Live data from Hacker News

Semiconducting Transport in LK99 reproduction attempt

arxiv.org

261–269 of 269 posts

Re: Semiconducting Transport in LK99 reproduction attempt

#261

Everyone in this thread needs to understand that particularly for materials science, and particularly when there is bad methodology documentation, it is really, really normal for early replication attempts to fail. What works in one lab will often need to be adjusted to work in another, with different equipment, altitude, humidity, all sorts of stuff. Making it even worse, apparently the original team can't even get…

we used to joke in the chemistry lab that someone once tried to reproduce a reaction that was done in india. Procedure called for boiling ether, room temperature, WTF. Of course, room temperature in india can get up to 40C.

Re: Semiconducting Transport in LK99 reproduction attempt

#262
post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just materials science though. I’m a longtime reader of Derek Lowe’s In the Pipeline blog, and he often emphasizes the trickiness of lab work and lab techniques. But the model we have of science from elementary and high school doesn’t give us room for the random, ephemeral things that come into play in actual experimental work. Our model is methods equal result, every time, even though jiggling your foot a little…

NileRed and other Maker Channels are great to demonstrate that. In every video, there's 1 - 2 of these situations - Nile has been following some documented, established procedure which should result in a specific reaction and it looks decent to the layman - and then it just doesn't work at all. And then he re-does pretty much the same thing and it works. I can't imagine how frustrating that can be. And then you have…

Anyone who has dived into FDM 3D printing knows this pain well.

Filament is too wet, the air is too cold, a batch of filament might behave wrong. Or everything goes 99% right and the axis of the moon and the constellations are off and it ruins your entire print after 57 hours. Then you start again and it breaks at 59.5 hours. I’m sure it’s not as hardcore as synthesizing superconductors but the real world is incredibly messy and imprecise.

Re: Semiconducting Transport in LK99 reproduction attempt

#263
post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just materials science though. I’m a longtime reader of Derek Lowe’s In the Pipeline blog, and he often emphasizes the trickiness of lab work and lab techniques. But the model we have of science from elementary and high school doesn’t give us room for the random, ephemeral things that come into play in actual experimental work. Our model is methods equal result, every time, even though jiggling your foot a little…

NileRed and other Maker Channels are great to demonstrate that. In every video, there's 1 - 2 of these situations - Nile has been following some documented, established procedure which should result in a specific reaction and it looks decent to the layman - and then it just doesn't work at all. And then he re-does pretty much the same thing and it works. I can't imagine how frustrating that can be. And then you have…

But Jesus in this case the payoff is immense.

Re: Semiconducting Transport in LK99 reproduction attempt

#264
post #9

Maybe not yet the final nail in the coffin but I would no longer bet much on a successful replication. Which leaves me wondering how we got the initial papers. Does fraud make any sense, how could you possibly benefit from something like this? And if I would think that I might have produced a room temperature superconductor due to experimental errors, I would double and tripple check what I did. Assuming there is tim…

Apparently [1] the group wanted to play safe and push for more verification internally, but Kwon (the third author of the first arXiv submission) posted his own draft without others' consent. So it's in my opinion useless to discuss whether the submission itself was sincere or not---it was never their intention. [1] https://hackmd.io/@sanxiyn/S1hejVXo3 (Semi-automatically translated: https://hackmd.io/DMjYGOJFRheZw5X…

This is a very nice summary, especially for those of us who cannot read Korean. Thank you. If you posted it as a top level comment, it might get some more visibility.

Re: Semiconducting Transport in LK99 reproduction attempt

#265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently [1] the group wanted to play safe and push for more verification internally, but Kwon (the third author of the first arXiv submission) posted his own draft without others' consent. So it's in my opinion useless to discuss whether the submission itself was sincere or not---it was never their intention. [1] https://hackmd.io/@sanxiyn/S1hejVXo3 (Semi-automatically translated: https://hackmd.io/DMjYGOJFRheZw5X…

This is a very nice summary, especially for those of us who cannot read Korean. Thank you. If you posted it as a top level comment, it might get some more visibility.

I believe the report was also directly submitted a few times before (not by me), but hadn't seen much visibility. Repost probably?

Re: Semiconducting Transport in LK99 reproduction attempt

#266

Everyone in this thread needs to understand that particularly for materials science, and particularly when there is bad methodology documentation, it is really, really normal for early replication attempts to fail. What works in one lab will often need to be adjusted to work in another, with different equipment, altitude, humidity, all sorts of stuff. Making it even worse, apparently the original team can't even get…

This comment intrigued me, so I pulled together some information. The first paper submitted is titled "The First Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor." It lists three authors: Sukbae Lee, Ji-Hoon Kim, and Young-Wan Kwon. Its timestamp is Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 07:51:19 UTC. [1] The second paper submitted is titled "Superconductor Pb10−xCux(PO4)6O showing levitation at room temperature and atmospheric…

Thank you, I made the original comment on a whim after coming to the thread and being disappointed at how everyone was talking about this result as though it immediately exposed Lee, Jihoon Kim, Hyun-Tak Kim etc as frauds. It was also late at night and I was tired ¯ \ _ ( ツ ) _ / ¯ I really appreciate you putting together some more sourcing and explanatory material for it.

Side note, the upvotes on the original comment have pushed me well past the 500 upvotes mark, so now I have a downvoted button on most comments. Which is actually kind of annoying on mobile because God, they are right beside each other and absolutely tiny, with no remaining visual indicator afterwards as to whether you upvoted or downvoted a comment.

Re: Semiconducting Transport in LK99 reproduction attempt

#267
post #154

Everyone in this thread needs to understand that particularly for materials science, and particularly when there is bad methodology documentation, it is really, really normal for early replication attempts to fail. What works in one lab will often need to be adjusted to work in another, with different equipment, altitude, humidity, all sorts of stuff. Making it even worse, apparently the original team can't even get…

This is a good summary: https://youtu.be/RjzL9cS3VW8?t=32 TLDW it seems very unlikely that they have what they claim

In Sabine's opinion. I've seen Sabine's video when it was posted and intend no disrespect to her. The predominant theoretical explanation for the alleged new superconductor is that it may be a new type of superconductor, not type I or type II, or it may be presenting in unusual ways. There have been a bunch of confusing theoretical prodictions, like anisotropic conduction (how would that affect the way levitation looks)?, chance-based copper substitution in the lattice that could lead to superconducting clusters in what is otherwise just normal lead apatite (how would that affect the way levitation looks in a bulk chunk like that?), etc.

Plenty of people who know the theory of superconductors are sceptical. They're not wrong about the theory. It's also worth pointing out that every previous time a new superconductor critical temp limit was broken in a major way, superconductor theory saying it shouldn't be possible was a cause for early scepticism amongst those who knew the theory. Sabine's gut reactions in a YouTube video doesn't make the result very unlikely. It doesn't make her wrong either, she's right that all existing superconductors, if pure and homogeneous, would not behave like that on a magnet. It is also the case that all existing superconductors do not superconduct at room temperature and ambient pressure. It is also the case that (absent fraud, which is on everyone's mind after Ranga Dias) we don't know of any material that could plausible behave the way that video shows something behaving. The only thing I can think of that could behave that way would be impure/heterogeneous diamagnetic material, but like 15x as diamagnetic as the next highest non-superconductor, which means if that material exists we don't know about it. If it was fraud, it would be with a magnetised sample on a magnet like that. The reason I think fraud is the only option if it was a magnetised sample is because that's a really, really obvious explanation for the effect and they have to have measured the sample for magnetism before putting it on a magnet. They would also literally feel it/see it/hear it while placing the sample on the magnet. Also it would almost certainly have to be composed of different elements than they describe, because lead apatite with copper definitely should not be ferromagnetic at all.

Re: Semiconducting Transport in LK99 reproduction attempt

#268
post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you suggesting that they take phone video of all their experiments over the course of multiple years? Or just the one they know will succeed?

A lot of science takes a mind-numbing amount of time at the lab desk. Something like 40 hours a week just dedicated to picking apart fruit flies with tweezers under a microscope is pretty common. I think I read somewhere that with MatSci, mortars and pestles and blisters are involved. It would be a lot of recording that would have to happen, and then you have to record every setting on every instrument you touch. How…

> mortars and pestles and blisters are involved

Can confirm from my life prior to working with computers.

“Is this mortar and pestle actually clean?”

“How much grinding is the right amount?”

“Is the window open or closed?”

“Did someone fuck with the settings on this machine since I last used it?”

And so on…

Re: Semiconducting Transport in LK99 reproduction attempt

#269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment intrigued me, so I pulled together some information. The first paper submitted is titled "The First Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor." It lists three authors: Sukbae Lee, Ji-Hoon Kim, and Young-Wan Kwon. Its timestamp is Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 07:51:19 UTC. [1] The second paper submitted is titled "Superconductor Pb10−xCux(PO4)6O showing levitation at room temperature and atmospheric…

Thank you, I made the original comment on a whim after coming to the thread and being disappointed at how everyone was talking about this result as though it immediately exposed Lee, Jihoon Kim, Hyun-Tak Kim etc as frauds. It was also late at night and I was tired ¯ \ _ ( ツ ) _ / ¯ I really appreciate you putting together some more sourcing and explanatory material for it. Side note, the upvotes on the original comme…

> with no remaining visual indicator afterwards as to whether you upvoted or downvoted a comment.

A new link appears on that comment with text `undown` or `unvote` depending on which one you clicked.

Post reply on HN