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

Ferromagnetic half levitation of LK-99-like synthetic samples

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 331 posts

Re: Ferromagnetic half levitation of LK-99-like synthetic samples

#111

Post by squeaky-clean »

javajosh wrote: post #41
ldjkfkdsjnv wrote: post #38

I knew it was fake, there would have been a huge rise in the stock market. Financial markets would have sniffed this out. The market never lies. If anything, this was an obvious opportunity to short it on prediction markets.

If fake those researchers careers are over. Like, they'll have to go into programming or something. And they've also besmirched the good name of Korea, and their moms are going to beat the shit out of them for fucking up that bad. They've got a LOT to lose if this is fake, which is why I think it's most likely true. But hey, sometimes people just do crazy shit.

The paper was leaked by someone fired from the team months prior. The researchers still active were not satisfied with the state of their paper.

Re: Ferromagnetic half levitation of LK-99-like synthetic samples

#112

Post by clmay »

tkzed49 wrote: post #108
clmay wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This question has been asked with near identical or very similar wording in almost every LK-99 submission I've seen over the last week or so... Is there something botnet-y happening? I find it hard to believe anyone reading similar threads could have missed the numerous answers to this and similarly-formed questions that have been offered lately.

It could be the sheer volume of discussion. I've seen a lot of these posts and this is the first time I've read this question.

Maybe it's because I have been obsessively ensuring that I read every comment on every top thread... Some kind of selection bias could be at play...

Re: Ferromagnetic half levitation of LK-99-like synthetic samples

#113

Post by versteegen »

fnordpiglet wrote: post #97
versteegen wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not all the replication videos show the sample in the middle, see the Varda sample videos Andrew McCalip himself says this explains everything he's seen. https://nitter.net/andrewmccalip/status/1688741684316975104#...

You’re reading something entirely different - at the end of a long discussion of sending the samples off for more testing, holding hope it’s a SC but admitting it’s always been a long shot, he notes at the end: > That said, I think we're getting to the point where magnetic observations may be adding more noise than signal. Yesterday, I did perform the pole flip that was discussed in the last video. Very important to…

He wrote that other tweet before that paper was put up on arXiv. How does the fact that the one I linked to is a reply to the one you quoted change the plain meaning of his words? I'm trying to understand how I've misinterpreted his tweet but I've got to interpret "Sounds like it explains everything we're seeing" as referring to his own observations too, not (just) other people's.

He's been looking for an explanation of this sort for a while:

"I'm still suspecting it's a magnetic phenomena that's not SC" https://nitter.net/andrewmccalip/status/1687887799872294912

"I don't want to succumb to the echo chamber just yet, it seems weird, but could we explain this another way? Is there a lead compound that exhibits ferromagnetic behavior?" https://nitter.net/andrewmccalip/status/1687497082322788352

Re: Ferromagnetic half levitation of LK-99-like synthetic samples

#114

Post by Jweb_Guru »

throwawaymaths wrote: post #86
Jweb_Guru wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ferromagnetic explains half levitation but it doesn't explain full levitation No one reputable has actually demonstrated full levitation, including the original team. > Sure, metal ones are, but Are ceramic ferromagnets (without iron) common? That lone electron in an orbital is pretty important. They literally reproduced this behavior with a substance that looks identical to the original LK-99, so while it would be…

Never claimed it was impossible, just that it's rare. > No one reputable I don't care about reputability of anyone unless they have a known past of fraud. Gatekeeping in science is lame unless someone makes a claim to break well understood theory or claims to do something technically difficult. RTSC is neither. Do you think this video is faked?: https://twitter.com/Andercot/status/1687740396691185664?s=20

> Never claimed it was impossible, just that it's rare.

Okay, so? It's been experimentally verified and it's not some sort of novel behavior. It's even been predicted to occur in PbO before, just not observed until now.

> I don't care about reputability of anyone unless they have a known past of fraud. Gatekeeping in science is lame unless someone makes a claim to break well understood theory or claims to do something technically difficult. RTSC is neither.

RTSC is absolutely something we believe is likely to be difficult, but more importantly none of the replications by either verified labs or scientists willing to put their names on the line, who documented what they were doing, actually worked.

Meanwhile, we have videos like the one you linked, which are posted completely anonymously by someone affiliated with no institution who followed it up with two videos of spinning poop. Many people have demonstrated that it's quite easy to fake a video that looks like this using software like Aftereffects. For you to claim this video is equally trustworthy to replications by credible labs with reputations on the line is certainly a choice you can make! I will not be doing it with you, however.

Re: Ferromagnetic half levitation of LK-99-like synthetic samples

#115

Post by Jweb_Guru »

lifthrasiir wrote: post #69
Jweb_Guru wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were refusing to share them with anyone reputable until today. Today, they said they would share them, so hopefully this will all be over soon (but IMO it's already resolved).

> They were refusing to share them with anyone reputable until today. This is incorrect (under some definition of "reputable"), because KENTECH [1] has reportedly received samples from Q-Center for the analysis, which started on July (following the MOU on May) and is estimated to finish within 6 months. Whether KENTECH is reputable or not, and whether it should be considered affiliated with Q-Center is of course deba…

I don't consider a replication attempt with a lab in a commercial relationship with another lab, that has essentially embargoed the results for six months, credible.

Re: Ferromagnetic half levitation of LK-99-like synthetic samples

#116

Post by yongjik »

jgtrosh wrote: post #23
arpowers wrote: post #7

My main concern: Where are the original authors and why are they not helping people synthesize the replications?

According to Wikipedia: > On 3 August 2023, the Korean LK-99 Verification Committee requested a high-quality sample from the original research team. However, the team responded that they would only provide the sample once the review process of their paper, potentially submitted to APL Materials, is completed. This process is expected to take several weeks or months.

From what I've heard, the chief of the Korean Society of Superconductivity and Cryogenics had personally called LK-99 out as a hoax - which might have been justifiable, given evidences, but it might explain the reluctance by the LK-99 team.

(Assuming the inventors of LK-99 believe it's real, they could be thinking "Why should I give you the honor of being the first outsider to verify the sample, when we could ask anyone else?")

Re: Ferromagnetic half levitation of LK-99-like synthetic samples

#117

Post by computerfriend »

clmay wrote: post #103
rishav_sharan wrote: post #99

Naive question, and I hope someone more knowledgeable than me can enlighten me here; Why are we even testing for superconductivity with levitation, instead of just checking for current loss/heat loss while conducting?

This question has been asked with near identical or very similar wording in almost every LK-99 submission I've seen over the last week or so... Is there something botnet-y happening? I find it hard to believe anyone reading similar threads could have missed the numerous answers to this and similarly-formed questions that have been offered lately.

At least nobody has asked about the real-world technology implications in this thread yet.

Re: Ferromagnetic half levitation of LK-99-like synthetic samples

#118

Post by tyre »

clmay wrote: post #103
rishav_sharan wrote: post #99

Naive question, and I hope someone more knowledgeable than me can enlighten me here; Why are we even testing for superconductivity with levitation, instead of just checking for current loss/heat loss while conducting?

This question has been asked with near identical or very similar wording in almost every LK-99 submission I've seen over the last week or so... Is there something botnet-y happening? I find it hard to believe anyone reading similar threads could have missed the numerous answers to this and similarly-formed questions that have been offered lately.

It’s a natural question when reading about this, like asking why a police officer makes a suspected drunk driver walk a line instead of measuring BAC.

Not everyone reads every (or any!) paper and story.

Re: Ferromagnetic half levitation of LK-99-like synthetic samples

#119

Post by haldujai »

segfaultbuserr wrote: post #106
rishav_sharan wrote: post #99

Naive question, and I hope someone more knowledgeable than me can enlighten me here; Why are we even testing for superconductivity with levitation, instead of just checking for current loss/heat loss while conducting?

A magnetic levitation demo indicates a possible Meissner effect (which is refuted here by this paper), and this is so much easier than a resistance measurement, which is a delicate task and susceptible to experimental errors. So levitation is used as a quick "first check", especially when you don't have a full lab setup to do other tests, which are much more complicated (in addition to a levitation test or a resistan…

Do you have any idea on what the ballpark cost is to do these replication experiments I keep reading about? Or the more complicated experiments you mention?

Asking out of curiosity as I would have assumed it's very expensive but there seem to be many groups of varying sizes doing these and quite quickly which I would have thought would be extremely wasteful but may suggest it's more economically feasible than I had thought.

Re: Ferromagnetic half levitation of LK-99-like synthetic samples

#120

Post by joe__f »

ldjkfkdsjnv wrote: post #38

I knew it was fake, there would have been a huge rise in the stock market. Financial markets would have sniffed this out. The market never lies. If anything, this was an obvious opportunity to short it on prediction markets.

You're saying that, if this had been real, the stock market would have known about it before the scientific community? How exactly?

The markets do predict things but they can't synthesise correct information out of nowhere. Wall Street stock brokers weren't exactly going to sit down and start trying to replicate these results to see if they could cash in on it

Post reply on HN