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

Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 316 posts

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#121

Post by throwaway2037 »

m463 wrote: post #70
keyle wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Renegade Researcher" is not something I thought could be a thing!

I believe the saying about academia is: "Competition in academia is so vicious because the stakes are so small." think about this one though... wonder what the real story is? I remember reading about the story of the transistor and the hijinks by shockley: "Bardeen and Brattain demonstrated the transistor device to Bell Lab officials Dec. 23, 1947. Shockley was reported to have called it "a magnificent Christmas pres…

Nice reference. It's called "Sayre's law". Read more here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayre%27s_law

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#122

Post by KiwiJohnno »

robinduckett wrote: post #107
hutzlibu wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it would be reliable working at milliamps, I am sure it can be put to practical use in my sci fi scenarios eventually (1000 cables with 1 milliamps each should add up to 1 amp?). Of course, unless it all just is a quirky side effect, that can never be put to practical use.

It’s a ceramic so hard to make wires from

Regular YBCO "high temp" superconductor (that needs liquid nitrogen) is also a ceramic.

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#125

Post by imtringued »

tdehnel wrote: post #63
huijzer wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1) it takes a undergrad to make and measure a superconductor by a Nobel laureate to explain it. Another example of Taleb’s idea that experimentation comes first and theories second. Universities pretend that it’s the other way around but apart from an Einstein it’s usually not.

Not possible. Theory comes first. Scientists need a theory first to know which experiments to do. Any interesting experimental results are interesting precisely because they do not conform to the existing theories. Edit: here's a decent writeup to show what I mean https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory-ladenness

You are assuming that we have thought of all theories that an experiment can confirm, before conducting the experiment. Considering the large search space, that would be quite surprising.

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#126

Post by _0ffh »

dorchadas wrote: post #32
admissionsguy wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know what Kwon actually wants out of all of this stunt He may be just a grifter. Or he may have played a key role in the discovery but was going to be put as the 6th author (at best) in the joint paper. If so, he has already gained much more recognition than he would have otherwise.

I feel it's pretty clear he's aiming for the Nobel if it's true. It can only be split three ways, after all.

Yeah, but that is quite amateurish. Just having the paper out first does not establish priority for the Nobel. What you need is the first paper with solid proof. It has happened more than once before that the guys with the second or third paper won the Nobel because the earlier paper was too weak.

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#127

Post by tdehnel »

robinduckett wrote: post #74
tdehnel wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not possible. Theory comes first. Scientists need a theory first to know which experiments to do. Any interesting experimental results are interesting precisely because they do not conform to the existing theories. Edit: here's a decent writeup to show what I mean https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory-ladenness

So before Isaac Newton, apples would float up off the tree when they fell?

The pre-existing theory Newton needed was “things move when other things act on them.” Without that, the observation would be meaningless.

Seeing the apple fall told Newton “some unseen force is acting on the apple.”

Incidentally, this was wrong. There is no “force”, only a warping of space time.

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#128

Post by ProtoAES256 »

saberdancer wrote: post #31
est wrote: post #23

https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV14p4y1V7kS/ Latest update: the diamagnetism has been confirmed from a tiny LK-99 replica sample. The Author posted: > Under the guidance of Professor Haixin Chang, postdoctor Hao Wu and PhD student Li Yang from the School of Materials Science and Technology of Huazhong University of Science and Technology successfully for the first time verified the LK-99 crystal that can be magnetica…

https://targum.video/v/2023/8/1/2534a4408ccce9c13a811e94f16d... Targum translation. From the comments and video it seems he claims levitation of a micron sized particle. Not sure if it is fake or not.

He repeatedly stated that the sample stands up(become straight) when the object is nearing it, and drop down when its far. The same applies for the negative polarity(same behaviour on N/S). Source: Native Mandarin speaker.

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#129

Post by tdehnel »

sdenton4 wrote: post #77
tdehnel wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not possible. Theory comes first. Scientists need a theory first to know which experiments to do. Any interesting experimental results are interesting precisely because they do not conform to the existing theories. Edit: here's a decent writeup to show what I mean https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory-ladenness

Hope the air's good in the tower... Good science has often proceeded from 'weird' observations, leading to experiments trying to isolate the weirdness. The weird is necessarily outside the zone of existing theory, and requires experimentation to recreate the effect reliably and quantifiably. Once that's done, you can iterate on conjectures and experiments to try to get to the bottom of what's going on. In reality, I…

To consider an observation “weird” you need a theory about what a normal observation looks like.

Additionally, all observations require baked in theories about the observation being accurate.

Btw, I didn’t appreciate your insulting first sentence.

Edit: here's a decent writeup to show what I mean https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory-ladenness

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#130

Post by maho »

sanxiyn wrote: post #35
brunooliv wrote: post #12

What are the implications in general of room temperature superconductors? I just know that they needed typically ultra low temperatures right? But what would be the practical implications?

Cooler chips. Chips heat due to resistance, and superconductors have zero resistance (by definition). I suspect this is the company's intended application. The following quote from their patent is very suggestive if you know about semiconductor manufacturing. > In addition, various energy sources used for deposition are not limited to chemical vapor deposition (CVD) using heat, but atomic layer deposition (ALD), sput…

Note that the resistance of superconductors is 0 only for DC currents. The AC resistance is not 0 and typically gets larger for higher frequencies!
Post reply on HN