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

Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 316 posts

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#301

Post by ly3xqhl8g9 »

dang wrote: post #298
ly3xqhl8g9 wrote: post #43

"In no case may a prize amount be divided between more than three persons." [1] Sad state of affairs to expect a reward for brilliance and to have science bottlenecked by a merchant of death. Just the fact that the merchant of death gives "peace prizes" should have made the entire affair laughable a long time ago. Perhaps it's time to move on from this ancient and limited understanding of appraisal, awards. I'm in no…

We detached this flamewar tangent from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36953091 . Can you please not do this? Your post broke several of the site guidelines, including " Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. " If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.

Not to worry. I will not comment anymore. Please delete my account.

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#302

Post by [deleted] »

dang wrote: post #297
realjhol wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes things worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: you've unfortunately been using HN primarily for ideological battle. That's not allowed, and we ban accounts that do it, regardless of what they're battling for or against. I've banned this account accordingly. For past explanations on this point see http…

[deleted]

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#303

Post by s1artibartfast »

consilient wrote: post #296
s1artibartfast wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing, just words that don't have any predictive value or convey any understanding of the world. Maybe an example would help clear things up. go into the lab with a 1 lb weight and a 2 lb weight and weigh them together. Saying that the total weight could either equal 3 lb or any value other than 3 lb does not constitute a predictive theory for how the physics of summing Mass works. It might be a theory that a scale…

> Maybe an example would help clear things up. go into the lab with a 1 lb weight and a 2 lb weight and weigh them together. > Saying that the total weight could either equal 3 lb or any value other than 3 lb does not constitute a predictive theory for how the physics of summing Mass works. The relevant theoretical background here is hidden in the "weigh them together" step: that there is such a thing as weight, it's…

Im not making the claim that theory Never informs experimentation. I'm making the claim that it possible to make discovery without theory about what you are exploring.

If you want to count distant theories like "I exist" or "The world exists", then sure, every action starts with theory. But like I said, that is every different than a specific theory about what outcome an experiment has, and the underlying physics that make it so.

If you think nobody can discover anything without a theory for what could be discovered, you are flat out wrong.

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#304

Post by King-Aaron »

vixen99 wrote: post #148
King-Aaron wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might have to go collect all the ones I've thrown in the ocean over the years

I presume you're joking else you probably should - as an act of propitiation for your sins. 'Toxic effects of lead exposure on bioaccumulation, oxidative stress, neurotoxicity, and immune responses in fish: a review' https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30884452/ and numerous other studies.

I am joking, the ocean is too far away

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#305

Post by blueprint »

sdenton4 wrote: post #291
blueprint wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how exactly has physics been at an impasse? this trope is so common now. did you hear it from Weinstein? we've had a metric ton of mindblowing theory emerge in the past 30 years. do you even study physics?

I was careful to say fundamental physics - there's great stuff happening in materials science. We are in a world where exponentially growing amounts of energy are needed to confirm/deny an increasingly small slice of the standard model. We still don't know what dark matter or energy is (almost literal holes in theory), we haven't figured out how to scale up quantum computers, and we don't have scalable fusion reactor…

none of the things you listed have anything to do with fundamental or theoretical physics. It also seems that you don't know about some of the recent advances. we don't need to deny the standard model. Nature has already shown us proof that it's not sufficient. but the standard model is not actually fundamental physics. It's basically just a mash up of a bunch of aspects of particle systems. There's, again, a ton of work on alternatives. and I would have to disagree, it would seem that we do know how to scale, quantum computers, but we're still doing the material science for it. Physics is probably far more advanced than almost anyone really realizes... and that is the bigger issue. We are still working out what advances to pay attention to. Yet what we do know about , if the engineering work were done, is enough to get us "free" energy, for example.

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#306

Post by blueprint »

mrguyorama wrote: post #286
blueprint wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how exactly has physics been at an impasse? this trope is so common now. did you hear it from Weinstein? we've had a metric ton of mindblowing theory emerge in the past 30 years. do you even study physics?

Call me when someone finally schedules a test to possibly disprove string theory. It's been stuck in "The math works but we haven't solidified it" for like decades. It makes testable predictions right?

i'm not talking about string theory anyway

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#307

Post by smcameron »

xdennis wrote: post #277
smcameron wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Better than the WWII era German aircraft insignia youtube uses for the "unfullscreen" button.

Ha, it really does look like the Balkenkreuz[1]. Although it was in use before Hitler and it's just a cross. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balkenkreuz

Thanks, I knew there had to be a name for that thing, now I know what it is.

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#308

Post by xorbax »

ndtm wrote: post #165
jiggawatts wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't anyone working in the physical sciences know how to record a decent video that isn't shaky, blurry, out-of-focus, or a handheld mobile phone recording of a computer screen? He's using a digital microsocope! Just press the "record" button and upload that! I can't wait for someone to successfully reproduce it, use a polaroid camera to take the photo, print it out, fax it, and have someone scan in the photocopy,…

I feel like one of the reasons is that it is a lot harder to fake a shaky video than a still one and he won't need to add in his voiceover in comparing to if he is directly recording from the digital microscope presumably.

Yeah, a shaky video is visually convincing and allows for slight-of-hand

If you want your work to mean something, make sure the focus of attention is totally convincing.

Or soothe yourself in knowing all that work is destined to be an unconvincing footnote appreciated, at best, in hindsight

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#309

Post by xorbax »

beowulfey wrote: post #293
mcpackieh wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not him but I share his confusion. Honestly I can't figure out what sort of point you're trying to make here. What's the point of all the island and pink cats stuff if not to make the point that the researchers didn't have adequate video cameras available to them at the time? jiggawatts's gripe is that the researchers seem generally incapable of effectively using the cameras they already possess (including iphone…

Ha, I'll definitely admit it's not the best metaphor. My point was the last sentence of my original comment: when you're in the heat of discovery, witnessing something for the first time, you are NOT thinking about the quality of the video you are trying to capture! These videos were not intended for public consumption -- they were likely sent to a friend or something, showing the exciting thing they were witnessing.…

So you never need good data. "They're trying so hard and it looks like what I want! Forgive them!"

This is why people think Bigfoot 3xists after 60 years

We need proof - real and clear data. Reliable data. Reproducible data. Anything else is dismissible, not forgivable.

It feels like bet-hedging:

If LK99 is nothing? Who cares it's a nothing video on the internet.

I'd LK99 is real? Well we know it's true so a bad video of a real thing is real!

Don't run the race and stop two feet from the finish line. Expend the pain and attention to make your effort worthwhile.

Re: Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor LK-99 preprint revision 2

#310

Post by neuah »

willis936 wrote: post #225
neuah wrote: post #205

In this version, in figure 6a and b the new log scale of the IV curve looks quite linear and increasing in the range of 150 to 250 mA. I thought that it should be flat if it was a superconductor (no resistance). Can anyone explain how that behavior still supports it being a superconductor?

Because you're not measuring a pure superconductor sample. To be able to observe the cliff on the IV curve you need enough of the current path in between the electrodes to be superconducting, but certainly not all of it will be. This is true even in commercial superconductors, just with the ohmic losses pushed down even further.

Ah that makes sense. Thanks!
Post reply on HN