Progress in High Tc Superconductors: A Brief Overview

[Groothouse]

Just curious if anyone knew about any progress with higher critical temperature superconductors, whether they're cuprates or metals, what is the mixture of elements, you know just any news. I was thinking about looking into making a high tc superconductor of my own and yes I know that if its ceramic ill need a kiln

 

[Davephaelon]

My favorite site for updates on the latest high Tc superconductors is http://www.superconductors.org/ The latest report is superconductivity above 95C, which is nearly the boiling point of water. Go to the link "Superconductor News" to see the latest experimental results.

 

[M Quack]

The highest confirmed superconducting temperature seems to be 133K which is well above the boiling point of liquid nitrogen, but equally well below what your kitchen fridge can reach.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-temperature_superconductivity

Since the cuprate superconductors, several other families have been discovered and investigated. These include rare-earth nickel borocarbides (R Ni2B2C), magnesium diboride (MgB2), iron arsenates (R Fe2 As2 and R O Fe As).

Room temperature and above superconductivity, for all I can tell, has still not been achieved reliably and reproducibly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room-temperature_superconductor

Of all the materials listed above, MgB2 is easiest to make. In fact, you can buy it off the shelf. The catch is that the superconducting temperature is only 39K.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnesium_diboride

 

[TeethWhitener]

My favorite site for updates on the latest high Tc superconductors is http://www.superconductors.org/ The latest report is superconductivity above 95C, which is nearly the boiling point of water. Go to the link "Superconductor News" to see the latest experimental results.

Caveat lector: you'll notice that none of the links on that page have actual peer-reviewed literature references. That's because none of the results have been accepted by the wider scientific community as veridical. I wouldn't trust anything you see on that website.

 

[Davephaelon]

I'm rather disappointed to hear this. The site is just so well done, with great graphics. I was under the impression that the author of the site was only able to make very tiny quantities of these novel superconducting compounds, and assumed it was too difficult, or costly, to manufacture them in bulk quantities. But I thought his discussion of the history of superconductivity, and how superconductors work, was well written, especially for a layman like myself.

 

[ZapperZ]

I'm rather disappointed to hear this. The site is just so well done, with great graphics.

That is how most dubious websites try to seduce you. Do not fall for the bells and whistles. Looking good does not equate to being valid.

Zz.

 

[TeethWhitener]

I'm rather disappointed to hear this. The site is just so well done, with great graphics. I was under the impression that the author of the site was only able to make very tiny quantities of these novel superconducting compounds, and assumed it was too difficult, or costly, to manufacture them in bulk quantities. But I thought his discussion of the history of superconductivity, and how superconductors work, was well written, especially for a layman like myself.

If the only issue was that he was only able to make very tiny quantities of the material, I doubt that would be a barrier to getting the claimed results published legitimately. The real issue is that his results look like noise.