That's a failed repro then right? Below 110K is below -163.15 Celcius How would that compare to other superconductors?
One of the most well known, YBCO, has a Tc of 95K.
LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K
61–70 of 361 posts
Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K
#62There are multiple mentions of "extraterrestrial super islands", is this a mistranslation of the Meissner effect? Great term nonetheless.
Yes, I saw that, there are some more obvious translation errors.
Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s possible there are tiny bits of superconducting stuff at room temperature which connect into bigger and bigger bits as temperature drops, until it starts working as a whole at 110K. Maybe. Don’t quote me.
That would suggest that a very high quality sample would superconduct at room temperature.
Unless the "low quality" part is actually causing the superconductivity. Remember the multiple simulations that showed Cu replacing Pb at a less favorable site (energetically) was better for superconductivity than at a more favorable site. It's possible "high quality" samples actually have less "imperfections", which seem important for the superconductivity.
Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K
#64Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would suggest that a very high quality sample would superconduct at room temperature.
Unless the "low quality" part is actually causing the superconductivity. Remember the multiple simulations that showed Cu replacing Pb at a less favorable site (energetically) was better for superconductivity than at a more favorable site. It's possible "high quality" samples actually have less "imperfections", which seem important for the superconductivity.
Exactly it's quite possible that 'worse' is actually 'better' and vv. I'm sure that it won't be long before that will be resolved though, this is all happening so fast that such important answers will be sought by more than one team.
Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K
#66Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K
#67Ok not sure how to phrase this: Could there be small pieces of RTSC inside the sample (causing the floating) But then enough impurities to not be able to complete a circuit through the sample? And cooling makes other parts of the sample super conducting?
Could be insulated RTP superconducting crystals, grains, islands with the bulk being a high temperature superconductor?
Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
increased geopolitical tension
That is an interesting observation and puts words to some thoughts that I've had: if it turns out that this is 'the real thing' and the patent holds up South Korea is suddenly a superpower.
That doesn't follow at all. Lead and copper aren't exclusive to South Korea. The authors get prestige and the owners of whatever patents are granted get some money.
Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K
#69There are multiple mentions of "extraterrestrial super islands", is this a mistranslation of the Meissner effect? Great term nonetheless.
It's the mistranslation of room-temperature superconductivity.
"super islands" is likely translated from 超岛 which sounds the same as 超导 (superconductivity). I have no idea how 室温 (room-temperature) became extraterrestrial, must be extraordinarily bad speech to text model.
edit: could be 室温 (shi4wen1) -> shi4wai4 -> 室外(outdoors)/世外(out of this world) -> extraterrestrial
Re: LK-99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistance below 110 K
#70Interesting. Some people are getting strong diamagnetism at RTP, and now someone is actually seeing zero resistance at a low temperature. I'd take this as mildly positive news. It would be a surprising material if it were a high Tc (only in the LN2 sense) superconductor that is also strongly diamagnetic at room temperature (though I'm not sure if that's more surprising than a RTP superconductor).
It's confusing. You'd expect both to be present or none, it is strange to have a material that is conducting and diamagnetic at room temperature and that shows super conductivity at much lower temperature. You'd expect the diamagnetism to disappear with the superconductivity.
Multiple teams have said they had to produce 10 batches just to get one sample with properties worth reporting on.
Perhaps the simplest explanation is that different teams are all ending up with different variations of a common material, with different impurities, crystal structure, etc.
There's likely a whole zoo of interesting materials here!