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

LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 361 posts

Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K

#221

Post by throwanem »

carabiner wrote: post #193
d1str0 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming they discovered a low cost, room temperature, room pressure, superconductor, there are many HUGE technological advancements that can be made that would impact your daily life. Possibilities include improved battery longevity in all devices(probably in an order of magnitude), low friction transport improvements (ie. cheaper high speed rail), and faster and higher bandwidth wired connections. https://en.wikipe…

No I mean why is this "huge" when each time that's happened it's been deflated within 12 hours: - initial LK-99 paper upload on Arxiv: HUGE, then it's probably nothing until replication (waiting) - DFT release: HUGE, then probably nothing (DFT has poor predictive power) - 110K SC: HUGE, then ... ? In every case it's been the laymen saying HUGE, then the experts saying it's probably insignificant. Then the laymen sett…

Derek Lowe is a layman? I grant his specialism doesn't precisely match the field, but it's easily close enough I'd expect him to be able to smell bullshit on this if there was any, and his latest "In the Pipeline" suggests much more the scent of roses.

Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K

#222

Post by staunton »

crazygringo wrote: post #216
modeless wrote: post #121

To me this is encouraging. 110K is really high! It's higher than YBCO which is what they make commercial "high temperature" superconducting tape out of. IMO if this is legit (I have no way of judging the source) then this is the first good third party evidence that the original researchers are not just doing some kind of fraud. A total fraud wouldn't have actually discovered a novel high-temperature, but not room tem…

> I'm surprised the prediction markets don't seem to be reacting. Where can we look at prediction markets on this? For those of us who aren't familiar. I'm very curious -- because unlike sports scores or political elections, this seems like such a hard thing to define a prediction market around, because what is the exact threshold you're defining and what is the threshold of proof of that thing and on what date is th…

Metaculus has some markets on LK-99, for example

Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K

#223

Post by asdfman123 »

crazygringo wrote: post #216
modeless wrote: post #121

To me this is encouraging. 110K is really high! It's higher than YBCO which is what they make commercial "high temperature" superconducting tape out of. IMO if this is legit (I have no way of judging the source) then this is the first good third party evidence that the original researchers are not just doing some kind of fraud. A total fraud wouldn't have actually discovered a novel high-temperature, but not room tem…

> I'm surprised the prediction markets don't seem to be reacting. Where can we look at prediction markets on this? For those of us who aren't familiar. I'm very curious -- because unlike sports scores or political elections, this seems like such a hard thing to define a prediction market around, because what is the exact threshold you're defining and what is the threshold of proof of that thing and on what date is th…

Those rules are defined in the actual bet. I think it was "three replications of room temperature superconductivity by X date" or something like that.

I looked closely because I very much wanted to bet tens of thousands of dollars on "no", but I couldn't because I'm in the US. The two outcomes would be I'd make a lot of money or humanity would make the biggest breakthrough in generations.

Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K

#224

Post by tigershark »

valine wrote: post #16
thecopy wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the Resistance-Temperature graph ( https://twitter.com/Lipez400/status/1686793608626663441/phot... ) the resistance starts increasing from 110K

What’s the explanation for the sudden drop between 230K and 250K? It’s not dropping to zero but something is happening there.

It was exactly one of the point that were criticised in the original paper. I think that the supposed Reddit “expert” that ridiculed it should really be shamed to apologise to the authors. And together with him a lot of other people in various other places on the net.

Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K

#225

Post by klimt »

klimt wrote: post #206

This is my first comment on this material, because I've been skeptical, but this result shouldn't be understated. It basically confirms the existence of a new family of high-temperature superconductors, the first of its kind since the cuprates in 1986. And for context, in the initial paper on the cuprates the critical temperature was measured to be 36 K. By synthesising other members of the cuprate family and optimis…

The jump at 250K looks like bad contacts to me that fixed themselves during cooldown. Rewiring the sample and remeasuring should get rid of it. The field dependence is indeed a bit weird. One would expect the critical temperature to reduce with increasing magnetic field (magnetic field weakens superconductivity), but here you don't see that. It's expected that the superconductivity is very strong for such a high critical temperature and the fields applied are not strong enough, but with better measurements you should still see a small reduction in the critical temperature.

Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K

#226

Post by asdfman123 »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #188
spandrew wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The initial claim was speculated to be room temp and ambient pressure superconduction. 110K is a far cry from that.

Looks like 110K still puts this in the top 5 highest temp known superconductors and it only takes a couple of days to produce out of the blue. So even if that's all it sounds like an important discovery.

110K actually makes me excited as someone with a physics background. It seems more realistic, and there's always the possibility of finding full room temp later, too.

Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K

#227

Post by username332211 »

tigershark wrote: post #218
coryfklein wrote: post #210

Why are all these materials confirmations coming from Chinese speaking scientists? Do scientists in the US not do materials science so much?

I guess that you can thank the DEA for this specific case…

What about European or Japanese scientists? And about Korean scientists not part of the original team?

The last should also be able to get their hands on a sample provided by the original team and won't have to do reproduction attempts, right?

Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K

#228

Post by klimt »

legulere wrote: post #128

I'm curious why the resistance is dropping by a lot in figure 3 a) between around 230 and 260 K

The jump looks like bad contacts to me. The wires you attach undergo stress during the cooldown, and such artefacts can happen with small samples. Rewiring the sample should get rid of it.

Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K

#229

Post by tshaddox »

asdfman123 wrote: post #223
crazygringo wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm surprised the prediction markets don't seem to be reacting. Where can we look at prediction markets on this? For those of us who aren't familiar. I'm very curious -- because unlike sports scores or political elections, this seems like such a hard thing to define a prediction market around, because what is the exact threshold you're defining and what is the threshold of proof of that thing and on what date is th…

Those rules are defined in the actual bet. I think it was "three replications of room temperature superconductivity by X date" or something like that. I looked closely because I very much wanted to bet tens of thousands of dollars on "no", but I couldn't because I'm in the US. The two outcomes would be I'd make a lot of money or humanity would make the biggest breakthrough in generations.

> I think it was "three replications of room temperature superconductivity by X date" or something like that.

That doesn’t sound like a sufficient market resolution condition. Surely it would need to be something like “declared by specific Party X to be a room-temperature superconductor” where Party X is sufficiently trusted by all market participants.

Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K

#230

Post by asdfman123 »

ramesh31 wrote: post #163
modeless wrote: post #121

To me this is encouraging. 110K is really high! It's higher than YBCO which is what they make commercial "high temperature" superconducting tape out of. IMO if this is legit (I have no way of judging the source) then this is the first good third party evidence that the original researchers are not just doing some kind of fraud. A total fraud wouldn't have actually discovered a novel high-temperature, but not room tem…

>At worst it seems to me like they discovered a cool new superconductor that may have commercial applications. At best, they may have a variant of this material that really is a room temperature superconductor. Either way, there is an important scientific discovery here. I feel like this whole thing is going to be graphene all over again. A massive initial hype around "world changing tech" that ends up being very dif…

I think the rule of thumb, though, is that most things don't turn out to be viable, and then most viable things are only barely useful due to constraints. But occasionally they DO occasionally come up with world-changing technology.

Dark example, but the atomic bomb for instance was a dramatic improvement in our capacity to destroy things: night and day difference.

Post reply on HN