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

191–200 of 331 posts

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

#191

Post by zzbn00 »

pie420 wrote: post #60
ldjkfkdsjnv wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Impossible, wall street has some of the smartest scientists on the planet. They absolutely went through the research and determined it was a fake. Look at the AI boom, nasdaq rallied 40%. Superconductor would have had the same effect

You know how there was a dotcom boom? Well the AI boom is just a repeat. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Save this comment and revist it in 5 years.

"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

somewhere I read the a good addition to this:

"and those who do know history are doomed to watch it being repeated"

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

#192

Post by layer8 »

ironborn123 wrote: post #132
versteegen wrote: post #95

Very interesting comments on the paper by Prof. Michael S. Fuhrer https://nitter.net/i/status/1688755932275384320 > But I think they buried the lede a little. Ferromagnetism is novel and unexpected in this material system, and might be interesting. But strong diamagnetism even more so > Even if the diamagnetic fraction is the entire sample (appears less) then it would be the second-strongest diamagnet known (and pyro…

There are 2 things in favor of the Korean team - Hyun-Tak Kim is unlikely to ruin his career and legacy for something careless and frivolous. But stranger things have happened, so lets assign a 10% probability to give some benefit of doubt to the team. - The various DFT papers show interesting flat band structures. But DFT is an approximation and also they do not take into account electron electron correlations. So l…

That's not how probabilities combine.

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

#193

Post by layer8 »

hliyan wrote: post #80

According to this: https://twitter.com/Andercot/status/1688598313497694208 "...there is a less well-known exception to this rule called Brauenbecker extension which provides a mathematical proof that levitation is possible with a simple diamagnetic in a dipole field so long as the diamagnetic material mass is very small relative to the strength of the magnetic field." I was very hopeful in the early days and was foll…

The amount of hyped discussion here on HN based on such scant evidence was astonishing.

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

#194

Post by seewhydee »

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.

The team believes they have made the world's first room temperature superconductor, and they submit the paper to APL Materials (Impact Factor 6.6)?

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

#195

Post by ironborn123 »

tw1984 wrote: post #151
ironborn123 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are 2 things in favor of the Korean team - Hyun-Tak Kim is unlikely to ruin his career and legacy for something careless and frivolous. But stranger things have happened, so lets assign a 10% probability to give some benefit of doubt to the team. - The various DFT papers show interesting flat band structures. But DFT is an approximation and also they do not take into account electron electron correlations. So l…

> Hyun-Tak Kim is unlikely to ruin his career and legacy for something careless and frivolous. you came with presumption that this man knows & understands the subject matter. that is a very bold assumption given the mounting evidence against such brief. > so lets assign a 10% probability why 10%? not 0.01%? because of his "prof." title or previous publications? Surely that won't change the course of nature I thought?…

- Nothing against Russian researchers, but apart from Iris who is somewhat anonymous and doesnt have the required equipment to create good samples, I havent seen anyone from there interested in performing expts on this

- There have already been some retractions from China after the initial replication claims. I get the feeling they have been overeager about this to prove themselves. Maybe if they approach this with cooler heads, they could be depended on more.

- When i said western labs, i spiritually include japan, taiwan, south korean labs in that, since they generally have similar practices and rigor (even if geographically they are in the east)

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

#196

Post by whimsicalism »

carabiner wrote: post #148
ironborn123 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are 2 things in favor of the Korean team - Hyun-Tak Kim is unlikely to ruin his career and legacy for something careless and frivolous. But stranger things have happened, so lets assign a 10% probability to give some benefit of doubt to the team. - The various DFT papers show interesting flat band structures. But DFT is an approximation and also they do not take into account electron electron correlations. So l…

I too like to assign probabilities to my vibes. Much more legitimate.

I think this culturally comes from lesswrong and it really makes me laugh every time I see it

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

#197

Post by briansm »

vbezhenar wrote: post #79
versteegen wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. https://nitter.net/VanGennepD/status/1688052003216261120 And this new paper finally rigorously explains away all the half-levitation videos. They can no longer be considered any evidence of SC at all.

The only evidence of superconductivity is zero resistance. When you have a coil, pump it with current and let it rest for few years. If the current is still the same, it's superconductor. Rest are just hints.

not that simple, need to compensate for all external magnetic flux, crystal compression and so on.

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

#198

Post by whimsicalism »

codethief wrote: post #184
tw1984 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hyun-Tak Kim is unlikely to ruin his career and legacy for something careless and frivolous. you came with presumption that this man knows & understands the subject matter. that is a very bold assumption given the mounting evidence against such brief. > so lets assign a 10% probability why 10%? not 0.01%? because of his "prof." title or previous publications? Surely that won't change the course of nature I thought?…

> you came with presumption that this man knows & understands the subject matter. that is a very bold assumption given the mounting evidence against such brief. Not OP but "this man" has published enough papers on superconductors[0] that yes, he absolutely deserves the benefit of the doubt. [0]: See e.g. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=de&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=hyun... or https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=_P8mu…

Do you work in the field? Those papers are ridiculous and the “theory” parts literally do not make sense

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

#199

Post by whimsicalism »

smcl wrote: post #162
tw1984 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hyun-Tak Kim is unlikely to ruin his career and legacy for something careless and frivolous. you came with presumption that this man knows & understands the subject matter. that is a very bold assumption given the mounting evidence against such brief. > so lets assign a 10% probability why 10%? not 0.01%? because of his "prof." title or previous publications? Surely that won't change the course of nature I thought?…

I've seen this on here before. Guys convincing themselves that they're being rational and you're being emotional - because they put little numbers besides their feelings and perform some calculations to produce a percentage that "proves" their theory about Antivax stuff, Putin/Ukraine or whatever is credible.

It comes from lesswrong/rationalist circles.

Best to ignore people once you have identified that they are on the wrong side of the Dunning-Kruger curve

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

#200

Post by kzrdude »

VHRanger wrote: post #4

After reading the r/physics thread on LK-99 [1] I've cooled significantly on the matter. Basically: people who work in SC think the initial science seems very sloppy and the replication attempts don't come close to what you need to demonstrate a RT SC [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics/comments/15i3h9d/lk99_megat...

Now, I don't have this guys credentials, but it sounds very close to "This is not a superconductor as we know them to be". Which almost goes without saying, because if this is a room temperature superconductor in some sense, maybe something quite different is needed to explain it. I think we should be excited for new physics.
Post reply on HN