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

Electronic Structure of LK-99

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 448 posts

Re: Electronic Structure of LK-99

#101

Post by carabiner »

chc4 wrote: post #80
carabiner wrote: post #64

More DFT? Haven't we concluded that has little predictive power?

More people saying it sounds feasibly like it could be a superconductor is great, but agreed - https://nitter.net/MichaelSFuhrer/status/1686267690770739200 and similar threads by actual experts in the field have outlined that DFT studies ignore a lot of variables that need to line up for superconductivity, in harsh contrast to techbros on Twitter claiming they're proof of the next thousand year golden era.

Yeah the techbros have been the worst. Coffee guy went from saying the first DFT paper should deserve a Nobel to, "it's not a strong signal of anything" in 12 hours. WTF. All the actual scientists have been rock steady at, "it is probably not going to replicate," especially CMTC.

Techbro speculation on physics should be considered harmful.

Re: Electronic Structure of LK-99

#102

Post by sheepscreek »

girvo wrote: post #70
refulgentis wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not dumber. You can verify this on their models with any prompt you ran at 0.0 when it first came out, I did. It's the exact same model run the same exact way. They've repeatedly confirmed this.

> It's not dumber So I absolutely agree with this. And yet this meme persists. I wonder what's creating the feeling that it's "dumber" in so many? Perhaps they're just noticing the limits that always existed previously? I'm not sure, and am interested in others thoughts on it.

ChatGPT as in the paid subscription hosted by OpenAI. Its quality has deteriorated. It will miss the simplest details in the prompt and hallucinate a lot. I’ve only noticed this before on models with lesser parameters.

In comparison, Bard and Claude are getting better with time.

Re: Electronic Structure of LK-99

#104

Post by Baeocystin »

bluecoconut wrote: post #12

I got my PhD studying band structure of high-tc superconductors (experimentalist, ARPES). These Cu d-d interactions right at the fermi energy give me huge hope. Feels very familiar to other superconductors (re: all the cuprates). (Note: I specifically worked in a lab that was measuring a lot of the d-wave character / gap-energies of various superconductors) All in all, I'm now much more bullish on LK-99 being real su…

Serious question- I saw the original video, where once they stopped waving the magnet around and held it near the sheet of LK-99, it looked to me like it stayed at a specific standoff distance, with no decay.

Assuming no videographic trickery, what else could it be, other than the Meissner effect?

Re: Electronic Structure of LK-99

#106

Post by arriu »

lt wrote: post #76
dralley wrote: post #30

My understanding is that the "99" in LK-99 is the year it they first synthesized the material, i.e. 1999. Assuming this is all true, why is it just now coming to light? Did they just not know what they had? (I have not been following this closely, maybe this has already been explained)

As I've read it, the first lead to the material was 99. 2018 They got funding to research it further, 2020 was a first attempt of publication at Nature that was retracted, further improvements were made until 22/23 were two patents were filled, then suddenly 10 days ago Kwon, one of the co-researchers jumped the gun publishing a paper with the details, on one hand fearing a leak of someone else publishing first as th…

Im sure I’m not the only person thinking 24 years is way too long for such an important advancement.

Huge respect for those in this field or others that don’t give up after so many years. Thank you

Re: Electronic Structure of LK-99

#107

Post by DoreenMichele »

1over137 wrote: post #82
DoreenMichele wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unidentified Flying Objects are absolutely real, though the newer cool kid term is UAP. (From the internet: UAP stands for "unidentified anomalous phenomena." ) It's flying saucers carrying aliens from another planet that's controversial and up for debate.

>It's flying saucers carrying aliens from another planet that's controversial and up for debate. Which is what "UFO" means to 99% of people.

I hate seeing it used that way on HN though because it actively undermines meaty discussion of objective data and promotes the treatment of articles about objective data as click-bait, like it's the "hot sheets" of Men in Black -- like HN is a place to take seriously the wildest conspiracy theories with no real basis.

Re: Electronic Structure of LK-99

#108

Post by cooper_ganglia »

rel2thr wrote: post #46
jeffbee wrote: post #16

The most interesting phenomenon revealed so far is that the room-temperature superconductor people and the generative-LLMs-are-God people draw on the same limited global pool of credulity, such that HN cannot be flooded with both ChatGPT worship and superconductor speculation at the same time.

Theres some crossover. Isn't this exactly what a rogue super AI would do first? - run some simulations and discover a superconductor - then write up a paper on it ( the paper has some gaps but humans take it and run with it) - human technology and computing power rapidly accelerates. - the rogue AI's powers increase exponentially

Having played through Portal 2 again recently, it's like the equivalent of GlaDOS scheming to take back over the Aperture Science Facility while she's only getting 1.1 Volts from the potato.

Re: Electronic Structure of LK-99

#109

Post by objektif »

carabiner wrote: post #101
chc4 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More people saying it sounds feasibly like it could be a superconductor is great, but agreed - https://nitter.net/MichaelSFuhrer/status/1686267690770739200 and similar threads by actual experts in the field have outlined that DFT studies ignore a lot of variables that need to line up for superconductivity, in harsh contrast to techbros on Twitter claiming they're proof of the next thousand year golden era.

Yeah the techbros have been the worst. Coffee guy went from saying the first DFT paper should deserve a Nobel to, "it's not a strong signal of anything" in 12 hours. WTF. All the actual scientists have been rock steady at, "it is probably not going to replicate," especially CMTC. Techbro speculation on physics should be considered harmful.

CMTC comes of as a whiny little POS tbh. They have the exact opposite of the attitude I would have expected from a scientist. In their first thread regarding this topic they were almost flat out belittling the og authors. WTF.

Re: Electronic Structure of LK-99

#110

Post by [deleted] »

vesinisa wrote: post #26
appplication wrote: post #20

This ongoing research saga pretty much the most excited I’ve been about anything since before Covid. It feels like the science equivalent of watching your favorite sports team on an epic rise towards winning a world championship. Even if this turns out to flop, I hope history remembers the original authors favorably. They really did find something that by all accounts could plausibly be a room temp superconductor. An…

Just curious, how did you find Covid "exciting"? Making lots of money on the bear market?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN