Something incredible to note: it took around 5 years from when the transistor was first developed, to when it started to get integrated into consumer goods. LK-99 appears promising (and at the very least, may lead to other tangentially interesting discoveries), and if this is “it”, we could see commercial applications far sooner, especially if the synthesis is relatively straightforward. We couldn’t be on a more exci…
But that first contact point transistor, even if it degraded rapidly actually worked, the challenges were to package it properly and to make it smaller and more reliable. This stuff, assuming it is all true is more at the level of the first inkling that semiconductor diodes might be a thing. We still have to reach that transistor stage (which would mean we an expensive way to manufacture a small stretch of usable conductor, say a few cm). Then you can start thinking about high volume production in any desired length and commercialization. So from a strict materials science point of view there is still a ton of work to be done even if everything so far turns out to be true. There is a good chance that even if the material isn't superconducting in bulk small regions of it are (the chances of that are actually higher than that it is all superconducting) and there is still a good chance that they are simply mistaken.
But even if it is just superconducting grains smaller than a millimeter that would already be a massive discovery.
Man, I'm feeling stronger about LK-99 being it. This paper is theoretical and she finds that particular Cu substitutions onto specific Pb atomic sites are key to enabling a band structure that is usually linked to high Tc superconductors. What this means for the more practical minded is that the synthesis of superconducting LK-99 is not trivial and you need to make the appropriate substitutional alloy for this to wor…
If this could be simulated, can you help me understand why we couldn't have used simulation to find promising SC materials to investigate further earlier? Are there just too many permutations to investigate? It seems to my own naive self that if LK99 is the real deal, we mostly just got lucky finding it.
It's like NP problems. It's much harder to find a solution than to check if a candidate solution is valid.
And audio nerds everywhere are still lusting after germanium transistors to this day!
Hmm, superconducting inductors seem like an audiophile thing. Patent?
I've read that superconducting inductors are handy for making very high-Q filters (no parasitic resistance!) and are even used in places as prosaic as cellular towers (LN2-cooled microstrip structures).
It's funny to read all those grammatical mistakes in the abstract. They are probably just not native English speakers, but to me it sounds like they were frantically typing the paper as soon as they finally got results after a 20 hour lab marathon and way too much caffeine. :D
From her wikipedia page, Sinéad Griffin is an Irish physicist, so she seems a native English speaker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin%C3%A9ad_Griffin
In the original paper, so i assume the Lee-Kim ones
If this could be simulated, can you help me understand why we couldn't have used simulation to find promising SC materials to investigate further earlier? Are there just too many permutations to investigate? It seems to my own naive self that if LK99 is the real deal, we mostly just got lucky finding it.
Not an expert but it just happen that my lab is full of DFT folks so I heard a lot about those everyweek. As people above already answered the questions, I gonna talk some extras. 1. Computation cost is large. 1 compute task for a small scale ~100 atoms last about 3 days to 1 week on supercomputer. 2. Search space is hugh. For each composition you can have different atomic (or crystal) structure. And here we are talk…
This looks similar to the protein folding problem. Maybe an AlphaFold-like approach could work?
If this could be simulated, can you help me understand why we couldn't have used simulation to find promising SC materials to investigate further earlier? Are there just too many permutations to investigate? It seems to my own naive self that if LK99 is the real deal, we mostly just got lucky finding it.
Not an expert but it just happen that my lab is full of DFT folks so I heard a lot about those everyweek. As people above already answered the questions, I gonna talk some extras. 1. Computation cost is large. 1 compute task for a small scale ~100 atoms last about 3 days to 1 week on supercomputer. 2. Search space is hugh. For each composition you can have different atomic (or crystal) structure. And here we are talk…
Based on your descriptions, if LK99 is real, it sounds like there are closer to infinite than 0 of these materials. If there are so many combinations and somebody randomly stumbled on one, it makes sense that if the number of combinations is asymptotically infinite, that number of superconducting materials is very large.
Disclaimer: this is not my area of expertise in the slightest. If we have the ability to computationally determine these things without any experimental data needed, and we know we're looking for a specific band structure, wouldn't we just do an automated search of possible chemistries to find everything producing said band structure? Then just whittle down that list to the easiest to produce and most common material…
The parameter space for such a search even with a limited number candidate materials is immense. You'd need to guide the search somehow, that band structure might be the one, or it may not be... and every candidate that you flag will have to be synthesized which may not be all that easy.
Not an expert but it just happen that my lab is full of DFT folks so I heard a lot about those everyweek. As people above already answered the questions, I gonna talk some extras. 1. Computation cost is large. 1 compute task for a small scale ~100 atoms last about 3 days to 1 week on supercomputer. 2. Search space is hugh. For each composition you can have different atomic (or crystal) structure. And here we are talk…
This looks similar to the protein folding problem. Maybe an AlphaFold-like approach could work?
not soo similar really, but yes, alphafold-style generative models could help find realistic structures for a specific composition. However a) data is much worse (I would say so at least...), b) the clever tricks of alphafold centered around strings of aminoacid don't really apply to particles in a box... and c) search space might be even larger if you go to interestingly sized systems.
Also there's been some people arguing about the particles in a box situation for a loooong time and the most promising approach currently is diffusion.
Transmission losses aren't really a big problem for the grid. Cost, geopolitics, and resiliency matters more. I don't expect superconductors to change much here.
Transmission losses are a concern because they require building huge, very high-voltage structures. Superconductors could make transmission lines much more compact, sturdy, weatherproof, and less vulnerable to sabotage. You could run a thick armored cable instead of a set of open-air wires on tall towers.
Superconductors have a limit on the current they can carry before the superconducting phase breaks down. This might put similar limits on the voltages.
I agree that the nature of this is entirely different to transmission losses, but I don't expect 230V lines carrying tens of thousands of amps. This would probably require excessive amount of SC material.
The parameter space for such a search even with a limited number candidate materials is immense. You'd need to guide the search somehow, that band structure might be the one, or it may not be... and every candidate that you flag will have to be synthesized which may not be all that easy.
Sounds like a good challenge for (Open)AI
they are doing that likely.
Google is doing XC-functionals and Alphafold. Facebook catalysts.