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

Compilation of claims/reports of LK-99 replication efforts

forums.spacebattles.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 303 posts

Re: Compilation of claims/reports of LK-99 replication efforts

#251

Post by rwmj »

hungryforcodes wrote: post #249
bhouston wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lab has a patent though which a lows for disclosure while also profiting from it. Thus I am not totally convinced of your claims.

Wait, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't patents only valid in the country they are filed in? So to be able to enforce a patent, you'd need to have filed in the US, Europe and China(?). Also patents take a couple of years to get accepted...

Filing in juridictions worldwide is a routine process when you apply for an important patent. Any respectable patent lawyer should be able to deal with it.

Re: Compilation of claims/reports of LK-99 replication efforts

#252

Post by local_issues »

hcks wrote: post #224
local_issues wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this is so much fun! Reddit isn’t fun, and the energy here is just lovely

You might want to checkout the many subreddit dedicated to crypto. Same energy

Huh? Those are people trying to pump garbage. This is people excited for a huge breakthrough.

Life is so much more beautiful and wondrous if you're willing to be vulnerable. Let people be excited.

Re: Compilation of claims/reports of LK-99 replication efforts

#253

Post by sudosysgen »

krab wrote: post #196
lucubratory wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is extremely rare that actionable, reproducible information comes out of the patent process. In general, they provide as little information as possible in order to satisfy the office, which is extremely overworked and (by design) rubber stamps everything that has basically the correct headings and formatting and isn't too similar to an existing patent.

In the case of drugs, it works. The day a patent expires, you have generics that instantly lower the market price. Replicating a drug from a patent is not free but you know that the compound works and can be synthesized. It's much cheaper than doing original research where a drug candidate can fail after you invested a lot into it.

That's generally because other companies figure out the synthesis themselves in that 20 years timespan, not because they got accurate synthesis instructions.

Re: Compilation of claims/reports of LK-99 replication efforts

#255

Post by DiscoBahb »

Qwertious wrote: post #241
A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #31

LK-99 is a quasi two-dimensional material, and one which seems particularly challenging to synthesize in a bulk polycrystalline three-dimensional mass. Even the original researchers stated that they'd "get it right" only a fraction of the time, and that their famous floating cracked-disc is still impure. I think that there's no reason to assume that negative results right now are conclusive, whereas positive results…

>LK-99 is a quasi two-dimensional material, Hey, what does this actually mean? Like, space is 3D and I don't think you're claiming all LK99 samples are all literally-one-atom-thick, so clearly it's a 3D object. I'd guess it means that the material has very regular layers, but (much like graphene) I've never actually seen someone directly say what "two-dimensional material" means 3-dimensionally.

Think of it this way: in something like copper, atoms are arranged in a 3d lattice, and electrons are able to jump (or "tunnel") from copper atom to copper atom freely in any of the x, y or z directions because the lattice looks the same in each direction.

Some more complex materials do not have this symmetry, and the ability of the electrons to tunnel is much stronger in some directions than others. In many known high temperature superconductors electrons are more or less confined to move in a 2d plane (even though a lump of the material is obviously a 3d object) so they are called "quasi-2d".

In other materials they are confined to move in only one direction, which seems to be the case with LK-99

Re: Compilation of claims/reports of LK-99 replication efforts

#256

Post by macromaniac »

pouulet wrote: post #113
memen wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't this be explained by magnetism alone? How does it show superconductivity?

This man claims to have reproduced the same kind of effects with a simple ferromagnetic sample: https://nitter.net/VanGennepD/status/1688052003216261120

The picture on figure 4 of this paper rules out ferromagnetism, assuming it's legit https://arxiv.org/pdf/2308.01516.pdf

Re: Compilation of claims/reports of LK-99 replication efforts

#257

Post by mensetmanusman »

mort96 wrote: post #82
bhouston wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lab has a patent though which a lows for disclosure while also profiting from it. Thus I am not totally convinced of your claims.

[flagged]

That’s actually the best case scenario.

Scale up for world consumption will be around $1B capital in my experience, and it will be difficult to get that learning curve paid for if IP doesn’t protect the first mover.

Otherwise there is first mover disadvantage in game theory which dramatically slows progress based on history of tech development.

Re: Compilation of claims/reports of LK-99 replication efforts

#258

Post by moralestapia »

mort96 wrote: post #172
moralestapia wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, but also, nothing stops you from making your own ambient temperature superconductor and donate it to humanity.

I don't know how to make ambient temperature superconductors.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I hope you see the point.

Re: Compilation of claims/reports of LK-99 replication efforts

#260

Post by hungryforcodes »

rwmj wrote: post #251
hungryforcodes wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't patents only valid in the country they are filed in? So to be able to enforce a patent, you'd need to have filed in the US, Europe and China(?). Also patents take a couple of years to get accepted...

Filing in juridictions worldwide is a routine process when you apply for an important patent. Any respectable patent lawyer should be able to deal with it.

But you have to choose to do it and there is an additional cost, if I am not mistaken. When our startup filed our patents in the US market, we chose not to do the same in Europe...
Post reply on HN