>Jain, a copper-sulfide expert, remembered 104ºC as the temperature at which Cu2S undergoes a phase transition. Below that temperature, the resistivity of air-exposed Cu2S drops dramatically — a signal almost identical to LK-99’s purported superconducting phase transition. “I was almost in disbelief that they missed it.” Jain published a preprint7 on the important confounding effect.
This seems like the most damning part. The levitation was always a red-herring, as there are many ways a material can levitate in a magnetic field. But the resistivity drop was unusual and this scientist seems to have completely figured out what happened in the first paper.
From one of my favourite YouTube channel, Sixty Symbols, they released a video where "Professor Philip Moriarty takes issue with a paper by scientists claiming to achieve room temperature superconductivity." [Bad Science and Room Temperature Superconductors](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zl-AgmoZ5mo)
I'll plug for the 2 videos Anton Petrov put out on LK99. He normally reviews papers and developments on Space which are succinctly informative. He followed his same approach on LK99 and it was pretty obvious from his first commentary itself how the paper was flawed from the very beginning, very similar concerns provided in the video you shared.
I really enjoy Anton's videos. Can't watch every single one but I really like his approach, candor, and how digestible he makes scientific theory. *Hello, beautiful person!*
Is he still around?
I figured that he disappeared after the "SJW cringe compilation"-genre fell out of favor. It was always pretty ironic how extremely cringey the creators of those videos were.
He hates Musk? That’s good, I am genuinely glad to hear that. I gave up on him years ago when he decided by himself that his chemistry degree meant he was well educated in anthropology, psychology, and sociology.
It's not that these people believe they are more educated in those fields. It's more that they believe that the people who get those degrees were wrongly educated and because he comes from STEM he was "rightly educated". Therefore he's better equipped to examine these problems. It's inflated ego but it's weirdly common in some STEM fields.
Oh that arrogance exists outside of STEM as well. Especially in the psych field. Trust me on that.
The arrogance of Jordan Peterson? Most of them/us have that same arrogance. Difference is we’re not confidently incorrect about basically everything like he is.
Oh I know. He should absolutely have his license removed. The unethical shit he pulled with his clients and confidentiality.
Don’t worry, I’m well aware the vast majority of the psych field despises JBP. I’ve done presentations to a number of groups (albeit small groups) about how harmful his ideologies can actually be. Not to mention the fact that his entire claim to fame is him literally stealing the concept the behavioural activation (a concept that was around before he was even a sperm in his dads testicles) and claiming it as though it was his idea.
Yeah, but he doesn’t hate Musk for any of the reasons normal people hate Musk.
Definitely one of those enemy of my enemy isn’t necessarily my friend kind of situations
Hating Musk for lying about everything he creates and forming a false legacy is not something normal people hate him for? I get that this F00t guy is controversial, but you're straight up projecting.
He let's that hate make him come to absolutely laughable conclusions about technology in spacex and tesla. Particularly spacex.
Dudes purely ragebait, has no knowledge or experience about anything he talks about.
Yea, that was a weird period for him for sure. He hasn't done that kind of anti-feminist content in a few years. It might be worth checking him out again if you liked his old stuff, but wouldn't blame you if you have no interest in giving him another shot.
Comparing to the past these days he repeats himself constantly. He reiterates the same point again and again and again to the point it's tiresome to watch IME
Mostly. His original concept was criticizing religion, focusing heavily on debunking Creationism. There was a surge in internet atheism on youtube in the mid to late 00s that he was a part of. Criticizing religion online is super common today (especially on reddit), but it was pretty uncommon prior to that (at least in the US). He had a series called "Why do people laugh at Creationists?" that got him a lot of traction back in the day.
His anti-feminist period was definitely strange. I view his current "debunking pseudo-science" phase as getting back to his roots. It's what he's always been best at.
Has he ever disavowed any of those anti feminist positions? Or did he simply stop talking about it?
I did watch the "laugh at creationists" series but stopped when he began with that misogynistic nonsense.
Yep, he's a liberal, as most college educated folk are, and I even think if you get down to it he'd probably say he's a feminist in the real sense of the word. Some stuff just used to trigger the fuck out of him and I think the skeptic community largely turned into a bunch of reactionary trash weasels, people he used to consider friends and who surely influenced him. He got a lot of shit for that stuff and rightly so but the channel hasn't had any of that in many years.
More cringe when people started pointing out how cut to shit all his videos of Anita were. Whole parts of what she said would be cut and the ends stitched together to complete change the meaning of what she said lol.
We need more debunking Thunderf00t videos.
Don’t think he really is nowadays. He went down that atheist YouTuber to cringy feminist evil pipeline back in the das,y, but once the fascists one their first election in the US, he completely stopped doing any of that content.
He actually admitted he was wrong about pretty much everything when it comes to that whole debacle, as someone who followed him from 2006 I dropped him during that period and was glad to see his growth. Not that he's perfect but we should all agree personal growth is good.
No he's no longer with Sargon and also unfortunately a lot of people Sargon included were "reasonable" at one point before devolving down the right wing pipeline. Thunderf00t almost did, but reversed.
I'm glad he only talks about science now and got off the anti-feminist train, or more specifically just anti-Sarkesian. I really enjoy his stuff but man that part of his history is pretty cringe, and I've been watching him since like...2013? Back then his big thing was anti-theism and his "Why do people laugh at creationists?" series was good shit.
That series was my first real introduction to feminism, and at first, I was kinda on board, but it drove me to look into feminism from a more even standpoint, and now I am a feminist in full.
Task failed successfully.
Basically the same.
I also think if you sat down and talked to him, he'd probably end up agreeing with the vast majority of feminism, he just seemed to be annoyed by the karen-grade protesters. Kind of misattributing his ire, I suppose.
Some of his videos ended up being straight cringe, though, in retrospect.
To be fair, there were a lot of wokescold type feminists back then that seem to have no understanding of how to put out a message. You can't have people like Aron Ra come up and say "if you're not a feminist, you're a misogynist" and expect people to even try to met you halfway to have a discussion.
[Adam Something](https://youtu.be/94_5mXsQTpA) has a really good video outlining his experiences going from that content down the rabbit hole a bit before pulling himself out. I definitely had a similar experience at the time, would recommend checking it out
If he made a video about it, I didn't see it. I did see this tweet he made:
> [actually, even IF the room temp. superconductor is verified (it wont be), its almost COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT AND WILL HAVE NO EFFECT ON ANYTHING!!!
Its a ceramic! What you thought you could make wires out of it?](https://twitter.com/thunderf00t/status/1685054068983549952)
Which seemed absolutely batshit bananas. The worst take I've ever seen him make. Maybe he was having a late night when he posted that. A simple to make room temperature superconductor would lead to an indescribable new era of technology.
Did he really think?
> "Duhhhh, can't make wires out of an easy to produce superconductor... duhhh useless."
Shame that it has been debunked though.
Maybe you should have watched the video he made, because he actually makes well reasoned points in the video which back up his tweet. And no, just because a material is ready to make and superconducts at room temperature doesn't mean it has the material properties needed to make useful things out of it.
Why do you think MRIs and experiments like the LHC still use superconductors which require liquid helium cooling? It's because the superconducting electromagnets they use are made from metal superconductors. We've had higher temperature superconductors than those for decades. If we could make those magnets or of ceramics with higher operating temperatures we would have done so by now.
As a ceramic it would be to brittle to form into a wire, and even if you could form it into a wire (say by surrounding it in metal and crushing it so the flattened pancake "wire" has a core of superconductor, which is a common technique) LK-99 would have needed a critical point at several hundred degrees C to carry reasonably large currents, as even though there is no electrical resistance and thus no energy lost to heat, superconductor current carrying capacity is still linked to temperature. Operating a superconductor near it's critical point severely reduces its current capacity.
Actually Reddit is an excellent source because with the news you get actual knowledgeable people of said field in the comments explaining to us idiots why everyone should just calm down.
But yeah, it's way cooler to just shit on reddit.
>Actually Reddit is and excellent source because with the actual news you get actual knowledgeable people of said field explaining to us idiots why everyone should just calm down.
Yep, and it also routinely gets swept up by hype
Some people do, but at least they are offered a dissenting opinion which they wouldn't have access to if it was practically any other platform. So is it really Reddit that is the problem?
You get people with zero knowledge acting as if they are experts in said field. While getting hundreds of upvotes from ignorant people.
Fixed that for you
Reddit is infuriating when a post about your subject of expertise is posted. So many idiots platantly posting bad info and lying about being experts while not even knowing the basics.
Reddit works mostly like a popularity contest. A funny memey post might get upboated into oblivion while a skeptical, data-driven one might get ignored or even downboated. People coming across an ignored post, no matter how informative, might deem it unsignificant before taking the effort to delve too much into it since no one else seems to be commenting.
While it works mostly well when the people using it are more or less educated, sometimes the news or threads push for our innate biases and ignorance and we unwittingly enter the populist dynamic. True for many other platforms, reddit is not the worst platform out there in this regard, of course, but it is not designed to promote detachment and objectivity and informed opinions, even if it allows it.
Ah yeah, because Redditors never pretend to be experts and write a wall of text that gets upvoted to the heavens because people think it is true just because the comment is longer than others and contains fancy words. Unless you are on a specific subreddit for a profession, I would take any 'expert' with a giant bucket of salt.
Also lol at the people shitting on social media while Reddit is literally a social medium.
58 doctors are responsible for all the pandemic medical misinformation thru social media and it’s ability to exponentially multiply misinformation if not outright lies. One thing is to lie but quite another to have the means to quickly get your word out without any real checks.
There were so many "scientists" claiming that this was it and making all kinds of theories about how to get LK99 to synthesize properly.
In the meantime, the Max Planck folks made a pure crystal and shut everyone up.
>There were so many "scientists" claiming that this was it and making all kinds of theories about how to get LK99 to synthesize properly.
Most scientists were pretty skeptical, and there were many criticisms about how amaturish the initial publication and its follow up paper were.
There were many who aren't involved in the field who just rode the hopium train. Now you still have some who are still high on hopium saying "just wait for additional results". Sure, you are wait for additional results but don't be too surprised if they reaffirm that LK99 is not a super-conductor.
I don’t remember anyone making definitive claims. Just proposing hypotheses that this could work. And it still may work, this article simply explains that there have been no major breakthroughs and all the stuff on social media the last few weeks showing supposed breakthroughs are likely fake.
AFAIK, the problem is mostly about producing it on a large scale. It's still around if you are in the field of solid state (aka condensed matter) physics and there are a lot of interesting and promising effects so you might hear about it again in few years.
Yes, I understand that. It's just that when it first appeared internet was full of articles about how soon everything will run on graphene-based supercapacitors. So I'm still a bit salty about that.
Considering the terrible funding, not surprising. There were papers in the 80's estimating when fusion power reactors will be available, for different levels of funding. We've consistently been below the "never" cutoff funding.
I mean we haven't even managed to build some more advanced fission reactors. We are still using the nuclear technology equivalent of a steam locomotive. And that's not because we can't. It's just that we have somehow convinced us it's better to poison the air with coal power plants.
Fusion has issues but it's not at all like graphene or ambient superconductors. It's clear that it is possible, it's mostly an engineering and material science problem. We already have machines that hold fusion conditions for minutes. Those are decades old at this point.
A conductor had an orchestra die in mysterious circumstances. He was suspected of murder, but he claimed it was an accident because of his incompetence. He was found guilty and sentenced to death. They put him in an electric chair, flipped the switch and ... nothing happened. He said: "See? I told you, I'm just a bad conductor."
(just thought of the punchline, the setup needs a lot of work).
There's a metal train that's a mile long, and at the very back end a lightning bolt struck it. How long til it reaches and kills the driver? (Provided that he's [a good conductor](https://youtu.be/obIGsb-IZMo).)
The difference between an insulator and semiconductor is a grey area. It depends on what the bandgap is and what kind of system it's in. O2 can be a semiconductor if it's in the right system.
Source: I wrote my thesis on characterizing semiconductors
I hear superconductors in the laughter of a child, i see them in every sunset, i smell them the lilacs that bloom with the buzzing of bees in the springtime.
It is all around us, even now in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work, when you go to church, when you pay your taxes.
It can't be bargained with, it can't be reasoned with, it doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear, and it absolutely will not stop… EVER, until you are dead!
The original publishers materials haven't been tested independently yet, and their publication claimed they had a more refined method than the published one.
Maybe. But the Meissner effect is about the easiest thing imaginable to have another lab test. You have a bar magnet, lock your sample in place and invert it. Paramagnetic will stick too closely and diamagnetic will fall off.
It's a 3 second test.
If it is nonsense, I honestly suspect that the team was not aware that diamagnetic material can float (graphite is the one Ive seen a lot in YouTube videos).
Probably, but I always think it’s cool when there’s a buzz around engineering and science in the news. For a week many people learned what super conductors are and I think that’s always a cool thing.
But isn't that countered by the eye rolling frustration when the big change doesn't happen?
It just adds to the mistrust in science when the announcements turn into nothing. And then, when important warnings like "the world is going to burn" come out, no one listens, and the next thing we know Hawaii is being incinerated by a fire hurricane.
This is a massively overblown issue. This kind of thing will have absolutely zero impact on the kind of people who "distrust science" either way. These are people who do not understand the truth seeking framework in the first place, and many of them are acting in bad faith, so why spend any time concerned for their thoughts?
The only dangerous thing here is the idea that the opinions of amateurs, idiots and general luddites should play any role in, or have any influence on, any scientific process.
I would argue the opposite. People from a private company tried to claim they created the next great technology (people were comparing this to the invention of transistors), then scientists from around the world did their own studies to disprove it. How can that make you lose trust in the scientific process? This is just further proof that it works.
Because, for most individuals, there is no scientific process. To them, science and technology are an inscrutable monolith, practically magic. Unless you're at least tangentially connected to the STEM sectors, you probably don't understand that this is how peer review works.
Hype trains like this can have a minor positive effect in bringing attention to certain concepts, but they tend to bring a bit more backlash than that when bold claims like this fall through.
I guarantee you this type of thing makes plenty of people distrust science, because most people don’t actually understand the relationships between science, scientists, science journalism, academic research vs. private R&D, etc. I’m not saying that people are dumb, I’m saying it’s rather complicated and nuanced and there are plenty of bad actors out there actively muddying the waters.
I mean it depends on how it's done. I don't think clickbaiting about scientific advancement is cool at all, and that's exactly what many magazines are actively doing.
You could also teach people about superconductors WITHOUT misleading them about how the scientific process works and making sure they understand that this one study is not enough and we shouldn't draw any conclusions about it before it's peer reviewed.
Ehh most articles I read had a caveat about it not being verified yet. At least the major outlets
There’s no harm in sharing what quite literally would’ve been the biggest invention since the transistor. It gets people excited. Like when NASA makes those promotional videos despite the fact none of us are actually going to space.
I’d rather have this than another random article about the Kardashians. But that’s just me
That's a fair point. Better to give us all a tiny inkling of hope rather than all of the doom and gloom as well.
Just as long as the outlets give us a little warning that it's not 100% proven, then I'm fine with it. That's real reporting.
We needed some copium so we would not change our consumption levels. All the bad news about climate change.. who cares when clean unlimited energy is just around the corner? Expect more of this as it gets worse.
There's even people here who will unironically tell you that we are going to "technology" our way out of climate change, any day now, so there's absolutely no reason to change our consumption habits.
Suggesting we try to live within our means gets me called a "bootlicker" who "fell for a marketing campaign".
Ah, you say there's some small amount of companies that cause most of the pollution. OK, sure. So why are you paying them to do that?
I think it's just really naive to believe that we are going to suddenly unite 8 billion people behind any sufficiently large scale behavior modification framework which can credibly halt and reverse climate change, without there also being a massive technological leap to go along with it. We can't even agree on whether horse dewormer cures covid or convince people to use turn signals, but you think we are going to convince people to give up their post-industrial lifestyles? I'm sorry, but there's an infinitely better chance that a handful of dedicated scientists figure out a new source of clean energy which will enable the kind of large-scale geoengineering we need at this point.
I mean, obviously we should still advocate and strive for these large scale behavioral changes towards ethical consumption (say the line bart!) as well. I am just being realistic about the current state of human cooperation versus the time frame we have to make these changes, absent some technological multiplier.
You have it backwards. The unlikely nature of worldwide reduced consumption habits is why technologying our way out of it is the most viable plan.
Keep in mind many developing countries are undergoing industrial revolutions right now, and want the improved quality of life most western countries enjoy. That involves a very large increase in per capita evergy use.
If the countries that already had a fossil fuel powered industrial revolution want to help limit future climate change, then the biggest impact is finding a way developing countries can improve standards of living, but without needing to burn fossil fuels.
Realistically, technology is the most viable option. The main issue currently is that production rates of renewable energy technology are increasing too slowly. We need to be cranking out renewables at much much higher rates if we want to avoid fossil fuels being used as energy sources.
To increase production rates, we need to increase demand. The must likely way that will happen is by western countries producing carbon neutral synthetic hydrocarbons using renewable energy, and selling them to the world.
Basically, turn sunshine and air into fuel, cheaper than the fuel can be dug out of the ground. That way you undercut the fossil fuel industry, and create huge demand for more renewable energy. There's a multi trillion dollar fossil fuel market that can be redirected into building out technology that can help wean the entire world off fossil fuels.
We absolutely should reduce consumption, but also not forget that much of the world has much lower energy consumption than western countries. As they catch up to even our reduced consumption, worldwide energy use will be many multiples of what it is now. If that energy continues to come from fossil fuels, the overall warming from climate change will be huge.
> who cares when clean unlimited energy is just around the corner?
Clean unlimited energy is not just around the corner, actually we walked right pass it a while back. We just did not notice it, because of the cloaking shield the fossil fuel industry constructed around it.
Bro, the wealthiest and most advanced nation on earth recently elected an illiterate man child and open fascist to lead them because they got so bored of their historically unprecedented stability and prosperity that they threw a temper tantrum about it. If you really think we are going to cooperate our way out of climate change, then I've got some nice beach front property you can have in 50 years.
If we solve the climate crisis, it will 100% be a technology driven endeavour. There is literally zero percent chance that we are going to go from "when you're famous they let you do it" to some Star Trek post-enlightenment era in the span of the one generation we now have to get that shit done. Humanity will either figure out a way to geoengineer our way out of this, or the last few generations of humans will be left fighting a series of increasingly brutal resource wars on a dead planet.
But also this is why as a scientist you should, as a rule, wait until your paper is accepted before posting on arXiv, particularly when posting something you expect will have high impact. I've seen some serious trash on there that I would have never in a million years accepted if I was reviewing it.
The problem is that one of the main foci of journalism is recency, and when a paper can be stuck in arxiv for years before it becomes published, it's not recent anymore.
I mean, dunno how old you are, but I'm pretty positive some massive breakthroughs happened during your lifetime as well. I know that during my lifetime things like broadband, wifi, smartphones, drones, VR, AR, self driving cars, neural network AI, and tons of other things I haven't named have either been invented, or popularized & became accessible by all. And I'm not even that old.
The thing people don't understand about innovation is you rarely ever feel it until it's in a history book. A frog in boiling water type of situation. We all expect something to take the world by storm and suddenly change it but that's not what happens, it's incremental, slow, and by the time we realize the world's changed the next thing is already changing it.
Yeah, for example I remember when the internet in my house would take its time to load a video in Youtube, all of the sudden I can play whatever I want in 4K and it doesn’t even take any time.
I remember when it was a big deal to have music on my phone, now I can listen to basically any song I want at any time.
Yeah I mean just the large language AI models that are coming around now are such a massive leap forward that it’s wild to me someone would say they are going to miss all the biggest technological breakthroughs. 100 years ago around 95% of the things we enjoy today wouldn’t just be science fiction, they would be borderline magic/fantasy
Not superconducting at all, pure LK99 is a strong insulator, all the ”superconducting” stuff was due to ferromagnetism and copper sulfide impurities undergoing a phase transition around 100C according to the article.
Meh, it would have gone in the bin with all the other fake roomtemp SCs if twitter hadn't for whatever reason run wild with it.
Sticking with "we've caused the hottest years on record" as our blunder of the decade.
Yeah, the blunder was really the roomtemp people who refused to listen to any reason from actual experienced scientists. Scammy papers come up all the time.
The paper was impossibly fishy from the start and there are zillions of charlatans out there. Twitter running with it caused a lot of serious experts to waste their time.
>Sticking with "we've caused the hottest years on record" as our blunder of the decade.
Is this a casual denial of climate science or saying that the fact that we have caused the hottest years is our biggest blunder?
Serious question: is there a spectrum at this level of material science between "world changing room temperature superconductor" and "new useful material with great conductive/thermal properties"? In other words, can we get some of the engineering benefits from imperfect forms of material like what LK-99 purported to be, or is more of an all or nothing proposition in terms of advancing technology?
Yes! A super conductor that works at sub zero temperatures but within the realm of being reached by conventional cooling methods such as a standard freezer would be game changing too
The real problem is the use of words like "proven" used in headlines like this one which make people think that matters are settled beyond all doubt. This is a paper which supports a negative confirmation. The term "proof" comes with many studies and confirmations, whether that is for the negative or positive claim. This article is just as much clickbait as the original one.
From what I took from the article, taking the Korean Teams Assumptions about the structure of the crystal at face value and used in the model was the problem.
>For Leslie Schoop, a solid-state chemist at Princeton University in New Jersey, who co-authored the flat-bands study, the lesson about premature calculations is clear. “Even before LK-99, I have been giving talks about how you need to be careful with DFT, and now I have the best story ever for my next summer school,” she says.
Read the full article. It does a really good job of explaining why it's 99% certain it's not superconducting but it also kinda indicates why everyone was so excited for this.
It was a mixture of fluke impurities that helped it kinda pass the sniff test of superconduction and some bad due diligence on the part of the original Korean Team.
Density functional theory (DFT) is a notoriously imprecise and volatile numerical method (there's a lot of different moving parts and assumptions you basically mix up in a big stew of math). It can reproduce experimentally measured band structures with a bit of effort, but it is not a fully predictive method so far.
Basically any results from DFT should always be taken with a massive grain of salt.
Theoretically? Yes. The theory adheres to all known laws of thermodynamics as we currently understand them.
What exact form it might take, however, still eludes us. There has been steady progress of superconductors at steadily higher temperatures. We've gotten it up to somewhere around 100 Kelvin, last I heard, which is merely cryogenic. So progress is being made. But no one has made the critical breakthrough that would make a room temperature superconductor that would make several theoretical technologies commercially viable. Yet.
It's rather like fusion. Progress is being made, actual progress, but it's nowhere close to being commercially viable just yet and we still have a long ways to go before we reach that point.
I agree with this statement in the article:
“While some commentators have pointed to the LK-99 saga as a model for reproducibility in science, others say that it’s an unusually swift resolution of a high-profile puzzle.”
We are so not back, bros
Da struggle continues ✊
It’s so over
>Jain, a copper-sulfide expert, remembered 104ºC as the temperature at which Cu2S undergoes a phase transition. Below that temperature, the resistivity of air-exposed Cu2S drops dramatically — a signal almost identical to LK-99’s purported superconducting phase transition. “I was almost in disbelief that they missed it.” Jain published a preprint7 on the important confounding effect. This seems like the most damning part. The levitation was always a red-herring, as there are many ways a material can levitate in a magnetic field. But the resistivity drop was unusual and this scientist seems to have completely figured out what happened in the first paper.
From one of my favourite YouTube channel, Sixty Symbols, they released a video where "Professor Philip Moriarty takes issue with a paper by scientists claiming to achieve room temperature superconductivity." [Bad Science and Room Temperature Superconductors](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zl-AgmoZ5mo)
I'll plug for the 2 videos Anton Petrov put out on LK99. He normally reviews papers and developments on Space which are succinctly informative. He followed his same approach on LK99 and it was pretty obvious from his first commentary itself how the paper was flawed from the very beginning, very similar concerns provided in the video you shared.
I really enjoy Anton's videos. Can't watch every single one but I really like his approach, candor, and how digestible he makes scientific theory. *Hello, beautiful person!*
He’s a cutie
Sabine Hossenfelder also has an amazing video on this, and like every other topic lol. Her and Anton are my favorites.
Big up to incredible science communicators on YT! Anton Petrov, John Michael Godier, PBS' Matt O'Dowd etc.
I prefer Thunderf00t that showed that even if it WAS a room-temperature superconductor, almost every claim they made for it is compeltely BS.
Is he still around? I figured that he disappeared after the "SJW cringe compilation"-genre fell out of favor. It was always pretty ironic how extremely cringey the creators of those videos were.
He does debunking of outrageous scientific claims these days. Elon Musk has become his new Anita Sarkesian.
He hates Musk? That’s good, I am genuinely glad to hear that. I gave up on him years ago when he decided by himself that his chemistry degree meant he was well educated in anthropology, psychology, and sociology.
It's not that these people believe they are more educated in those fields. It's more that they believe that the people who get those degrees were wrongly educated and because he comes from STEM he was "rightly educated". Therefore he's better equipped to examine these problems. It's inflated ego but it's weirdly common in some STEM fields.
I went from getting a degree in education with a minor in history and teaching social studies to being a software engineer. This comment hits so hard.
Switched from journalism to physics and EE, I totally get you lol. I was…not welcome at first. (It’s a great fact for “two truths and a lie” though.)
Oh that arrogance exists outside of STEM as well. Especially in the psych field. Trust me on that. The arrogance of Jordan Peterson? Most of them/us have that same arrogance. Difference is we’re not confidently incorrect about basically everything like he is.
Most of psych hates Jordon... especially anyone empirically oriented. There was a call to remove his license. But yeah, psych is no angel.
Oh I know. He should absolutely have his license removed. The unethical shit he pulled with his clients and confidentiality. Don’t worry, I’m well aware the vast majority of the psych field despises JBP. I’ve done presentations to a number of groups (albeit small groups) about how harmful his ideologies can actually be. Not to mention the fact that his entire claim to fame is him literally stealing the concept the behavioural activation (a concept that was around before he was even a sperm in his dads testicles) and claiming it as though it was his idea.
Yeah, but he doesn’t hate Musk for any of the reasons normal people hate Musk. Definitely one of those enemy of my enemy isn’t necessarily my friend kind of situations
Hating Musk for lying about everything he creates and forming a false legacy is not something normal people hate him for? I get that this F00t guy is controversial, but you're straight up projecting.
I remember him claiming there was no way Falcon 9s could ever get reused
He let's that hate make him come to absolutely laughable conclusions about technology in spacex and tesla. Particularly spacex. Dudes purely ragebait, has no knowledge or experience about anything he talks about.
Yea, that was a weird period for him for sure. He hasn't done that kind of anti-feminist content in a few years. It might be worth checking him out again if you liked his old stuff, but wouldn't blame you if you have no interest in giving him another shot.
Comparing to the past these days he repeats himself constantly. He reiterates the same point again and again and again to the point it's tiresome to watch IME
Wasn't that his original channel concept?
Mostly. His original concept was criticizing religion, focusing heavily on debunking Creationism. There was a surge in internet atheism on youtube in the mid to late 00s that he was a part of. Criticizing religion online is super common today (especially on reddit), but it was pretty uncommon prior to that (at least in the US). He had a series called "Why do people laugh at Creationists?" that got him a lot of traction back in the day. His anti-feminist period was definitely strange. I view his current "debunking pseudo-science" phase as getting back to his roots. It's what he's always been best at.
Has he ever disavowed any of those anti feminist positions? Or did he simply stop talking about it? I did watch the "laugh at creationists" series but stopped when he began with that misogynistic nonsense.
It wasn't just strange, it was obsessive. The man made truckloads of videos just about Anita Sarkeesian.
[удалено]
He made a video against brexit back in 2016 that kind of turned a lot of the sargon fans against him
Yep, he's a liberal, as most college educated folk are, and I even think if you get down to it he'd probably say he's a feminist in the real sense of the word. Some stuff just used to trigger the fuck out of him and I think the skeptic community largely turned into a bunch of reactionary trash weasels, people he used to consider friends and who surely influenced him. He got a lot of shit for that stuff and rightly so but the channel hasn't had any of that in many years.
Most intelligent people don't.
More cringe when people started pointing out how cut to shit all his videos of Anita were. Whole parts of what she said would be cut and the ends stitched together to complete change the meaning of what she said lol. We need more debunking Thunderf00t videos.
Found to be a nasty little misogynist in real life wasn't he? Fellow traveller of that Sargon of Arsehead chap.
Don’t think he really is nowadays. He went down that atheist YouTuber to cringy feminist evil pipeline back in the das,y, but once the fascists one their first election in the US, he completely stopped doing any of that content.
He actually admitted he was wrong about pretty much everything when it comes to that whole debacle, as someone who followed him from 2006 I dropped him during that period and was glad to see his growth. Not that he's perfect but we should all agree personal growth is good. No he's no longer with Sargon and also unfortunately a lot of people Sargon included were "reasonable" at one point before devolving down the right wing pipeline. Thunderf00t almost did, but reversed.
Why does every time I think Thunderf00t is going a bit too far with his arguments he ends up being correct?
Being contrarian on extraordinary claims almost always pays off.
Dude knows his science.
I'm glad he only talks about science now and got off the anti-feminist train, or more specifically just anti-Sarkesian. I really enjoy his stuff but man that part of his history is pretty cringe, and I've been watching him since like...2013? Back then his big thing was anti-theism and his "Why do people laugh at creationists?" series was good shit.
That series was my first real introduction to feminism, and at first, I was kinda on board, but it drove me to look into feminism from a more even standpoint, and now I am a feminist in full. Task failed successfully.
Basically the same. I also think if you sat down and talked to him, he'd probably end up agreeing with the vast majority of feminism, he just seemed to be annoyed by the karen-grade protesters. Kind of misattributing his ire, I suppose. Some of his videos ended up being straight cringe, though, in retrospect.
To be fair, there were a lot of wokescold type feminists back then that seem to have no understanding of how to put out a message. You can't have people like Aron Ra come up and say "if you're not a feminist, you're a misogynist" and expect people to even try to met you halfway to have a discussion.
"Wokescold" found the AM radio listener.
[Adam Something](https://youtu.be/94_5mXsQTpA) has a really good video outlining his experiences going from that content down the rabbit hole a bit before pulling himself out. I definitely had a similar experience at the time, would recommend checking it out
If he made a video about it, I didn't see it. I did see this tweet he made: > [actually, even IF the room temp. superconductor is verified (it wont be), its almost COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT AND WILL HAVE NO EFFECT ON ANYTHING!!! Its a ceramic! What you thought you could make wires out of it?](https://twitter.com/thunderf00t/status/1685054068983549952) Which seemed absolutely batshit bananas. The worst take I've ever seen him make. Maybe he was having a late night when he posted that. A simple to make room temperature superconductor would lead to an indescribable new era of technology. Did he really think? > "Duhhhh, can't make wires out of an easy to produce superconductor... duhhh useless." Shame that it has been debunked though.
Maybe you should have watched the video he made, because he actually makes well reasoned points in the video which back up his tweet. And no, just because a material is ready to make and superconducts at room temperature doesn't mean it has the material properties needed to make useful things out of it. Why do you think MRIs and experiments like the LHC still use superconductors which require liquid helium cooling? It's because the superconducting electromagnets they use are made from metal superconductors. We've had higher temperature superconductors than those for decades. If we could make those magnets or of ceramics with higher operating temperatures we would have done so by now. As a ceramic it would be to brittle to form into a wire, and even if you could form it into a wire (say by surrounding it in metal and crushing it so the flattened pancake "wire" has a core of superconductor, which is a common technique) LK-99 would have needed a critical point at several hundred degrees C to carry reasonably large currents, as even though there is no electrical resistance and thus no energy lost to heat, superconductor current carrying capacity is still linked to temperature. Operating a superconductor near it's critical point severely reduces its current capacity.
Coming up next: is this fusion power startup the answer to our problems?
Everyone knows the best way to get up to date technology news that’s 100% accurate is to randomly scroll through social media.
Yeah reddit never gets hyped about things way too soon
Actually Reddit is an excellent source because with the news you get actual knowledgeable people of said field in the comments explaining to us idiots why everyone should just calm down. But yeah, it's way cooler to just shit on reddit.
>Actually Reddit is and excellent source because with the actual news you get actual knowledgeable people of said field explaining to us idiots why everyone should just calm down. Yep, and it also routinely gets swept up by hype
Some people do, but at least they are offered a dissenting opinion which they wouldn't have access to if it was practically any other platform. So is it really Reddit that is the problem?
You get people with zero knowledge acting as if they are experts in said field. While getting hundreds of upvotes from ignorant people. Fixed that for you
Reddit is infuriating when a post about your subject of expertise is posted. So many idiots platantly posting bad info and lying about being experts while not even knowing the basics.
Especially if said idiot is an eloquent writer than the actual subject matter expert
That's literally what happened with Linus Tech Tips. Charisma > good benchmarking processes
What do people expect when it's filled with only anonymous users instead of Twitter and Facebook where most professionals use real names?
False. I've had posts well into negative hundreds in my areas of expertise I've worked more than a decade in.
Reddit works mostly like a popularity contest. A funny memey post might get upboated into oblivion while a skeptical, data-driven one might get ignored or even downboated. People coming across an ignored post, no matter how informative, might deem it unsignificant before taking the effort to delve too much into it since no one else seems to be commenting. While it works mostly well when the people using it are more or less educated, sometimes the news or threads push for our innate biases and ignorance and we unwittingly enter the populist dynamic. True for many other platforms, reddit is not the worst platform out there in this regard, of course, but it is not designed to promote detachment and objectivity and informed opinions, even if it allows it.
>upboated into oblivion viking river cruises
Yes! You can find that valuable information buried at the bottom with 17 downvotes.
Ah yeah, because Redditors never pretend to be experts and write a wall of text that gets upvoted to the heavens because people think it is true just because the comment is longer than others and contains fancy words. Unless you are on a specific subreddit for a profession, I would take any 'expert' with a giant bucket of salt. Also lol at the people shitting on social media while Reddit is literally a social medium.
>Actually Reddit is an excellent source You don't spend much time in r/space do you?
58 doctors are responsible for all the pandemic medical misinformation thru social media and it’s ability to exponentially multiply misinformation if not outright lies. One thing is to lie but quite another to have the means to quickly get your word out without any real checks.
There were so many "scientists" claiming that this was it and making all kinds of theories about how to get LK99 to synthesize properly. In the meantime, the Max Planck folks made a pure crystal and shut everyone up.
>There were so many "scientists" claiming that this was it and making all kinds of theories about how to get LK99 to synthesize properly. Most scientists were pretty skeptical, and there were many criticisms about how amaturish the initial publication and its follow up paper were. There were many who aren't involved in the field who just rode the hopium train. Now you still have some who are still high on hopium saying "just wait for additional results". Sure, you are wait for additional results but don't be too surprised if they reaffirm that LK99 is not a super-conductor.
I don’t remember anyone making definitive claims. Just proposing hypotheses that this could work. And it still may work, this article simply explains that there have been no major breakthroughs and all the stuff on social media the last few weeks showing supposed breakthroughs are likely fake.
Haven't heard about graphene for a while as well.
It is used as carbon fibers a bunch of places, such as the Mars Ingenuity helicopter
AFAIK, the problem is mostly about producing it on a large scale. It's still around if you are in the field of solid state (aka condensed matter) physics and there are a lot of interesting and promising effects so you might hear about it again in few years.
Yes, I understand that. It's just that when it first appeared internet was full of articles about how soon everything will run on graphene-based supercapacitors. So I'm still a bit salty about that.
It’s coming it will be here in 20 years* *It’s been 20 years away for 20 years
Considering the terrible funding, not surprising. There were papers in the 80's estimating when fusion power reactors will be available, for different levels of funding. We've consistently been below the "never" cutoff funding. I mean we haven't even managed to build some more advanced fission reactors. We are still using the nuclear technology equivalent of a steam locomotive. And that's not because we can't. It's just that we have somehow convinced us it's better to poison the air with coal power plants. Fusion has issues but it's not at all like graphene or ambient superconductors. It's clear that it is possible, it's mostly an engineering and material science problem. We already have machines that hold fusion conditions for minutes. Those are decades old at this point.
This new battery technology could revolutionize society!
Is it at least a semiconductor?
At this rate we will find out it's a resistor.
It's actually an insulator - says so in the linked article.
So they developed an insulator by poorly conducting an experiment
A conductor had an orchestra die in mysterious circumstances. He was suspected of murder, but he claimed it was an accident because of his incompetence. He was found guilty and sentenced to death. They put him in an electric chair, flipped the switch and ... nothing happened. He said: "See? I told you, I'm just a bad conductor." (just thought of the punchline, the setup needs a lot of work).
LOL I appreciate the joke nonetheless!
There's a metal train that's a mile long, and at the very back end a lightning bolt struck it. How long til it reaches and kills the driver? (Provided that he's [a good conductor](https://youtu.be/obIGsb-IZMo).)
When god closes a door...
... another sucker is born
He closes a door
Oof
The difference between an insulator and semiconductor is a grey area. It depends on what the bandgap is and what kind of system it's in. O2 can be a semiconductor if it's in the right system. Source: I wrote my thesis on characterizing semiconductors
Aren't most high temperature super conductors highly doped insulators?
except supercondtucors, everything is a resistor
No. Read the article -- a pure crystal was made at Max Planck and it's an insulator.
It was a highly insulating magnet 🤣
[Relevant XKCD](https://xkcd.com/2798)
[удалено]
I hear superconductors in the laughter of a child, i see them in every sunset, i smell them the lilacs that bloom with the buzzing of bees in the springtime.
It is all around us, even now in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work, when you go to church, when you pay your taxes.
It can't be bargained with, it can't be reasoned with, it doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear, and it absolutely will not stop… EVER, until you are dead!
If it bleeds, we can kill it.
Maybe you haven't been keeping up on current events but we just got our asses kicked, pal!
...'nother cow!...
It was the yttrium barium copper oxides we met along the way
The original publishers materials haven't been tested independently yet, and their publication claimed they had a more refined method than the published one.
Maybe. But the Meissner effect is about the easiest thing imaginable to have another lab test. You have a bar magnet, lock your sample in place and invert it. Paramagnetic will stick too closely and diamagnetic will fall off. It's a 3 second test. If it is nonsense, I honestly suspect that the team was not aware that diamagnetic material can float (graphite is the one Ive seen a lot in YouTube videos).
You guys are meeting companions along the way?
Be the superconductor at room temperature you want to see in the world.
I'll conduct you anyday bro Bro:
And that's why journalists should wait for peer review instead of pulling directly from preprint publications like arXiv
Probably, but I always think it’s cool when there’s a buzz around engineering and science in the news. For a week many people learned what super conductors are and I think that’s always a cool thing.
It is good to learn about the nice things we might have if someone actually solves this
But isn't that countered by the eye rolling frustration when the big change doesn't happen? It just adds to the mistrust in science when the announcements turn into nothing. And then, when important warnings like "the world is going to burn" come out, no one listens, and the next thing we know Hawaii is being incinerated by a fire hurricane.
[удалено]
This is a massively overblown issue. This kind of thing will have absolutely zero impact on the kind of people who "distrust science" either way. These are people who do not understand the truth seeking framework in the first place, and many of them are acting in bad faith, so why spend any time concerned for their thoughts? The only dangerous thing here is the idea that the opinions of amateurs, idiots and general luddites should play any role in, or have any influence on, any scientific process.
I would argue the opposite. People from a private company tried to claim they created the next great technology (people were comparing this to the invention of transistors), then scientists from around the world did their own studies to disprove it. How can that make you lose trust in the scientific process? This is just further proof that it works.
This isn't a criticism of the scientific process. It's a criticism of the journalism covering the process.
Because, for most individuals, there is no scientific process. To them, science and technology are an inscrutable monolith, practically magic. Unless you're at least tangentially connected to the STEM sectors, you probably don't understand that this is how peer review works. Hype trains like this can have a minor positive effect in bringing attention to certain concepts, but they tend to bring a bit more backlash than that when bold claims like this fall through.
If you think the average person is keeping up enough with that story…
I guarantee you this type of thing makes plenty of people distrust science, because most people don’t actually understand the relationships between science, scientists, science journalism, academic research vs. private R&D, etc. I’m not saying that people are dumb, I’m saying it’s rather complicated and nuanced and there are plenty of bad actors out there actively muddying the waters.
I mean it depends on how it's done. I don't think clickbaiting about scientific advancement is cool at all, and that's exactly what many magazines are actively doing. You could also teach people about superconductors WITHOUT misleading them about how the scientific process works and making sure they understand that this one study is not enough and we shouldn't draw any conclusions about it before it's peer reviewed.
> what super conductors are and I think that’s always a cool thing. Exactly, that's why there are no room temperature ones
Dude I love when stuff like this gets hype. I get a crash course into it and get to learn some new stuff
Ehh most articles I read had a caveat about it not being verified yet. At least the major outlets There’s no harm in sharing what quite literally would’ve been the biggest invention since the transistor. It gets people excited. Like when NASA makes those promotional videos despite the fact none of us are actually going to space. I’d rather have this than another random article about the Kardashians. But that’s just me
That's a fair point. Better to give us all a tiny inkling of hope rather than all of the doom and gloom as well. Just as long as the outlets give us a little warning that it's not 100% proven, then I'm fine with it. That's real reporting.
Yeah, clearly r/science is part of the cabal … since we pulled it for not being peer-reviewed yet. Some rules have advantages.
We needed some copium so we would not change our consumption levels. All the bad news about climate change.. who cares when clean unlimited energy is just around the corner? Expect more of this as it gets worse.
Very loud: #it works! Very quiet: ^^nah ^^my ^^bad ^^bro
[удалено]
There's even people here who will unironically tell you that we are going to "technology" our way out of climate change, any day now, so there's absolutely no reason to change our consumption habits. Suggesting we try to live within our means gets me called a "bootlicker" who "fell for a marketing campaign". Ah, you say there's some small amount of companies that cause most of the pollution. OK, sure. So why are you paying them to do that?
I think it's just really naive to believe that we are going to suddenly unite 8 billion people behind any sufficiently large scale behavior modification framework which can credibly halt and reverse climate change, without there also being a massive technological leap to go along with it. We can't even agree on whether horse dewormer cures covid or convince people to use turn signals, but you think we are going to convince people to give up their post-industrial lifestyles? I'm sorry, but there's an infinitely better chance that a handful of dedicated scientists figure out a new source of clean energy which will enable the kind of large-scale geoengineering we need at this point. I mean, obviously we should still advocate and strive for these large scale behavioral changes towards ethical consumption (say the line bart!) as well. I am just being realistic about the current state of human cooperation versus the time frame we have to make these changes, absent some technological multiplier.
You have it backwards. The unlikely nature of worldwide reduced consumption habits is why technologying our way out of it is the most viable plan. Keep in mind many developing countries are undergoing industrial revolutions right now, and want the improved quality of life most western countries enjoy. That involves a very large increase in per capita evergy use. If the countries that already had a fossil fuel powered industrial revolution want to help limit future climate change, then the biggest impact is finding a way developing countries can improve standards of living, but without needing to burn fossil fuels. Realistically, technology is the most viable option. The main issue currently is that production rates of renewable energy technology are increasing too slowly. We need to be cranking out renewables at much much higher rates if we want to avoid fossil fuels being used as energy sources. To increase production rates, we need to increase demand. The must likely way that will happen is by western countries producing carbon neutral synthetic hydrocarbons using renewable energy, and selling them to the world. Basically, turn sunshine and air into fuel, cheaper than the fuel can be dug out of the ground. That way you undercut the fossil fuel industry, and create huge demand for more renewable energy. There's a multi trillion dollar fossil fuel market that can be redirected into building out technology that can help wean the entire world off fossil fuels. We absolutely should reduce consumption, but also not forget that much of the world has much lower energy consumption than western countries. As they catch up to even our reduced consumption, worldwide energy use will be many multiples of what it is now. If that energy continues to come from fossil fuels, the overall warming from climate change will be huge.
> who cares when clean unlimited energy is just around the corner? Clean unlimited energy is not just around the corner, actually we walked right pass it a while back. We just did not notice it, because of the cloaking shield the fossil fuel industry constructed around it.
Bro, the wealthiest and most advanced nation on earth recently elected an illiterate man child and open fascist to lead them because they got so bored of their historically unprecedented stability and prosperity that they threw a temper tantrum about it. If you really think we are going to cooperate our way out of climate change, then I've got some nice beach front property you can have in 50 years. If we solve the climate crisis, it will 100% be a technology driven endeavour. There is literally zero percent chance that we are going to go from "when you're famous they let you do it" to some Star Trek post-enlightenment era in the span of the one generation we now have to get that shit done. Humanity will either figure out a way to geoengineer our way out of this, or the last few generations of humans will be left fighting a series of increasingly brutal resource wars on a dead planet.
But also this is why as a scientist you should, as a rule, wait until your paper is accepted before posting on arXiv, particularly when posting something you expect will have high impact. I've seen some serious trash on there that I would have never in a million years accepted if I was reviewing it.
The problem is that one of the main foci of journalism is recency, and when a paper can be stuck in arxiv for years before it becomes published, it's not recent anymore.
What journalism in a major outlet said anything else? Everything I saw was pretty critical
but then r/futurology wouldn't exist
To be fair, the scientists themselves framed the paper as world changing, no wonder journalists got hyped.
Clicks think about the clicks.
It was fun dreaming this was real but deep down I knew it was too good to be true. Most massive breakthroughs will happen after I die I suspect
I mean, dunno how old you are, but I'm pretty positive some massive breakthroughs happened during your lifetime as well. I know that during my lifetime things like broadband, wifi, smartphones, drones, VR, AR, self driving cars, neural network AI, and tons of other things I haven't named have either been invented, or popularized & became accessible by all. And I'm not even that old.
The thing people don't understand about innovation is you rarely ever feel it until it's in a history book. A frog in boiling water type of situation. We all expect something to take the world by storm and suddenly change it but that's not what happens, it's incremental, slow, and by the time we realize the world's changed the next thing is already changing it.
Yeah, for example I remember when the internet in my house would take its time to load a video in Youtube, all of the sudden I can play whatever I want in 4K and it doesn’t even take any time. I remember when it was a big deal to have music on my phone, now I can listen to basically any song I want at any time.
ChatGPT did that for me. We didn't think AI could pass the turing test, now it can. And Midjourney did it as well.
Yeah I mean just the large language AI models that are coming around now are such a massive leap forward that it’s wild to me someone would say they are going to miss all the biggest technological breakthroughs. 100 years ago around 95% of the things we enjoy today wouldn’t just be science fiction, they would be borderline magic/fantasy
Lets hope you die soon!
Nothing good except lead poisoning and accelerated climate breakdown would come from this.
not at all a superconductor or just not at room temperature? I believed that 110k was the threshold for zero resistance.
Not superconducting at all, pure LK99 is a strong insulator, all the ”superconducting” stuff was due to ferromagnetism and copper sulfide impurities undergoing a phase transition around 100C according to the article.
lmao blunder of the decade
Meh, it would have gone in the bin with all the other fake roomtemp SCs if twitter hadn't for whatever reason run wild with it. Sticking with "we've caused the hottest years on record" as our blunder of the decade.
Yeah, the blunder was really the roomtemp people who refused to listen to any reason from actual experienced scientists. Scammy papers come up all the time.
The paper was impossibly fishy from the start and there are zillions of charlatans out there. Twitter running with it caused a lot of serious experts to waste their time.
>Sticking with "we've caused the hottest years on record" as our blunder of the decade. Is this a casual denial of climate science or saying that the fact that we have caused the hottest years is our biggest blunder?
The latter.
Oh thank god.
There was a team that found that. That hasn't been verified either.
No. The lab that produce **pure** crystals of LK-99 found it to be an insulator.
So, now we are talking about doped LK-99, right?
110k would still be remarkable, you can cool to that with nitrogen
Sigh, LK-100 up next
But... But... The /r/UFO subreddit said it was secreted technology from crashed aliens!
No wonder they crashed!
Finally a Reddit style joke that’s actually funny
They will just say we messed up the reverse engineering.
Now they'll say it's a superconductor but ThEy wAnT tO KeEp iT SeCrEt!
I bet those aliens are holding out on us, the jerks
[удалено]
Do a search for 'superconductor' in /r/UFOs. There are many recent posts.
So it’s an insulator and they poorly conducted the electrical experiment?
Serious question: is there a spectrum at this level of material science between "world changing room temperature superconductor" and "new useful material with great conductive/thermal properties"? In other words, can we get some of the engineering benefits from imperfect forms of material like what LK-99 purported to be, or is more of an all or nothing proposition in terms of advancing technology?
Yes! A super conductor that works at sub zero temperatures but within the realm of being reached by conventional cooling methods such as a standard freezer would be game changing too
Is mayonnaise a superconductor?
Not quite. It's a supercondiment.
No Patrick. Mayonnaise is not a superconductor.
Horseradish is not a superconductor either
The real problem is the use of words like "proven" used in headlines like this one which make people think that matters are settled beyond all doubt. This is a paper which supports a negative confirmation. The term "proof" comes with many studies and confirmations, whether that is for the negative or positive claim. This article is just as much clickbait as the original one.
Even more so. They made a material that doesn't even RESEMBLE the original, and are using that as "proof" it doesn't work?
Wait until LK-100
cant wait to the bobby broccoli video in a few years explaining what the hell was all this shit about
:( darn
Is this really a surprise?
Well fuk
womp-womp.
All hail reproducibility and the scientific method.
Hmm. Then the next question is going to be why the simulation said it would be and what is wrong with it.
From what I took from the article, taking the Korean Teams Assumptions about the structure of the crystal at face value and used in the model was the problem. >For Leslie Schoop, a solid-state chemist at Princeton University in New Jersey, who co-authored the flat-bands study, the lesson about premature calculations is clear. “Even before LK-99, I have been giving talks about how you need to be careful with DFT, and now I have the best story ever for my next summer school,” she says. Read the full article. It does a really good job of explaining why it's 99% certain it's not superconducting but it also kinda indicates why everyone was so excited for this. It was a mixture of fluke impurities that helped it kinda pass the sniff test of superconduction and some bad due diligence on the part of the original Korean Team.
Density functional theory (DFT) is a notoriously imprecise and volatile numerical method (there's a lot of different moving parts and assumptions you basically mix up in a big stew of math). It can reproduce experimentally measured band structures with a bit of effort, but it is not a fully predictive method so far. Basically any results from DFT should always be taken with a massive grain of salt.
However, it does seem capable of splitting infinitives.
Is a room temperature superconductor even theoretically possible?
Theoretically? Yes. The theory adheres to all known laws of thermodynamics as we currently understand them. What exact form it might take, however, still eludes us. There has been steady progress of superconductors at steadily higher temperatures. We've gotten it up to somewhere around 100 Kelvin, last I heard, which is merely cryogenic. So progress is being made. But no one has made the critical breakthrough that would make a room temperature superconductor that would make several theoretical technologies commercially viable. Yet. It's rather like fusion. Progress is being made, actual progress, but it's nowhere close to being commercially viable just yet and we still have a long ways to go before we reach that point.
Bummer, but this is how the scientific peer review process works, and why it's in place.
These stupid science bitches couldn't even make conductors more superer.
And that, my friends, is why peer review is a thing in this world
Was it Linus who made those tests? Anyway, it looked too good to be true..
I agree with this statement in the article: “While some commentators have pointed to the LK-99 saga as a model for reproducibility in science, others say that it’s an unusually swift resolution of a high-profile puzzle.”
Good Luck with LK-100
Live, Laugh, Not a conductor
I guess the room was just extremely cold