating E-M fields could screw up the material in a way that matters?

Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor

#540

Post by WalterBright »

galangalalgol wrote: post #457
aydyn wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So they have a batch of the material as proof, but no idea how to exactly reproduce it? That would be a wild story if true.

Not that crazy. Steel was the same at first. Wild guess is that the dopant that creates wells doesn't always end up where it should. The paper that claimed superconductivity in layers of graphene at very particular angles also seems to be very sensitive. A similar one claimed graphene with alkanes was observed to superconduct. Perhapes whatever impure hydrocarbon they were using held the sheets at the perfect angle.…

Samurai sword making took what, a thousand years of trial and error? The forgers had no idea how making steel worked, they just found a way to make it work.
Post reply on HN