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

Absence of superconductivity in LK-99 at ambient conditions

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 81 posts

Re: Absence of superconductivity in LK-99 at ambient conditions

#51

Post by MissingAFew »

kijin wrote: post #42
lumost wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why would this be the case? (not a chemist, but was trained in physics)

According to the screenshot attached to the tweet, it seems that the material needs to have oxygen atoms in exactly the right locations, too, not just copper. Annealing in an oxygen-deprived environment might not be conducive to that. The original two papers were inconsistent with respect to the vacuum required in the process. Perhaps they were working with crappy equipment that can't maintain a vacuum and accidental…

Wasn't the original paper's sample a result from a broken vacuum tube? Correct me if I'm misremembering.

Re: Absence of superconductivity in LK-99 at ambient conditions

#53

Post by beaned »

Zetice wrote: post #30
gizmo686 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you need to believe anything at this point. Unless you regularly dance at the bleeding edge of material science, either sit back and enjoy the show, or change the channel and watch something else.

Conversely, why wouldn't someone believe something if there are no consequences to being wrong? As you say, unless you regularly dance at the bleeding edge of material science, nothing you believe really matters, so why not jump in with both feet?

Eventually such a practice will bite you in the ass when you form an opinion on something you think doesn't matter, but actually turns out to matter.

Re: Absence of superconductivity in LK-99 at ambient conditions

#55

Post by Turskarama »

jprete wrote: post #31
Zetice wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conversely, why wouldn't someone believe something if there are no consequences to being wrong? As you say, unless you regularly dance at the bleeding edge of material science, nothing you believe really matters, so why not jump in with both feet?

Because it leads to a habit of getting overly excited about every press release.

And then burning out when too many of them turn out to be nothing and deciding no progress ever gets made.

Re: Absence of superconductivity in LK-99 at ambient conditions

#56

Post by Nition »

function_seven wrote: post #43
computerdork wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems super interesting, waiting to see if this sparks another round of fabrication attempts!

Oh man, “fabrication” isn’t a word I’d use :) I had to reread that a couple times before I realized you meant “make” and not “fake” (…right?)

"Fabricate" is a bit of a contronym really. Like oversight or sanction. Two meanings that are almost the opposite of each other.

Re: Absence of superconductivity in LK-99 at ambient conditions

#57

Post by coding123 »

sMarsIntruder wrote: post #4
soligern wrote: post #3

Now I don’t know what to believe.

Wait till tomorrow when there will be a new not peer reviewed paper stating the contrary. [edit:grammar]

lol, and now it's not tomorrow, it's today

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37043447

Re: Absence of superconductivity in LK-99 at ambient conditions

#58

Post by loveparade »

sMarsIntruder wrote: post #4
soligern wrote: post #3

Now I don’t know what to believe.

Wait till tomorrow when there will be a new not peer reviewed paper stating the contrary. [edit:grammar]

Sure, but you really think peer review would solve any of that? It would only make things move 1000x slower and be worse.

The current "free-market" process of replication attempts is going to resolve the issue both quicker and with more statistical significance than peer-review ever could.

Perhaps this isn't what you're implying, but the peer-review word in your comment jumped out to me, as if that changes anything.

Re: Absence of superconductivity in LK-99 at ambient conditions

#59

Post by nntwozz »

Asianometry recently released a video on the history of superconductors:

https://youtu.be/wUczYHyOhLM

The research field is apparently fraught with failures.

The video is a great primer on the subject and tones down all the hype when looking back at previous breakthroughs.

Re: Absence of superconductivity in LK-99 at ambient conditions

#60

Post by colordrops »

jacquesm wrote: post #26
fnord77 wrote: post #5

I think we'll eventually discover superconductivity isn't possible at STP

What part of physics is it that states this and how do you explain that 'room temperature' just happens to be the range that is related to us and our environment and not to anything particular in physics? Or is it that you suspect that there is an exclusive or relationship between the conditions that allow complex biological life to never have overlap with those that allow superconductivity?

I don't think they are talking about physics, but rather the law of "nothing ever happens".
Post reply on HN