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

301–310 of 361 posts

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

#301

Post by im3w1l »

QuadrupleA wrote: post #195

Can someone with field expertise explain the implications if this material were real / replicable / cheaply manufacturable? I see a lot of breathless excitement in these comments, as if free energy and perpetual motion machines are right around the corner, but from the few details I've delved into it's more like the electric grid might get 10% more efficient, MRIs might get a little cheaper, etc. What are the excitin…

For some reason what my brain keeps imagining is pulling out a drawer of a cabinet and it being perfectly silent and butter smooth because it uses mag-lev instead of wheels.

Mag-lev based bearings might be nice too.

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

#302

Post by Robotbeat »

gus_massa wrote: post #196
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.

Everyone agree. Oversimplifying, there are 3 categories to classify the initial team: 1) A bunch of clowns. 2) Interesting 3) Next Nobel prize winners I think they had a good reputation in the community, so the opinion of the hivemind was to discard 1. But there was still the possibility of a honest mistake or something weird. If this post is correct, other team confirmed that they discovered a new family of "high te…

I disagree. First, there have been many RESPECTED scientists who have thrown it all away for fraud. This happened RECENTLY with retracted papers on near-ambient superconductors so you should be wary. Just like cold fusion claims. So it’s possible at least one of these did, too. Another possibility is they fooled themselves (see Feynman’s quote) and maybe one of them faked data to help garner credit.

Secondly, there is no middle ground here. If it’s a room temperature superconductor like some of their data showed, then it’s Nobel Prize.

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

#303

Post by cmrdporcupine »

QuadrupleA wrote: post #292
saulrh wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The BIG change is if this supports high magnetic flux densities, in which case literally everything that depends on magnetism or magnets or electromagnets gets an order of magnitude better - ten times as much power per unit of heat disappeared and ten times as much power per unit of mass or volume or just ten times more powerful. Remember how battery energy density increased by a factor of five (nicads -> lithium-ion…

But wait - modern electric motors, for example, are something like 80-95% efficient ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#Efficiency ), which implies there's not a ton of room to grow. Do superconductors somehow enable 10x more torque output for the same watt of electricity? Or is it that you could have a small motor in the palm of your hand that can consume huge amounts of electricity and produce enough tor…

They're far more efficient than a combustion engine, but electric motors and associated controllers/inverters do generate heat, and lots of it. DIY electric car conversion hobbyists struggle with this big time, for example. Cooling loops w/ pumps, fans etc. It's not as bad as the battery pack, but still a thing to design around.

I get the impression there's room for improvement esp in the inverter space.

Cars of course being only application of electric motors. I'm no electrical engineer, but I gotta think stuff like generators must have challenges?

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

#304

Post by saulrh »

QuadrupleA wrote: post #292
saulrh wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The BIG change is if this supports high magnetic flux densities, in which case literally everything that depends on magnetism or magnets or electromagnets gets an order of magnitude better - ten times as much power per unit of heat disappeared and ten times as much power per unit of mass or volume or just ten times more powerful. Remember how battery energy density increased by a factor of five (nicads -> lithium-ion…

But wait - modern electric motors, for example, are something like 80-95% efficient ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#Efficiency ), which implies there's not a ton of room to grow. Do superconductors somehow enable 10x more torque output for the same watt of electricity? Or is it that you could have a small motor in the palm of your hand that can consume huge amounts of electricity and produce enough tor…

The latter. Motor losses are in large part due to resistance in the windings. Going from 95% efficiency to 99% efficiency means 1/5 as much heat output per unit of energy delivered, which means if your motor is thermally limited (which many are these days!) you can push five times as much power through it without it burning itself up. Similarly, increased achievable magnetic flux means a smaller motor can achieve greater torque and power so it can convert more electricity into movement.

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

#305

Post by scarmig »

loxias wrote: post #290
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…

[flagged]

Spicy take:

Theory is shit (betraying my bias here). If someone released a paper that theoretically proved a material was a superconductor from first principles, I would ignore it, every bit as much as I would if it had the opposite results. In materials, experiment has always led theory. Theory has use in suggesting new angles to explore with experiment, but theory is fundamentally reactive: get new data, try to fit that data using known principles and math. It's simply not equipped to say whether reality is real or not.

Honestly, I think anyone who thought the DFT-based papers mattered at all doesn't really get how science works. The politics here is also worthy of keeping in mind: if a theorist comes out and says something is flat out impossible, he/she gets egg on their face if it turns out to be possible. If someone says it's possible, there's plenty of wiggle room to justify yourself if the material doesn't pan out (plus, if it does, you get lots of credit for offering the first theoretical explanation).

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

#306

Post by Robotbeat »

EthanHeilman wrote: post #247
ramesh31 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 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 difficult and costly to scale and produce commercially. That's kinda how science goes. The first free-electron laser was built in 1971. It took decades to develop and commercialize free-electron lasers and we still in the early days. It is rare for a single discovery to re…

It’s worth pointing out that graphene literally is just a single layer of graphite. Making macroscopic objects out of graphene would mean layering them. So effectively we already have graphene in the form of graphite fiber (also called “carbon fiber”).

Graphite with zero defects and perfect crystallinity has the same properties as graphene. It IS layers of graphene.

(This is all essentially true for carbon nanotubes, too, which are just tubes made of graphene… maybe graphene is more chemically reactive due to the ends of the sheets though.)

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

#307

Post by nullc »

snitty wrote: post #270
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…

YBCO superconducts as high as about 93K, so we're talking 17K difference. Which is useful but not wildly so. LN2 boils at 77K, for reference.

for YBCO the critical field increases the further you get from its threshold temp.

If being further from the threshold temp implies a higher critical field then that is very useful.

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

#308

Post by selimthegrim »

anabab wrote: post #264
xdennis wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Drug Enforcement Administration? What does that have to do with physics?

This is probably about the fact that red phosphorus (required for the original process) cannot be purchased without a license ( https://nitter.net/andrewmccalip/status/1684191067477004288#... ), so kitchen chemists are out of the race. Established labs should have less problems though.

Plot twist - a cartel holds a press conference, and beats everybody to the punch

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

#309

Post by kallistisoft »

jacquesm wrote: post #54
BasedAnon wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

increased geopolitical tension

That is an interesting observation and puts words to some thoughts that I've had: if it turns out that this is 'the real thing' and the patent holds up South Korea is suddenly a superpower.

If LK-99 turns out be a legit room temp superconductor I can't see traditional patent/IP rules applying to it. The value to our species to too high for a technology like that to be encumbered. I would think a very large lump sum payment to the patent holders would be sufficient to cover everyone's interest.

Otherwise I fully expect every government in the world to simply ignore the patent and allow public/private use -- effectively invalidating the patent.

There is existing precedent for this type of action: the US government seizing wireless patents during WW1 or the Indian government invalidating international patents on medication for the purpose of federal manufacturing.

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

#310

Post by abnry »

faraggi wrote: post #141
jacquesm wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NileRed is youtube gold. It's one of very few channels that I follow and learn from.

I agree, great channel, but the cadence in his narration is atrocious.

It only adds to the channel. I find it amusing.
Post reply on HN