Room temperature superconductor paper published

In summary, a paper has been circulating on fintwit about the first room-temperature ambient-pressure superconductor. The paper claims to have synthesized a room-temperature superconductor with a modified lead-apatite structure that works at ambient pressure. The superconducting properties of the material have been tested and the results support its claims. The authors suggest that the unique structure of the material is the key factor in maintaining superconductivity at room temperature and ambient pressure. However, there are some concerns raised about the paper, including its unclear evidence plots and the authors' lack of expertise in experimental superconductivity. Additionally, the material has been patented, but it is uncertain if a material can be patented. Overall, while the paper has sparked
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
Another thibg to have ib mind is that even if we find a RT SC at 1 atm, it doesn't necessailty make it useful. Not only because of the ability to make wires but also due to I max. It is said that if such a cuprate was found, it would be of little use, due to low I max. It may not lead to any technological revolution. Not sure this would be worth a nobel prize.
 
  • #38
fluidistic said:
It is said that if such a cuprate was found, it would be of little use, due to low I max.
That may be true for electrical and transport applications, but it could well be a benefit to information processing or instrumentation.
 
  • #39
Except in the dictionary, confirmation comes before application.
 
  • #40
Vanadium 50 said:
Except in the dictionary, confirmation comes before application.
I can make it consistent, by reverse sorting the dictionary, which would help to get an earlier retraction.
 
  • Haha
Likes mfb
  • #41
Here's another thing that bugs me "LK"? Really? They named it after themselves? Not only is it worth 20 points on the Baez Index, do they not remember the GFAJ-1 fiasco?
 
  • Like
Likes PhDeezNutz
  • #42
Fiasco normally comes before redaction and retraction.
 
  • Like
Likes Borg
  • #43
I don't think the arsenic crowd ever retracted. However, I think it has been generally accepted as wrong. "Too good to check" is a common problem with such papers.
 
  • #44
Vanadium 50 said:
Here's another thing that bugs me "LK"? Really? They named it after themselves? Not only is it worth 20 points on the Baez Index, do they not remember the GFAJ-1 fiasco?
Worked (possibly) for J/Psi.
As far as I understand they picked that name as students and at a time they didn't expect that material to get larger attention.
 
  • #45
Vanadium 50 said:
This didn't happen with the last time we had the first room temperature superconductor, the Indian gold-silver amalgam. Or maybe it was the time before that.

Does this pass the smell test? It's pretty stinky. Doesn't make it wrong, but...
  1. The paper, as stated, is not very good. Doesn't make it wrong, but...
  2. The evidence plots are, at least to me, not so clear. Doesn't make it wrong, but...
  3. The authors' publication history is not in experimental superconductivity - it appears to be more in theory, and non-SC theory dominates. Doesn't make it wrong, but...
  4. The research was apparently conducted at a commercial company, This appears to be the very first paper out of this company, at least in English. Doesn't make it wrong, but...
  5. The idea of increasing the internal pressure by substitution is not new. It has had some success in the past, but nothing like this. Doesn't make it wrong, but...
  6. The authors claim to have a new family of materials. The first and thus far only member of this family has the property of interest. Doesn't make it wrong, but...
You may be sensing a theme.

Smells like... uh, ... "but" ?
 
  • #46
Is it dead or does it still just smell funny?

We successfully synthesized polycrystalline LK-99-like ceramic samples with a solid-state-sintering method. Powder X-ray diffraction shows that the main contents are Pb10−xCux(PO4)6O and Cu2S, consistent with recent reports [arXiv:2307.12037; arXiv:2308.01192]. In some small flaky fragments, we successfully observed ``half levitation'' atop a Nd2Fe14B magnet. Using magnetization measurements on such small pieces, as well as on a large piece which does not exhibit the half levitation, we show that the samples ubiquitously contain weak yet definitive soft ferromagnetic components. We argue that, together with the pronounced shape anisotropy of the small fragments, the soft ferromagnetism is sufficient to explain the observed half levitation in strong vertical magnetic fields. Our measurements do not indicate the presence of the Meissner effect, nor zero resistance, in our samples, leading us to believe that our samples do not exhibit superconductivity.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.03110
 
  • Informative
Likes Lord Jestocost
  • #48
Is there any result that cannot be explained by this material being a diamagnetic metal?
 
  • #49
Nature: LK-99 isn’t a superconductor — how science sleuths solved the mystery
Instead, studies have shown that impurities in the material — in particular, copper sulfide — were responsible for the sharp drops in electrical resistivity and partial levitation over a magnet, which looked similar to properties exhibited by superconductors.
Multiple groups reproduced the claimed "levitation" with ferromagnetic elements and the sudden resistance drop seems to come from copper sulfide undergoing a phase transition.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes Filip Larsen, berkeman and Borg
  • #50
University of Nottingham physicist Philip Moriarty doesn't hold back about the way this initially unfolded

 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Likes russ_watters, Lord Jestocost and DaveE
  • #51
Well, it sounds like we can stick a fork in it. At least until next time.
 
  • #52
Vanadium 50 said:
Well, it sounds like we can stick a fork in it. At least until next time.
But if it sticks to the fork doesn't that mean it is a superconductor?
 
  • Haha
Likes russ_watters
  • #55
A lot of the Dias work is...um...troubled.
 

Similar threads

  • Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Back
Top