151–160 of 316 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Note that the resistance of superconductors is 0 only for DC currents. The AC resistance is not 0 and typically gets larger for higher frequencies!
Yes, but computer chips are powered by DC.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you tell me why a scientist would decide to do a certain experiment without a theory about what to test and why? Why that experiment and not any of infinite others?
Because he already has a sample and it doesn't hurt to check other properties of it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it would be reliable working at milliamps, I am sure it can be put to practical use in my sci fi scenarios eventually (1000 cables with 1 milliamps each should add up to 1 amp?). Of course, unless it all just is a quirky side effect, that can never be put to practical use.
It’s a ceramic so hard to make wires from
What are the implications in general of room temperature superconductors? I just know that they needed typically ultra low temperatures right? But what would be the practical implications?
They're trying to build them with existing superconductors instead, but those require super cold temperatures or super high pressure.
This is (maybe!) a superconductor that's cheap and exists at normal temperature and pressure.
It's got some deficiencies that would prevent it from being used in a fusion reactor, but it's existence may teach us how to build a better one that will work.
What are the implications in general of room temperature superconductors? I just know that they needed typically ultra low temperatures right? But what would be the practical implications?
Anything that uses electricity would use less electricity because you aren’t wasting it as heat. So in theory you could have a ridiculous computer that runs 1000GW of power through it without heating up. Or a flying car. Or power cables that lose nothing during travel. Naturally that’s why it doesn’t make sense. It’s too game-breaking to be possible in normal conditions. Glitching something out by making it basically…
I touched on this in a previous thread[1], but superconductors only stay superconducting below not just a critical temperature, but also below a critical current density and critical magnetic field strength.
These limits are different for different superconductors. It could very well be this superconductor has really high critical temperature but really low critical current density, in which case you can't have lots of current at zero resistance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A few practical things that we need superconductors for which currently require very expensive cooling: 1) MRIs — could be way cheaper, smaller and more ubiquitous with room temperature superconductors 2) Maglev trains — superconducters expel a magnetic fields that can make things "levitate" (called the Meissner effect). Maglev trains have minimal friction and are incredibly energy-efficient. 3) Quantum computing — m…
MRI is a potential application of room temperature superconductor in general, but not specifically for LK-99. One disadvantage of LK-99 is that it has very low critical current, see patent figure 10. On the other hand, 300 mA is more than enough for computing applications.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Arbitrary punishing rules of the Nobel prize is part of the fun of science. As far as I can tell either wise they'd have dropped all these insane rules ages ago.
Would be interesting if the rule were dropped given that in some fields like particle physics a paper may have dozens of authors…
What are the implications in general of room temperature superconductors? I just know that they needed typically ultra low temperatures right? But what would be the practical implications?
Worldwide electric grid. Solar is all you need.