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

Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(PO₄)₆O

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–389 of 389 posts

Re: Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(PO₄)₆O

#381

Post by zackees »

lucubratory wrote: post #373
zackees wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cold fusion was replicated by a few labs but that wasn’t good enough for the media and they killed it. For background see 60 minutes episode “Cold Fusion is Hot again” where they interview and admit Pons Fleischmann was right. The difference now is that China is a super power and doesn’t have to kiss the ring of the US hegemon. As an example of replication see https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S036031…

Journal seems legitimate, but author has a H-index of 7 and is making a revolutionary claim that the vast majority of working scientists in the field reject. Why aren't people accepting his work, then? Who is perpetrating this "hoax" you are referencing?

Because science has been captured by the global mafia who wants to shut off oil imports if some client state decides to get uppity.

This proverbial gun is disabled if there is abundant decentralized power generation they don’t control.

Just look at the oil shutdown at Niger.

Re: Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(PO₄)₆O

#382

Post by lucubratory »

zackees wrote: post #381
lucubratory wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Journal seems legitimate, but author has a H-index of 7 and is making a revolutionary claim that the vast majority of working scientists in the field reject. Why aren't people accepting his work, then? Who is perpetrating this "hoax" you are referencing?

Because science has been captured by the global mafia who wants to shut off oil imports if some client state decides to get uppity. This proverbial gun is disabled if there is abundant decentralized power generation they don’t control. Just look at the oil shutdown at Niger.

Okay, so if this global conspiracy is about maintaining control of the world through the supply of oil, thus they are suppressing cold fusion, why have they allowed solar power and wind power to exist? Or battery storage technology, or electric cars?

Re: Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(PO₄)₆O

#383

Post by ekianjo »

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #327
ekianjo wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why would multiple independent labs fake their videos Why would different newspapers spread hoaxes? Yet it happens...

why would you respond to the question with an unrelated question instead of answering directly?

because incentives are the same

Re: Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(PO₄)₆O

#384

Post by frognumber »

aziaziazi wrote: post #224
frognumber wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such things are possible, and not even very uncommon. The human body has tissues with conductivity different in different dimensions. If you'd like to create one yourself, take a bunch of parallel insulated wires. Conductivity will be low along the wires, and high perpendicular to them. Or alternated high-resistivity and low-resistivity sheets. Conduction will be low parallel to the sheets, and high going through the…

> human tissues > isolated wires > alternated sheets The thinks you describes are systems made of multiple materials. Are you aware of a materials that behave that way by its own ?

To give an extreme example: Bundles of carbon nanotubes. Or carbon nanotube cloth. It's pure carbon.

A lot of materials (including any crystal) have a sense of direction.

Re: Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(PO₄)₆O

#385

Post by thelazyone »

jacquesm wrote: post #94
thelazyone wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a fair question. I guess the answer is "because we have superconductors, and no material with 'very small resistance' instead". Also note that while there is zero resistance you still have parasitic currents and general interaction with the rest of the environment. So no perpetual motion for us today!

Even a 'very small resistance' would likely be prohibitive. Pure silver for instance is an excellent conductor, but when you're talking about the last little bits it's orders of magnitude difference between that and a superconductor, and those orders of magnitude difference in resistance translate into orders of magnitude more current. So even a small resistance would cause your MRI machine to have a resolution so lo…

I think that the initial question was "why a 0 resistance compared to a ridicously low resistance". And my point is that it's easier to get a superconductor than some material with "ridicously low" resistance. As you said, silver is unusable for potent magnets, and such is any other non-superconducting magnets.

Probably if we had materials with a billionth of the resistance of silver they would work, but we haven't. And we have superconductors, luckly. :)

Re: Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(PO₄)₆O

#386

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

ekianjo wrote: post #383
ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why would you respond to the question with an unrelated question instead of answering directly?

because incentives are the same

if that were true, you could have answered the question directly

you couldn't, suggesting that it isn't true

by the way, you forgot to respond to [0]

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36984443

Re: Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(PO₄)₆O

#387

Post by daxfohl »

snowwrestler wrote: post #359
flavius29663 wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

even more so as the mug literally levitates above the desk, the atoms of the mug are not really touching the atoms of the desk.

The atoms do touch, by interacting electrically--which is the physical definition of how anything touches anything.

(for fermions)

Re: Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(PO₄)₆O

#388

Post by stcredzero »

jacquesm wrote: post #379
stcredzero wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The material used for conductors must be mechanically stable and perform consistently from one production batch to another. One reason why current high tc superconductors are not popular I was going to ask: Why don't we use the current high temperature superconductors, and start building grid interconnects? I guess part of the answer lies in the cost that would be incurred because of the mechanical properties of the…

Because it is easier to keep a localized thing cool than something that is 100's of km long. That's why iceboxes are boxes and not ice ribbons and why most applications of superconductors right now are using them as coils for magnetic field and volume economy. For instance there is one grid component that uses superconducting coils as inertia free stabilizers, they can be used to source and sink current very rapidly…

Because it is easier to keep a localized thing cool than something that is 100's of km long.

If we simply decided to make this kind of thing a priority, we could probably manufacture suspension components at scale. (Or create small tunnel boring machines and bury them?) We wouldn't need to replace all of the lines. We'd just need enough interconnects to make transferring more power economical.

Re: Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(PO₄)₆O

#389

Post by stcredzero »

mrguyorama wrote: post #355
stcredzero wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The material used for conductors must be mechanically stable and perform consistently from one production batch to another. One reason why current high tc superconductors are not popular I was going to ask: Why don't we use the current high temperature superconductors, and start building grid interconnects? I guess part of the answer lies in the cost that would be incurred because of the mechanical properties of the…

The current best "High temperature", standard pressure superconductor only works at -150ish degrees Celsius. That's not as bad as cryogenic superconductors, but it is still a blocker for large scale use.

In essence, my comment is asking, "Why is it a blocker?" Very efficient thermal insulation is something we already have.
Post reply on HN