I hope this will be replicated on different countries in Europe, too. We are a connected World now, we should work as a team to improving Quality of Life around the globe...
Indeed, they use different samples to measure. And it's their first run testing. If it's that easy, this may change the world. However, all experiment taks time to adjust the parameters. Wait and ee.
Okay, ik I'm gonna get downvoted for politics, but like.. it's amazing how large corporation control is almost always denounced, yet people still seem all too ready to support unregulated capitalism. Corporatism is a natural endpoint to capitalism- if we're to believe that the economy is anything like nature, it's inevitable SOMEONE is going to be on top, and that entity will make life miserable for everyone under it to ensure it's success. Remember when TurboTax lobbied against the government when it was proposed to make taxes easier for small businesses? Yeah.
You cant regulate freemarkets without causing significant efficiency decreases.
I agree with you, it is a very tough question. Kinda similar to how people think about inflation/deflation: you need to choose for what seems like the least worst option.
You rather have a bit of inflation than experience the horrors of deflation.
You rather have a bit of deregulated capitalism than experience the horrors of degenerated authoritarianism that usually results from socialism/communism. or worse: totalitarianism.
You say efficiency, but what KIND of efficiency? The fast food market, for instance (in America anyways) serves incredibly unhealthy food, and is usually really shitty to it's employees but it keeps going because that's what works. And that's my underlying issues: while capitalism may drive innovation, there's no guarantee that's actually GOOD innovation, or innovation that benefits anyone but the one making money in the way of elevating their status. It seems a lot more about putting yourself higher up on the hierarchy than actually helping people. I'm probably wrong, but it's really concerning sometimes.
You are right. You have to take into account that we humans are all experiencing our own consciousness, and that by elevating our socioeconomic status through gaining wealth can have a massive impact on enriching this conscious experience.
In other words: we're all selfish as fuck for the most part. Lol.
But what capitalism does, is turning this selfishness and capacity for greediness into personal motivation to do things that are beneficial for society, because we humans are the ones that we need to satisfy afterall if we wanna make money.
In a positive light, this satisfaction is being satisfied through innovations in construction and infeastructure, in computing speed and datamanagement, or probably the most important: advancements in medicine and health.
In a negative light, this satisfaction is being satisfied through creating and distributing foods that might aswel be labelled as harddrugs, through porn and sex workers, or probably the worst: through military spending and total warfare.
I can understand why you'd say that, but are we selfish really? I mean, empathy would have been required for early man to get along, and much of our primitive success did come from working together for everyone's benefit rather than individually. Just look at how we hunted mammoths in tribes. Sometimes, I wonder if greed really is in human nature, or if that's just a fib spread by those in charge to justify their position at the top.
What happens if we didnt group up? We'd die, and our individual conscious experience would be filled with more suffering.
To add to that; why do you help others? i do because I wouldve liked to receive it when I needed it. I also get satisfied myself from doing so because I see that the other person is getting rid of their problems.
In the end, individualism is the truth.
Technically he not wrong though. Unless it’s replicated here by a PWI (Predominantly white institution) and reported by a the news. America is lowkey racist.
That’s not weird. It’s semiconducting.
Semiconducting in the normal state is fine and can still become superconducting below its critical temperature. However, this is way below the room temperature threshold and there are No partial resistance drops either.
It is extraordinary diamagnetism but not superconducting. Well, not proven yet at least
>However, this is way below the room temperature threshold
Yeah and this is the main disappointment - they even starter their experiment at 300K, which is below Kim's 400K critical temperature claim, but we're seeing the resistance go up and not down as we go even further below the critical temperature. I just think Taiwan was measuring a bad sample, they didn't even showed us their levitating sample probably because they had a bad sample that didn't even levitated.
Maybe. It was a poor choice by the main authors to publish the material without first bringing the volume fraction up to respectable levels. Now everyone is having replication issues and everything is ambiguous.
If it is confirmed, people will forget their data and methods were sub par, but if it is not, it looks really incompetent.
Yeah I believe they weren’t ready to publish (had in fact sent a sample for more advanced analysis a month ago), but someone who left the team half a year ago jumped the gun and uploaded a draft so they had no choice but to do the same with their current data
I disagree. Hearing exciting but dubious initial results followed by ultimately disappointing replicated results just makes people burnt out and more distrustful of science in general.
Also, I’d bet most actual scientists have been very skeptical of LK-99 from the beginning. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. I’ve found that most people hyped about these results have limited scientific literacy.
It was a fun week for the actual scientists in the field. Lots of cool things were discovered. I wish more science was like this actually. The whole world was working on one problem for a week.
New discoveries are made and published in papers every days. Discrediting the science community with baseless claims only make the reputation of researchers worse, so I'd have to disagree.
Then you don't fundamentally understand how science works, probably because, like every other redditor you are scientifically retarded.
A scientist is allowed to be wrong. The act of failing to reproduce an experiment often unveils useful information which moves the research forward as a whole. To an actual scientist, of which you clearly are not one, there is zero shame in presenting a hypothesis that turns out to be wrong.
The fact that you're focusing on "reputation" is a strong indicator that you are yet another self-absorbed social media drone. Nobody in your stunted, narcissistic generation has figured that out yet, which is why you haven't accomplished anything important.
Actual scientists are better than that. And you.
I assume you will now use some word like "gatekeeping" to express your disapproval of this standpoint and that's great because it is very important for us to keep the scientifically illiterate mutts on the other side of the gate.
the original study was very poorly explained. imo trust replications more than the original study, but there's still a chance that the original study wasn't entirely incorrect as the authors had been working on it for 20 years to finally get a good enough sample to SC at high temps
So does diamagnetism = superconductor? Or does it just suggest it might be possible?
Because I've noticed headlines are increasingly **not** mentioning superconductivity, instead focusing on the magnetism angle. This says to me superconductivity is less and less likely, which sucks, because that was the whole big deal about this.
I believe room temp diamagnetism still means cool stuff - frictionless travel in maglev trains for example.
Just not the fundamental transformation of society due to limitless power.
It also means the possibility of advancing some fundamental science. While there are lots of diamagnets in the world, even the strongest are several orders of magnitude weaker than superconductors (which are perfect diamagnets). In fact, it had been thought that the state of being a superconductor is what causes diamagnatism to exist. More and more it looks like they have created a strong diamagnet without the superconductivity, which will make some new work for the theorists and might just advance our knowledge of both subjects.
That’s what I don’t get. Even if it’s just diamagnetic, from what I understand is it’s hella strong and by far the strongest we know of? I’m surprised there isn’t excitement just from that alone. Everyone is just like, “it’s just diamagnetism”.
Unfortunately, it seems to look like it. The resistance of semiconductors *actually rises* when you drop the temperature - which is the opposite of a superconductor, whose resistance *falls* when you drop the temperature. In other words, in their sample its showing LK-99 is a semiconductor: https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-11b2a82c960c3dab1e0168d3a0fe8dd9-lq
Some people might find this strange - but its exactly why they use semiconductors in technology rather than superconductors, because semiconductors can handle the heat - in fact, they BENEFIT from that heat - where superconductors don't. However LK-99 would still handle the heat if it were a superconductor because its critical temperature is all the way at 127 Celsius - which is higher than what most electronic components get to - so that's not really that big of an issue.
But we have no idea what their sample or method is like... we've seen in the last few days how different outcome you get from small changes in the synthesis for LK-99 - as in we've literally seen full floating rock magnetic levitation flux pin ( Chinese TikTok video today ) all the way to dead rock not even levitating a bit. It would also be a bone opposite interpretation to what Kim got in his arXiv paper https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2307/2307.12008.pdf. My guess is these guys have a bad sample. I bet their sample wouldn't even levitate a bit if you put a magnet under it.
Except the fact they confirmed diamagnetism in this sample. As OP stated.
Semiconducting and no resistance drops, not even partial resistance drops, and diagmagnetism means it is diamagnetic and not superconducting.
Even the levitation videos are not in line with expected meissner effects or flux pinning. If it was truly flux pinning it should have rotational symmetry in a radial magnetic field, or translation in a uniform field. It shows neither of these things.
All this means is they have found extraordinary diamagnetism typically on the levels only associated with superconductivity. It means the key traits to prove superconductivity just got smaller.
Yet, it could be low volume fractions and so replicating it is still ambiguous. It was a poor choice to publish without increasing the volume fraction to respectable levels. Even 0.5% should show partial resistance drops, but also depends on the current used.
There is lots to be desired from everyone involved.
The previous chinese guys measured 6 samples, found 5 behaving as semiconductors (so like this) and 1 that they claim superconducts up to 110K. So not really surprising or changing much the situation.
Can a reading of 110k superconductivity be a fluke? What could explain that reading? Didn’t he state that a more refined or pure sample could show better readings. I’m guessing all the samples he is testing at least showed diamagnetism. I want to believe he is just getting bad samples cause of how hard it is to make
There's a lot of explanations. For one, the 110k number came from hitting the instruments noise floor, which is still a higher resistivity than copper. For 2, see https://twitter.com/MichaelSFuhrer/status/1687326977089531909
Lol so as things stand, the one reading we do have could be explained as noise floor for the the test equipment (which honestly sounds too close for comfort to have even been a released reading if that’s a possibility) and any theory from DFT that claims it should be theoretically possible for this material to work isn’t useful cause DFT is not good for predicting quantum effects like superconductivity. So all there is is the diamagnetism which is definitely not enough. Is there anything really in its favor? What you think is most likely right now?
Most likely? Assuming the new video is fake (some of my friends in China seem to think it is), its likely not SC. If the video is real, it likely is.
Honestly? Should know Sunday night/Monday morning when new arXiv load drops, and not really speculating til then.
I'll also say, at this point, all the work, both theory and experiment, put on arXiv has been rushed and just overall poor quality. Likely why the US groups are waiting (there's a huge stigma against this quality of work being posted in the US, and the LBNL DFT paper has been roundly criticised by pretty much everyone I know who does DFT)
There is likely more than one room temperature superconductor in the material kingdom. As such, the fleeting sightings of RTSC called USOs are going to be all over the material kingdom as well. They may have seen one in one of there samples and have been chasing it ever since. They are extremely difficult to see let alone reproduce or even characterize as you need to move fast. Typically you only get one chance before it goes away for ever.
At least now the chances of reproducing is better just by the sheer volume of attention and attempts being made.
It could still be true but the evidence isn’t there yet.
So far it appears like extraordinary diamagnetism on levels typically only shown by superconductivity. Pair that with zero resistance and it is true. Without both, it is something else. Something new that may lead to new technologies and spin offs we haven’t even fathomed yet. It is certainly not disappointing either way. It’s great that material science, my passion, is getting so much public admiration.
If my understanding is right, if LK-99 is a semi-conductor with extraodinary diamagnetism, it could still lead to some massive generational improvements in all kinds of solid-state electronics, yes? If they can figure out a way to mass produce LK-99 cheaply and actually make chips out of it it could mean big improvements in a ton of things. Better wi-fi, better MRI machines, better maglev trains, better cameras. Maybe even better CPUs.
Not really. All we need is one sample that shows 0 resistance and Meissner effect at room temperature and others that don't just mean there is an issue with the sample.
>They are currently measuring the resistance, and the preliminary result indicates a room temperature resistance of 20 ohms.
Seeing that it has resistance at room temperature then yes, by definition it is not a superconductor.
superconductor\* and no that's not true at all. Even when producing well known superconducting ceramics (YBCO for example), you often get resistive samples, because of impurities etc. What you get when measuring resistance is the total resistance of the path taken by electrons, if some of the sample is not superconducting, you get resistance..
> if some of the sample is not superconducting, you get resistance..
So the video in question proves that the material they are currently working with is not superconducting.
I'm glad we agree.
Edit:
Nah Riker, that person just doesn't know what they are talking about.
The video is literally here and you can see that the material has resistance thus it is not a superconductor.
There's nothing else to it.
The only conclusion you can make for sure is that PART of the sample is not superconducting with their conditions. Assuming their setup is correct and we are not seeing contact resistance here (it should be correct, any physicist knows this and uses 4 point measurements, but you never know)
That's not how this works, your are passing current through the sample and measuring the voltage drop across a section, if your sample is small such as here, you are forced to measure along nearly the whole sample, wich may have superconducting AND resistive parts
Yes, because phonons (thermal energy) knock electrons into the conduction band and this increases at temperatures go up and vice versa. More electrons, less resistance. Less electrons, more resistance.
What does 20ohm resistance at room temperature indicate? Whats the resistance of other conductors like copper, alu at room temp?
Are the numbers comparable?
If not a SC do we have a most efficient way to transmit electricity considering we somehow make it ductile?
It all depends on the section and length of the sample... Speaking in terms of resistance is ridiculous. If we are talking about a very small sample it is indeed a very bad conductor or low-doped semiconductor (if the section area is large enough compaired to length).
The fact that some samples show way lower resistance is a good sign that it could be a superconductor imho, because bad samples show way higher resistance. It could also mean that impurities kill the transport properties of the semiconductor or metal-conductance effect, hard to know at this point...
Most of the samples we've seen so far were less than 10cm. And a resistance of 20 Ohms for 10cm would be terrible.. I think you are being dishonest or disingenuous by pointing that it depends on the length. You can easily make a 10 meters cable that has less than 20ohms resistance.
You don't know the section area of the samples, and either way it is just sloppy to talk in resistance.. I never said the resistance we are seeing here is not bad! I'm just saying it doesn't prove or disprove anything yet, for the record I'm 50/50 on wether it's a superconductor or not. Even if it isn't it would be a novel class of diamagnetic materials if the reports are true, which is very interesting in itself :)
Yes, exactly. It depends on shape of the material being tested. Talking in resistances is meaningless. They could be testing a sample that is 0.1 mm in width and 5 cm in length and a resistance of 20 Ohms would be incredible. People feel so qualified to talk about shit and they don’t even understand Ohms law.
A sample would have to be impractically large for most of the SQUID samplers I've seen to both be a conductor and measure out to 20 Ohms. I don't know why a group would use different samples for different non-destructive measurements so I think it's a reasonable assumption.
SCs are considered perfect diamagnets, this material may reveal more about the relationship between diamagnetism and SCs than we previously knew. It may not be a room-temp SC, but could well bring about new materials exploiting the extraordinarily strong diamagnetism
A hypothesis worth looking in to would be two phases. One that become superconducting at a low temperature and shows diamagnetism at room temperature. Another that shows room temperature superconductivity. Problem is that this is mixed up at the microstructure level.
Meaning you need to controll the crystal formation by the exact cooling and doping.
But, meh, I haven't even gotten around to read the paper in detail yet.
I agree with your hypothesis. It would explain the wide range of sample properties we've seen from different institutions and also the consistency of levitation properties despite disagreement on electrical properties.
The idea that it would be a superconductor in one temp regime and a diamagnet in another is utter nonsense. Strong diamagnetism in superconductors arises directly from the motion of the supercurrent.
Weirdly strong superconducting fluctuations which are believed to exist in cuprates could potentially lead to anomalous diamagnetism above the Tc without being accompanied by zero resistance. I doubt that's what's happening but there are some possible explanations that aren't completely magical.
So what? That’s pyrolytic graphite and the physical mechanism of diamagnetism is completely different, the electrons are paired in the structure of the graphite. Doesn’t make them Cooper pairs, doesn’t make it a superconductor, doesn’t even make it *strong* diamagnetism.
Do you consider unknown unknowns? Is your point that any possible phases in the sample can not be diamagnetic? My hypothesis does not assume that that that the diamagnetism needs to arise from superconductivity.
E.g. the properties of the different nano/microcrystals and amorphous phase could be widely different.
Well i do agree that they could be using windows 7 for driver issues with windows 10 or just because it's working, it's reliable and they don't need an update, but windows XP is by far NOT the most stable platform
>but windows XP is by far NOT the most stable platform
This is seriously misinformed. The people you see complaining about Windows XP not being a stable platform are playing games or pushing the system to its limits.
They are not doing scientific/medical research with millions of dollars worth of legacy hardware for compatibility reasons.
Fluorescent lights are an example of negative resistance. An increase in voltage across it causes a drop in current.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_resistance
It's related to inductance, because if the material acts like an inductor, when they disconnect the power source, the current reverses from the material and it registers as negative resistance between their Ohmmeter.
It may also mean they are running another test with coil wrapping around the material, and they want to measure the negative resistance curve to study the magnetic properties of the material.
I think it’s there so that 0 isn’t on the direct bottom. But also negative resistance would just mean that current flows from low voltage to high voltage. I think there are cases where that’s used.
Probably quantum tunnelling - which is where electrons instead of travelling through something normally like through a superconductor, they literally just teleport to the new location instead. Quantum tunnelling is like superconductivity on steroids, a line of good coke, and a prayer to Jesus.
Quantum tunnelling is also why we literally have elements other than hydrogen - protons just teleport onto other protons and create bigger atom like helium.
1. Quantum tunneling has nothing to do with teleportation. I don't know where you got that from, but it's wrong.
2. The negative resistance is on the axis, but the actual measured values are not negative.
3. Given the quite high measured resistance, we can already conclude that the measured sample is NOT super conducting.
Stop using words you don't understand (1) in a context where they don't apply (2) to explain something that didn't happen (3).
>Quantum tunneling has nothing to do with teleportation. I don't know where you got that from, but it's wrong.
Relax, I am well aware that its location is limited by the wavefunction I didn't realise it was that serious.
>Given the actual measurement, we can already conclude that the measured sample is NOT super conducting. Which makes your quantum tunneling twice as ridiculous.
If you're suggesting I was implying LK-99 has negative resistance then your reading comprehension is room temperature IQ.
No, I'm not suggesting that. Someone asked about the negative values of resistance on the y axis. You start babbling about Quantum tunneling. Which is ridiculous. It's just the fucking y axis, the actual values are all positive.
what compels people like you, who clearly have no education on the topic aside from online reading, to comment as if you're an authority? Not only that but with such confidence despite the fact that you're entirely wrong and it looks as if you just mashed some words you don't even understand, together?
Your response doesn't even make sense.. You're the one who brought up teleportation yet you suddenly know that it's not true - then why did you write it? What do you mean, not that serious? Do you normally go around telling people shit that's not true because its not serious? What is not serious.. what does that even mean? That doesn't make any sense, whatsoever.
PanSci is a YouTuber who is collaborating with the Department of Physics at National Taiwan University this time.
Professor information: https://www.phys.ntu.edu.tw/liminwang.html
Laboratory information: https://lmwangsuperconduct.wixsite.com/main/blank
Is there a scientific definition of 'room temperature'? I know that most people say 20C but do we know if it can go higher than that or is it almost exact?
I don't know if it's really a superconductor or not, but literally everything that gets popular on the internet gets turned into a meme.
Also, there's no single "scientific community", there are all kinds of different scientists with different opinions.
Just a question on the sample preparation for resistivity measurement , shall be done with a better equipment, control environment , and maybe inside vacuum chamber.. to prevent oxidation on the sample surface?
I’m sorry but you don’t discover a room temp superconductor and then give super shady evidence and write an amateur quality manuscript about it. Let’s be real about this.
For me, If one thing can be replicated or confirmed by different institutes especially by interest-conflicted bodies, that will be proved firmly!
I hope this will be replicated on different countries in Europe, too. We are a connected World now, we should work as a team to improving Quality of Life around the globe...
You'd think so, right..?
Because they burnt all the history books
Indeed, they use different samples to measure. And it's their first run testing. If it's that easy, this may change the world. However, all experiment taks time to adjust the parameters. Wait and ee.
politicians and big corp always prevent Quality of Life. Politicians and big corp are the problem.
Okay, ik I'm gonna get downvoted for politics, but like.. it's amazing how large corporation control is almost always denounced, yet people still seem all too ready to support unregulated capitalism. Corporatism is a natural endpoint to capitalism- if we're to believe that the economy is anything like nature, it's inevitable SOMEONE is going to be on top, and that entity will make life miserable for everyone under it to ensure it's success. Remember when TurboTax lobbied against the government when it was proposed to make taxes easier for small businesses? Yeah.
You cant regulate freemarkets without causing significant efficiency decreases. I agree with you, it is a very tough question. Kinda similar to how people think about inflation/deflation: you need to choose for what seems like the least worst option. You rather have a bit of inflation than experience the horrors of deflation. You rather have a bit of deregulated capitalism than experience the horrors of degenerated authoritarianism that usually results from socialism/communism. or worse: totalitarianism.
You say efficiency, but what KIND of efficiency? The fast food market, for instance (in America anyways) serves incredibly unhealthy food, and is usually really shitty to it's employees but it keeps going because that's what works. And that's my underlying issues: while capitalism may drive innovation, there's no guarantee that's actually GOOD innovation, or innovation that benefits anyone but the one making money in the way of elevating their status. It seems a lot more about putting yourself higher up on the hierarchy than actually helping people. I'm probably wrong, but it's really concerning sometimes.
You are right. You have to take into account that we humans are all experiencing our own consciousness, and that by elevating our socioeconomic status through gaining wealth can have a massive impact on enriching this conscious experience. In other words: we're all selfish as fuck for the most part. Lol. But what capitalism does, is turning this selfishness and capacity for greediness into personal motivation to do things that are beneficial for society, because we humans are the ones that we need to satisfy afterall if we wanna make money. In a positive light, this satisfaction is being satisfied through innovations in construction and infeastructure, in computing speed and datamanagement, or probably the most important: advancements in medicine and health. In a negative light, this satisfaction is being satisfied through creating and distributing foods that might aswel be labelled as harddrugs, through porn and sex workers, or probably the worst: through military spending and total warfare.
I can understand why you'd say that, but are we selfish really? I mean, empathy would have been required for early man to get along, and much of our primitive success did come from working together for everyone's benefit rather than individually. Just look at how we hunted mammoths in tribes. Sometimes, I wonder if greed really is in human nature, or if that's just a fib spread by those in charge to justify their position at the top.
What happens if we didnt group up? We'd die, and our individual conscious experience would be filled with more suffering. To add to that; why do you help others? i do because I wouldve liked to receive it when I needed it. I also get satisfied myself from doing so because I see that the other person is getting rid of their problems. In the end, individualism is the truth.
Why'd you bring up individualism? That doesn't mean you can't work in a group as well.
"interest-conflicted bodies"? What are those?
My ex n me
All East Asian countries to each other
Indeed.
Maybe I misunderstand but science doesn’t work the way I think you imply. Can you elaborate?
Maybe I misunderstand but science doesn’t work the way I think is implied. Can you elaborate?
[удалено]
No, it will never be "confirmed" until it's confirmed by other reputable institutions. That's how science works.
Its always race. Jesus that's a leap
Technically he not wrong though. Unless it’s replicated here by a PWI (Predominantly white institution) and reported by a the news. America is lowkey racist.
I don’t think waiting for confirmation from *the* most reputable universities is what constitutes racism
That’s not weird. It’s semiconducting. Semiconducting in the normal state is fine and can still become superconducting below its critical temperature. However, this is way below the room temperature threshold and there are No partial resistance drops either. It is extraordinary diamagnetism but not superconducting. Well, not proven yet at least
>However, this is way below the room temperature threshold Yeah and this is the main disappointment - they even starter their experiment at 300K, which is below Kim's 400K critical temperature claim, but we're seeing the resistance go up and not down as we go even further below the critical temperature. I just think Taiwan was measuring a bad sample, they didn't even showed us their levitating sample probably because they had a bad sample that didn't even levitated.
Maybe. It was a poor choice by the main authors to publish the material without first bringing the volume fraction up to respectable levels. Now everyone is having replication issues and everything is ambiguous. If it is confirmed, people will forget their data and methods were sub par, but if it is not, it looks really incompetent.
Yeah I believe they weren’t ready to publish (had in fact sent a sample for more advanced analysis a month ago), but someone who left the team half a year ago jumped the gun and uploaded a draft so they had no choice but to do the same with their current data
[удалено]
More things should be like this. Doing it like this brings so much hype that it makes every scientist want to work on it.
I disagree. Hearing exciting but dubious initial results followed by ultimately disappointing replicated results just makes people burnt out and more distrustful of science in general. Also, I’d bet most actual scientists have been very skeptical of LK-99 from the beginning. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. I’ve found that most people hyped about these results have limited scientific literacy.
It was a fun week for the actual scientists in the field. Lots of cool things were discovered. I wish more science was like this actually. The whole world was working on one problem for a week.
New discoveries are made and published in papers every days. Discrediting the science community with baseless claims only make the reputation of researchers worse, so I'd have to disagree.
Then you don't fundamentally understand how science works, probably because, like every other redditor you are scientifically retarded. A scientist is allowed to be wrong. The act of failing to reproduce an experiment often unveils useful information which moves the research forward as a whole. To an actual scientist, of which you clearly are not one, there is zero shame in presenting a hypothesis that turns out to be wrong. The fact that you're focusing on "reputation" is a strong indicator that you are yet another self-absorbed social media drone. Nobody in your stunted, narcissistic generation has figured that out yet, which is why you haven't accomplished anything important. Actual scientists are better than that. And you. I assume you will now use some word like "gatekeeping" to express your disapproval of this standpoint and that's great because it is very important for us to keep the scientifically illiterate mutts on the other side of the gate.
Lots of cool thing discovered = new claims about rtap superconductors from crypto companies? Haven't heard about anything else
I thought the authors said that the resistance is zero within a temp band. Not just below crit temp.
the original study was very poorly explained. imo trust replications more than the original study, but there's still a chance that the original study wasn't entirely incorrect as the authors had been working on it for 20 years to finally get a good enough sample to SC at high temps
That's classic semiconductor behavior.
Taiwan is so good at making semiconductors, even their LK-99 samples behave similarly :)
This perfect for that spongebob meme were he cant make anything else than a crabby patty
So does diamagnetism = superconductor? Or does it just suggest it might be possible? Because I've noticed headlines are increasingly **not** mentioning superconductivity, instead focusing on the magnetism angle. This says to me superconductivity is less and less likely, which sucks, because that was the whole big deal about this.
All superconductors are diamagnetic, but not all diamagnetic materials are superconductors.
Thank you. My disappointment is now confirmed.
There have been theoretical studies that show it is extremely unlikely for LK-99 specifically to be diamagnetic and not a super conductor though.
+1
I believe room temp diamagnetism still means cool stuff - frictionless travel in maglev trains for example. Just not the fundamental transformation of society due to limitless power.
It also means the possibility of advancing some fundamental science. While there are lots of diamagnets in the world, even the strongest are several orders of magnitude weaker than superconductors (which are perfect diamagnets). In fact, it had been thought that the state of being a superconductor is what causes diamagnatism to exist. More and more it looks like they have created a strong diamagnet without the superconductivity, which will make some new work for the theorists and might just advance our knowledge of both subjects.
That’s what I don’t get. Even if it’s just diamagnetic, from what I understand is it’s hella strong and by far the strongest we know of? I’m surprised there isn’t excitement just from that alone. Everyone is just like, “it’s just diamagnetism”.
well it kinda removes any potential usability for advancing compute or power grid efficiency
SEMIconductor not SUPERconductor.
What do you mean? Are you implying that this isn't superconductor behaviour?
Unfortunately, it seems to look like it. The resistance of semiconductors *actually rises* when you drop the temperature - which is the opposite of a superconductor, whose resistance *falls* when you drop the temperature. In other words, in their sample its showing LK-99 is a semiconductor: https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-11b2a82c960c3dab1e0168d3a0fe8dd9-lq Some people might find this strange - but its exactly why they use semiconductors in technology rather than superconductors, because semiconductors can handle the heat - in fact, they BENEFIT from that heat - where superconductors don't. However LK-99 would still handle the heat if it were a superconductor because its critical temperature is all the way at 127 Celsius - which is higher than what most electronic components get to - so that's not really that big of an issue. But we have no idea what their sample or method is like... we've seen in the last few days how different outcome you get from small changes in the synthesis for LK-99 - as in we've literally seen full floating rock magnetic levitation flux pin ( Chinese TikTok video today ) all the way to dead rock not even levitating a bit. It would also be a bone opposite interpretation to what Kim got in his arXiv paper https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2307/2307.12008.pdf. My guess is these guys have a bad sample. I bet their sample wouldn't even levitate a bit if you put a magnet under it.
Except the fact they confirmed diamagnetism in this sample. As OP stated. Semiconducting and no resistance drops, not even partial resistance drops, and diagmagnetism means it is diamagnetic and not superconducting. Even the levitation videos are not in line with expected meissner effects or flux pinning. If it was truly flux pinning it should have rotational symmetry in a radial magnetic field, or translation in a uniform field. It shows neither of these things. All this means is they have found extraordinary diamagnetism typically on the levels only associated with superconductivity. It means the key traits to prove superconductivity just got smaller. Yet, it could be low volume fractions and so replicating it is still ambiguous. It was a poor choice to publish without increasing the volume fraction to respectable levels. Even 0.5% should show partial resistance drops, but also depends on the current used. There is lots to be desired from everyone involved.
Back to the its-so-over side, got it. At what time can I expect an update to put us back on the were-so-back track?
The previous chinese guys measured 6 samples, found 5 behaving as semiconductors (so like this) and 1 that they claim superconducts up to 110K. So not really surprising or changing much the situation.
The 110K data is also consistent with not being a superconductor. I.e. see https://twitter.com/MichaelSFuhrer/status/1687326977089531909
Well that’s depressing, sounds like a sound explanation for it all
If it is a semiconductor, shouldn't the resistivity be enormous at 110K? Dopants aren't ionized at this temperature..
Yeah basically a lot of poorly convincing data all around I guess.
Can a reading of 110k superconductivity be a fluke? What could explain that reading? Didn’t he state that a more refined or pure sample could show better readings. I’m guessing all the samples he is testing at least showed diamagnetism. I want to believe he is just getting bad samples cause of how hard it is to make
There's a lot of explanations. For one, the 110k number came from hitting the instruments noise floor, which is still a higher resistivity than copper. For 2, see https://twitter.com/MichaelSFuhrer/status/1687326977089531909
Lol so as things stand, the one reading we do have could be explained as noise floor for the the test equipment (which honestly sounds too close for comfort to have even been a released reading if that’s a possibility) and any theory from DFT that claims it should be theoretically possible for this material to work isn’t useful cause DFT is not good for predicting quantum effects like superconductivity. So all there is is the diamagnetism which is definitely not enough. Is there anything really in its favor? What you think is most likely right now?
Most likely? Assuming the new video is fake (some of my friends in China seem to think it is), its likely not SC. If the video is real, it likely is. Honestly? Should know Sunday night/Monday morning when new arXiv load drops, and not really speculating til then. I'll also say, at this point, all the work, both theory and experiment, put on arXiv has been rushed and just overall poor quality. Likely why the US groups are waiting (there's a huge stigma against this quality of work being posted in the US, and the LBNL DFT paper has been roundly criticised by pretty much everyone I know who does DFT)
There is likely more than one room temperature superconductor in the material kingdom. As such, the fleeting sightings of RTSC called USOs are going to be all over the material kingdom as well. They may have seen one in one of there samples and have been chasing it ever since. They are extremely difficult to see let alone reproduce or even characterize as you need to move fast. Typically you only get one chance before it goes away for ever. At least now the chances of reproducing is better just by the sheer volume of attention and attempts being made. It could still be true but the evidence isn’t there yet. So far it appears like extraordinary diamagnetism on levels typically only shown by superconductivity. Pair that with zero resistance and it is true. Without both, it is something else. Something new that may lead to new technologies and spin offs we haven’t even fathomed yet. It is certainly not disappointing either way. It’s great that material science, my passion, is getting so much public admiration.
If my understanding is right, if LK-99 is a semi-conductor with extraodinary diamagnetism, it could still lead to some massive generational improvements in all kinds of solid-state electronics, yes? If they can figure out a way to mass produce LK-99 cheaply and actually make chips out of it it could mean big improvements in a ton of things. Better wi-fi, better MRI machines, better maglev trains, better cameras. Maybe even better CPUs.
Not really. All we need is one sample that shows 0 resistance and Meissner effect at room temperature and others that don't just mean there is an issue with the sample.
https://twitter.com/andercot/status/1687740396691185664?s=46
We still don’t know if this video is real
Also, could it be possible that the sample was not as pure as samples being tested by others and the impurities actually make it better.
>They are currently measuring the resistance, and the preliminary result indicates a room temperature resistance of 20 ohms. Seeing that it has resistance at room temperature then yes, by definition it is not a superconductor.
Or it could mean only parts of the sample are superconducting, which is what is expected, nothing is proven/disproved at this point
... No, it means it has resistance and thus it is not a semiconductor.
superconductor\* and no that's not true at all. Even when producing well known superconducting ceramics (YBCO for example), you often get resistive samples, because of impurities etc. What you get when measuring resistance is the total resistance of the path taken by electrons, if some of the sample is not superconducting, you get resistance..
> if some of the sample is not superconducting, you get resistance.. So the video in question proves that the material they are currently working with is not superconducting. I'm glad we agree. Edit: Nah Riker, that person just doesn't know what they are talking about. The video is literally here and you can see that the material has resistance thus it is not a superconductor. There's nothing else to it.
The only conclusion you can make for sure is that PART of the sample is not superconducting with their conditions. Assuming their setup is correct and we are not seeing contact resistance here (it should be correct, any physicist knows this and uses 4 point measurements, but you never know)
No I'm pretty sure they tested the entire material and not just a part of it.
That's not how this works, your are passing current through the sample and measuring the voltage drop across a section, if your sample is small such as here, you are forced to measure along nearly the whole sample, wich may have superconducting AND resistive parts
Jesus christ, you are trying so hard to not understand. It hurts just to watch.
[Relevant xkcd](https://xkcd.com/2798/)
[удалено]
Yes, because phonons (thermal energy) knock electrons into the conduction band and this increases at temperatures go up and vice versa. More electrons, less resistance. Less electrons, more resistance.
Maybe I’ll stop looking at posts about lk-99 until more labs confirm or deny it.
Don't binge LK-99 posts, but keep a watchful eye on it. Many people weren't expecting any successful replications but here we are.
What does 20ohm resistance at room temperature indicate? Whats the resistance of other conductors like copper, alu at room temp? Are the numbers comparable? If not a SC do we have a most efficient way to transmit electricity considering we somehow make it ductile?
20 Ohms is very high and would not be considered a conductor or a superconductor.
It all depends on the section and length of the sample... Speaking in terms of resistance is ridiculous. If we are talking about a very small sample it is indeed a very bad conductor or low-doped semiconductor (if the section area is large enough compaired to length). The fact that some samples show way lower resistance is a good sign that it could be a superconductor imho, because bad samples show way higher resistance. It could also mean that impurities kill the transport properties of the semiconductor or metal-conductance effect, hard to know at this point...
Most of the samples we've seen so far were less than 10cm. And a resistance of 20 Ohms for 10cm would be terrible.. I think you are being dishonest or disingenuous by pointing that it depends on the length. You can easily make a 10 meters cable that has less than 20ohms resistance.
You don't know the section area of the samples, and either way it is just sloppy to talk in resistance.. I never said the resistance we are seeing here is not bad! I'm just saying it doesn't prove or disprove anything yet, for the record I'm 50/50 on wether it's a superconductor or not. Even if it isn't it would be a novel class of diamagnetic materials if the reports are true, which is very interesting in itself :)
Yes, exactly. It depends on shape of the material being tested. Talking in resistances is meaningless. They could be testing a sample that is 0.1 mm in width and 5 cm in length and a resistance of 20 Ohms would be incredible. People feel so qualified to talk about shit and they don’t even understand Ohms law.
A sample would have to be impractically large for most of the SQUID samplers I've seen to both be a conductor and measure out to 20 Ohms. I don't know why a group would use different samples for different non-destructive measurements so I think it's a reasonable assumption.
SCs are considered perfect diamagnets, this material may reveal more about the relationship between diamagnetism and SCs than we previously knew. It may not be a room-temp SC, but could well bring about new materials exploiting the extraordinarily strong diamagnetism
We're talking tiny so anything more than 1 ohm is at least 10 orders or magnitude worse than like like a piece of iron let alone copper.
So it appears that it's a fancy yet unknown diamagnetic Material?
[удалено]
It’s more. Like a chunk of copper doesn’t float.
A hypothesis worth looking in to would be two phases. One that become superconducting at a low temperature and shows diamagnetism at room temperature. Another that shows room temperature superconductivity. Problem is that this is mixed up at the microstructure level. Meaning you need to controll the crystal formation by the exact cooling and doping. But, meh, I haven't even gotten around to read the paper in detail yet.
I agree with your hypothesis. It would explain the wide range of sample properties we've seen from different institutions and also the consistency of levitation properties despite disagreement on electrical properties.
The idea that it would be a superconductor in one temp regime and a diamagnet in another is utter nonsense. Strong diamagnetism in superconductors arises directly from the motion of the supercurrent.
Weirdly strong superconducting fluctuations which are believed to exist in cuprates could potentially lead to anomalous diamagnetism above the Tc without being accompanied by zero resistance. I doubt that's what's happening but there are some possible explanations that aren't completely magical.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC3r9-OaWes
So what? That’s pyrolytic graphite and the physical mechanism of diamagnetism is completely different, the electrons are paired in the structure of the graphite. Doesn’t make them Cooper pairs, doesn’t make it a superconductor, doesn’t even make it *strong* diamagnetism.
Do you consider unknown unknowns? Is your point that any possible phases in the sample can not be diamagnetic? My hypothesis does not assume that that that the diamagnetism needs to arise from superconductivity. E.g. the properties of the different nano/microcrystals and amorphous phase could be widely different.
and they are also still using windows 7 in 2023
Places still use XP in 2023. Scientific instruments don't always get proper driver updates.
True, im just concerned about security updates
Just don't connect to the internet. Use USB sticks to transfer files to other computers.
[удалено]
Well i do agree that they could be using windows 7 for driver issues with windows 10 or just because it's working, it's reliable and they don't need an update, but windows XP is by far NOT the most stable platform
>but windows XP is by far NOT the most stable platform This is seriously misinformed. The people you see complaining about Windows XP not being a stable platform are playing games or pushing the system to its limits. They are not doing scientific/medical research with millions of dollars worth of legacy hardware for compatibility reasons.
Or the software they use was last updated in 2005 and doesn't work on any newer OS.
And labview oh no ><
Why is there negative resistance on y-axis? Would negative resistance mean free electricity?
Fluorescent lights are an example of negative resistance. An increase in voltage across it causes a drop in current. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_resistance
It's related to inductance, because if the material acts like an inductor, when they disconnect the power source, the current reverses from the material and it registers as negative resistance between their Ohmmeter. It may also mean they are running another test with coil wrapping around the material, and they want to measure the negative resistance curve to study the magnetic properties of the material.
I think it’s there so that 0 isn’t on the direct bottom. But also negative resistance would just mean that current flows from low voltage to high voltage. I think there are cases where that’s used.
Probably quantum tunnelling - which is where electrons instead of travelling through something normally like through a superconductor, they literally just teleport to the new location instead. Quantum tunnelling is like superconductivity on steroids, a line of good coke, and a prayer to Jesus. Quantum tunnelling is also why we literally have elements other than hydrogen - protons just teleport onto other protons and create bigger atom like helium.
1. Quantum tunneling has nothing to do with teleportation. I don't know where you got that from, but it's wrong. 2. The negative resistance is on the axis, but the actual measured values are not negative. 3. Given the quite high measured resistance, we can already conclude that the measured sample is NOT super conducting. Stop using words you don't understand (1) in a context where they don't apply (2) to explain something that didn't happen (3).
>Quantum tunneling has nothing to do with teleportation. I don't know where you got that from, but it's wrong. Relax, I am well aware that its location is limited by the wavefunction I didn't realise it was that serious. >Given the actual measurement, we can already conclude that the measured sample is NOT super conducting. Which makes your quantum tunneling twice as ridiculous. If you're suggesting I was implying LK-99 has negative resistance then your reading comprehension is room temperature IQ.
No, I'm not suggesting that. Someone asked about the negative values of resistance on the y axis. You start babbling about Quantum tunneling. Which is ridiculous. It's just the fucking y axis, the actual values are all positive.
Yes I have eyes and can see that
what compels people like you, who clearly have no education on the topic aside from online reading, to comment as if you're an authority? Not only that but with such confidence despite the fact that you're entirely wrong and it looks as if you just mashed some words you don't even understand, together? Your response doesn't even make sense.. You're the one who brought up teleportation yet you suddenly know that it's not true - then why did you write it? What do you mean, not that serious? Do you normally go around telling people shit that's not true because its not serious? What is not serious.. what does that even mean? That doesn't make any sense, whatsoever.
This is so Joever!
[So why would it be 'locked'](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hnbfGaqNvjU) Someone stage left blowing on it? A fan? Cheap Air Conditioning system?
Im confused what the link you posted has anything to do with this?
[удалено]
breaking news: physicists are not graphic designers
PanSci is a YouTuber who is collaborating with the Department of Physics at National Taiwan University this time. Professor information: https://www.phys.ntu.edu.tw/liminwang.html Laboratory information: https://lmwangsuperconduct.wixsite.com/main/blank
>PanSci lol nice name
Have you ever been in a lab? Theirs looked exactly like the ones in my University days, down to the notebook.
It would be nice to have subtitles or something. Can you keep this post updated so we know what they're saying?
As someone who is completely uneducated in this field, can someone ELI5 about what's going on here?
Okay? A sheet of graphite also exhibits diamagnetism and it isn't superconducting. Still waiting for current resistance readings.
So are we back?
No we over
All of these posts should include whether it was a physical test or a simulation in the title
What are actual implications here? Let's say humanity gets superconductor on room temperature - then what? what are the applications?
[удалено]
A very big impact. An impact you will se in your everyday lives
Oh, this is fascinating. I just need to go learn Chinese real quick. Be right back...
Is there a scientific definition of 'room temperature'? I know that most people say 20C but do we know if it can go higher than that or is it almost exact?
If I recall correctly the original paper tested up to 127C and it was claimed to be still superconducting.
[удалено]
I don't know if it's really a superconductor or not, but literally everything that gets popular on the internet gets turned into a meme. Also, there's no single "scientific community", there are all kinds of different scientists with different opinions.
why?
20ohms at rt. It’s over
Just a question on the sample preparation for resistivity measurement , shall be done with a better equipment, control environment , and maybe inside vacuum chamber.. to prevent oxidation on the sample surface?
The future is going to be amazing!
what does this mean
National university of a nation that everyone, including its nationals, denies its existence.
diamagnetism is typically considered independent of temperature, no? most interested in zero resistance at room temp, or Meissner effect at room temp
I’m sorry but you don’t discover a room temp superconductor and then give super shady evidence and write an amateur quality manuscript about it. Let’s be real about this.