The substance produced from the paper isn't a superconductor. While extremely unlikely, there is still a chance that LK-99 is a superconductor, but the paper itself did not sufficiently describe the method needed to make it so as to replicate it properly. We will know the resolution to this once the sample from the original researchers is assessed by a third party, of which there are presently at least two to my unde…
The German team produced a crystal of pure LK-99 and tested it. From the article: > LK-99 is not a superconductor, but an insulator with a resistance in the millions of ohms And furthermore, the graphs from the original pre-print article are just graphs of the resistivity of Cu2S. It sounds like there's nearly zero chance of any further science here (beyond confirmation).
LK-99 isn’t a superconductor
501–510 of 754 posts
Re: LK-99 isn’t a superconductor
#502My wife will be very happy. When I explained to her the potential if it truly was the breakthrough being reported, her first reaction was: "I hope we establish a government agency to regulate everything floating around because I don't want to get bumped into by random stuff".
Re: LK-99 isn’t a superconductor
#503Company that has already lied in the past lies again, and everyone eats it up, again... The internet has taught me to never trust material science advancements at face value. Batteries, solar power, superconductors, nanomaterials.. Even when they legit work, there is usually a straight forward reason why it just isn't feasible, and that is conveniently left out of the press release. I have to go to the HN comment sec…
"Company that has already lied in the past lies again, and everyone eats it up, again" - what are you referring to?
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05294-9
https://www.science.org/content/article/something-seriously-...
Re: LK-99 isn’t a superconductor
#504Earlier quoted context omitted.
But there's nothing meaningful in the video. He just keeps reiterating how he thinks you should feel about the situation. He clearly doesn't think it's worth his time to understand anything about LK-99, its history, or its popularity. It seems like most anybody that watched the fireworks show is more informed than he is. So what's the video about? The same way he says "this isn't how science is done", you could say a…
Yeah. I would argue that he displayed some bad science of his own. He kept harping on about how the LK-99 paper didn't show resistivity going down to exactly zero, but had a residual resistivity. But that is exactly what you would have seen with a mixed phase sample with some superconductor and some normal material. It took proper scientific detective work to distinguish the possibilities, not this kind of silly snar…
As someone who remembers the original cold fusion debacle well, this felt exactly the same to me: announce a result with a ton of unnecessary hype and fanfare (I mean, the closing sentence in the paper was just absurd in my opinion) without first trying to (a) at least call up some experts in superconductivity to get their opinion, or at least (b) write a paper with less of a "new era for humanity" tone. This smelled 100% of these researchers chasing glory without a modicum of introspection. I thought the most important part of the video is where the professor said that scientists are taught that when they get weird results, their first instinct should absolutely be to question it: what could have gone wrong? how could my experimental setup have been flawed? These researchers showed none of that appropriate skepticism.
Re: LK-99 isn’t a superconductor
#505Sixty Symbols released a video about this yesterday, and in it professor Philip Moriarty is less than impressed with the whole ordeal. I haven't been paying attention, I'm too jaded and skeptical and assumed from the start that there was something wrong and much hype about nothing. Bad Science and Room Temperature Superconductors - Sixty Symbols: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zl-AgmoZ5mo
And he did not talk at all about the scientifically most interesting part of the affair, which was the clever investigation from multiple angles that finally unearthed the explanation. It's as though he just ran his mouth without reading the literature... which is not a very scientific thing to do, is it?
Re: LK-99 isn’t a superconductor
#506Earlier quoted context omitted.
Am not the author of that comment, but the fact that comes to mind is that aluminum is used for virtually all transmission and distribution lines - for price reasons - even though copper has better conductivity. If we did discover a room-temperature superconductor, I suspect it would be a while before the cost to produce it in the bulk quantities required for electrical transmission are economically attractive compar…
Aluminum vs copper is a good example. Another is that we already do use superconducting transmission lines in a few places. We could do more of that, but presumably it's expensive to install and/or maintain otherwise we'd be using it everywhere. I'm not sure what the longest or highest capacity superconducting links currently in existence are.
Re: LK-99 isn’t a superconductor
#507It’s disappointing news but the excitement and amount of replication on this paper was pretty fun to witness and experience. To me the most interesting part was everyone talking about potential consequences, uses, the order of magnitude improvements we’d see in certain costs or areas. Pumps, MRIs, power grids, chips, etc. Great reminder what materials science can do to some underlying economics.
I disagree. I get pissed off when revolutionary scientific news is brought to me only to turn out to be some bogus crap. I don’t care about the replication and peer review process, it’s not fun, it’s banal. I would much rather have preferred to learn about LK-99 once it was confirmed to be a room temp superconductor, and if it wasn’t then I’d rather never hear about it. Now I have to walk back explanations I gave to…
If you step back and scan headlines a few days, or weeks, or years, after, you find that almost all of it comes to naught. (Not absolutely all of it, there is some real news, and occasionally a story grips and/or surprises.)
You can spare yourself a tremendous amount of cognitive and emotional strain and whiplash by waiting for the dust to settle. And possibly, cultivating a sense for what might actually be significant. (Early stories of a virus in a city I'd never heard of in China growing at 10x a week caught my attention quickly, as one reasonably recent example.) It's possible to get caught with a normalcy bias, though being prepared to quickly revise your priors helps here.
The LK-99 story reminded me a lot news that broke shortly after I'd first come online via the campus Unix network at uni: the Fleischmann–Pons cold fusion paper. There was a lot of excited discussion, and within a few days I had (courtesy of an FTP server --- this was not only pre-World Wide Web, but pre-Gopher, though we had Usenet) an ASCII-text version of the paper, something I excitedly wrote (via snail mail) home about. And ... after a few weeks ... it turned out to be nothing.
Science, mostly, progresses relatively slowly. Big upsets are rare. Extravagent claims (in a hype-driven and grant-driven world) are increasingly prevalent (it was bad enough 35 years ago, it's worse now).
So this time 'round, I scanned the headlines and some of the discussion, but mostly sat the story out.
The generative-AI story (as another recent example) seems more substantial but still somewhat frothy. Though I strongly do expect that far more capable AI techniques could well emerge quite suddenly and to profound effect.
But when you recognise that a story is largely speculation, especially if it's defending a point of view (Business As Usual / status quo or New World Order / this changes everything, or many views lying betwixt and beyond) recongise many of them as strongly motivated and quite often weakly informed.
Re: LK-99 isn’t a superconductor
#508Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the bright side: when people say “believe in the science,” this is exactly what they should be thinking: challenge. This whole process has been super healthy and similar challenges are important and needed for everything published, not just this particular research area. I might be out in left field, but I read so often that researchers are running out of ideas. What’s wrong with getting a PhD for challenging some…
Does this extend to climate change science too?
I just believe that there is a tremendous amount of pressure (financial and otherwise) to publish, there is academic pressure to toe the line on popular theories, and humans are fallible.
This is most likely the same for climate science as it is for medical research or any scientific field.
Re: LK-99 isn’t a superconductor
#509Earlier quoted context omitted.
Iris, the fabled ethnicly Russian LK99 Homebrewer with the Catgirl Girlfriend, is not convinced : - "70% CuS impurity" are you sure you didn't grab the Chalcocite by accident? - There's no significant CuS in samples prepared at 925°C. There cannot be. - I tried forcefully introducing sulfide into pbo, it just. Doesn't work. Even at 600°C. PbS reduces lead in 2 PbO to 3Pb, leaving as SO2. https://twitter.com/iris_IGB/…
I really wish less people would give pseudo-anon accounts this much credence. Literally no good science has (ever?) been done on Twitter/X, it's mostly just stupid equivocating. Much thanks goes out to the actual scientists out there working in labs and publishing their findings. The academic/publishing process is far from perfect already (conflicts of interest, funding, political pressure, institutional pressure, pe…
Re: LK-99 isn’t a superconductor
#510The substance produced from the paper isn't a superconductor. While extremely unlikely, there is still a chance that LK-99 is a superconductor, but the paper itself did not sufficiently describe the method needed to make it so as to replicate it properly. We will know the resolution to this once the sample from the original researchers is assessed by a third party, of which there are presently at least two to my unde…
It's like we have a murder suspect, the murder weapon, and fingerprints lifted from the scene. At this point it could still be space aliens, but nobody in their right mind would treat that possibility seriously.