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

281–290 of 448 posts

Re: Electronic Structure of LK-99

#281

Post by feoren »

pjc50 wrote: post #273
jacquesm wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jeffbee in the 1947 edition: The most interesting phenomenon revealed so far is that the solid state electronics people and the rocket fanatics people draw on the same limited global pool of credulity, such that TinkererNews cannot be flooded with both transistor worship and moon travel speculation at the same time. Seriously: if it doesn't interest you, you could simply refrain from commenting and even reading. This…

I think we're all horribly burned out by pop-science. How many battery "breakthroughs" have we seen on here? Meanwhile what actually works is incremental improvement in lithium battery manufacturing. The 1947 Golden Age SF is interesting because the "rocket fanatics" peaked in 1969 and humans haven't gone back to the moon, let alone conquered space. While the transistor succeeded to an extent nobody imagined due to t…

> Meanwhile over in the AI "optimism" channel people are telling us ...

I'm not sure why this line of reasoning is so prevalent. Someone says "There's strong evidence for A" and the reply is "yes but someone who is not currently in the conversation also said there was strong evidence for B and that is wrong! Therefore you are silly for believing in A!" What? We're not supposed to be optimistic when we see strong evidence for a breakthrough in a phenomenon we already knew existed, because someone else believes something else!? Because some other person believes in ghosts and psychic powers, no one is allowed to believe anything? These are different people making different claims! It's insanity.

Re: Electronic Structure of LK-99

#282

Post by samhuk »

My ultimate take-away about LK-99 since the start has been that, even if it doesn't turn out to be a holy-grail or whatever, the novel ideas behind the material are incredibly interesting.

The idea of causing tiny (~0.5%) crystal lattice shrinkage with cuprate percolation is a really interesting idea.

So far, only huge pressures or very low temperatures (i.e. Physics) have been used to cause that shrinkage, therefore perhaps LK-99 could, at the least, mark the time that Physicists hold up their hands, admit that they have failed, and let the Chemists give it a shot.

I'm slightly oversimplifying the situation, of course, and the disciplines of science cannot be so distinctly separated, but, y'know.

Re: Electronic Structure of LK-99

#283

Post by oxfordmale »

Baeocystin wrote: post #104
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?

The Meissner effect requires a temperature transition in the diamagnetic behaviour. As you increase the temperature, you would expect a sharp drop with the material falling back on the magnet, and then levitating again once the temperature drops.

Re: Electronic Structure of LK-99

#284

Post by pjc50 »

feoren wrote: post #281
pjc50 wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we're all horribly burned out by pop-science. How many battery "breakthroughs" have we seen on here? Meanwhile what actually works is incremental improvement in lithium battery manufacturing. The 1947 Golden Age SF is interesting because the "rocket fanatics" peaked in 1969 and humans haven't gone back to the moon, let alone conquered space. While the transistor succeeded to an extent nobody imagined due to t…

> Meanwhile over in the AI "optimism" channel people are telling us ... I'm not sure why this line of reasoning is so prevalent. Someone says "There's strong evidence for A" and the reply is "yes but someone who is not currently in the conversation also said there was strong evidence for B and that is wrong! Therefore you are silly for believing in A!" What? We're not supposed to be optimistic when we see strong evid…

My argument was that the _video_ evidence is not strong, because it's poor quality and videos are easy to fake, while also linking this to another piece of techno-optimism which has made it easier to fake videos.

Re: Electronic Structure of LK-99

#285

Post by BasedAnon »

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

people forget that AI was already in control of the markets since 2014 at least. it's bootstrapping

Re: Electronic Structure of LK-99

#286

Post by xorbax »

yetihehe wrote: post #265
fragmede wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Get involved with your local community of makers, get them intrigued by your idea and its potential, connect with people that will help you build it. Patent it, and then raise funds via the Internet to try and build it. Seek out local VCs. I know that's a lot to ask, on top of two jobs, but I didn't organize our economy.

Thanks for reply, I appreciate it a lot. > Get involved with your local community of makers, get them intrigued by your idea and its potential, connect with people that will help you build it. This will prevent me from patenting it. I can also make first prototype myself, I've started last year, will try to finish this year. Funding would just let me drop one job and make it faster. > Patent it, and then raise funds…

I think I'd ask you what I'd ask L/K - why do you think it works?

They're experimentalists: they didn't find the material from first principles, they appear to have made it and decided to continue.

So did you make the engine and notice it's efficiency, or did you find it using first principles where no one else did?

Re: Electronic Structure of LK-99

#287

Post by yetihehe »

xorbax wrote: post #286
yetihehe wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for reply, I appreciate it a lot. > Get involved with your local community of makers, get them intrigued by your idea and its potential, connect with people that will help you build it. This will prevent me from patenting it. I can also make first prototype myself, I've started last year, will try to finish this year. Funding would just let me drop one job and make it faster. > Patent it, and then raise funds…

I think I'd ask you what I'd ask L/K - why do you think it works? They're experimentalists: they didn't find the material from first principles, they appear to have made it and decided to continue. So did you make the engine and notice it's efficiency, or did you find it using first principles where no one else did?

> So did you make the engine and notice it's efficiency, or did you find it using first principles where no one else did?

I found it from first principles, I still don't know why no one else thought about it, but it requires sort of splitting and reversing a normal stirling engine inside-out. Since then I've found several attempts at going in that directions which I took, but no one connected all those pieces yet as far as I know. This doesn't require any advanced materials, just a new configuration of existing inventions. For 15 years I've thought why it should not work, but I can't find a flaw in my reasoning, so now I need to verify it with actual working machine, because I know I still might be wrong. If I'm right - this will change energy generation and storage (no more steam turbines and will replace PV panels). If I'm wrong - someone will potentially lose about $10k.

Re: Electronic Structure of LK-99

#289

Post by sampo »

lucideer wrote: post #288

For anyone interested in this topic, there's a thread on Twitter that's been garnering some attention: https://nitter.net/Errorreporrt/status/1685835688216821760

> a thread on Twitter

If you are not logged in to Twitter, Twitter doesn't show the thread, just the first post alone. But you can use nitter.net, if you don't want to log in to Twitter: https://nitter.net/Errorreporrt/status/1685835688216821760

Re: Electronic Structure of LK-99

#290

Post by lucideer »

sampo wrote: post #289
lucideer wrote: post #288

For anyone interested in this topic, there's a thread on Twitter that's been garnering some attention: https://nitter.net/Errorreporrt/status/1685835688216821760

> a thread on Twitter If you are not logged in to Twitter, Twitter doesn't show the thread, just the first post alone. But you can use nitter.net, if you don't want to log in to Twitter: https://nitter.net/Errorreporrt/status/1685835688216821760

Thank you! Edited & will try use in future.
Post reply on HN