Possibly more on that superconductivity at ambient room temp thing Kent posted
-
First claimed successful replication of LK-99 Accomplished by a team at the Huazhong University of Science and Technology and posted 30 minutes ago. Why this is evidence: The LK-99 flake slightly levitates for both orientations of the magnetic field, meaning it is not simply a magnetized piece of iron or similar 'magnetic material'. A simple magnetic flake would be attracted to one polarity of the strong magnet, and repelled by the other. A diamagnet would be repelled under either orientation, since it resists and expels all fields regardless of the polarity. Caveats There is no way to verify the orientation of the strong magnet in this video, also, there are yet to be published experimental measured values of this sample. Diamagnetism is a property of superconductors but without measured and verified data, this is just suggestive of a result. (emphasis honey's) Take-away If this synthesis was indeed successful, then this material is easy enough to be made by labs other than the original research team. I would watch carefully for results out of Argonne National Lab, who are reported to be working on their own synthesis of a sample. This overall corroborates two independent simulation studies that investigated the original Korean authors claim about material and crystal structure, and both studies supported the claims. Lawrence Berkeley National Lab: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.16892.pdf[^] Shenyang National Lab: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.16040.pdf[^] Anyway, my takeaway is this is another bit of evidence that points to this being more than just a fluke or a bad experiment. It has been replicated. Can they do it again? Can they get around the limitations of their current methodologies? None of this is peer reviewed yet, to my knowledge so caveat emptor. However, it's extremely interesting.
Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
I agree, if it pans out. I am not expert in this field but I do try to follow the science. I see where the doping process uses high conductivity metals, some precious. (Ni, Cu, Zn, Ag, and Au) Top five conductivity metals (according to Wiki): Silver (Ag) Copper (Cu) Annealed copper Gold (Au) Aluminium The costs of mass production may be driven by these doping agents.
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day" Badfinger
-
I agree, if it pans out. I am not expert in this field but I do try to follow the science. I see where the doping process uses high conductivity metals, some precious. (Ni, Cu, Zn, Ag, and Au) Top five conductivity metals (according to Wiki): Silver (Ag) Copper (Cu) Annealed copper Gold (Au) Aluminium The costs of mass production may be driven by these doping agents.
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day" Badfinger
Apparently the materials are inexpensive. Some Chinese researchers have posted the method they are using to produce LK-99. I used a translator so there may be errors:
Zhihu user wrote:
链接：https://www.zhihu.com/question/613850973/answer/3136000933 This synthesis method is so simple that it can be reproduced in a high school laboratory. The most important thing is that the paper also verified that the superconducting resistance is zero and the Meissner effect. If the paper is true, it is really outrageous. Synthesis in three steps: Step 1: Synthesis of Chaloste Pb2(SO4)O Mix lead oxide PbO and lead sulfate Pb(SO4) powders in a crucible at a ratio of 50% each, heat the mixed powder in a furnace at 725 degrees for 24 hours in the presence of air, and the mixture undergoes a chemical reaction. Generates chalkite. Step 2: Synthesis of Cu3P Cu3P Copper Cu and phosphorus P powders were mixed in a crucible according to the ratio, and the mixed powder was sealed in a 20 cm per gram sealed tube with a vacuum degree of 10-3 torr. The sealed tube was heated in a furnace at 550°C for 48 hours to eventually produce cuprous phosphide crystals. Step 3: To generate room temperature and pressure superconductor Pb(10-x)Cux(PO4)6O Grind chalcopyrite and cuprous phosphide crystals into powder and mix them in a crucible, then put them into a sealed tube with a vacuum of 10 torr. Heat the sealed tube in a furnace at 925°C for 5-20 hours, and finally generate a copper-doped lead apatite Pb(10-x)Cux(PO4)6O, which is a superconducting material at room temperature and pressure.
But they are saying they have not confirmed room-temperature superconductivity. This team has stated it's a very good diamagnetic material with a resistance of about 10~100 KΩ. Still unconfirmed, but there are dozens of other labs trying to reproduce it. I just thought it was neat to see the lab steps to make it.
-
Apparently the materials are inexpensive. Some Chinese researchers have posted the method they are using to produce LK-99. I used a translator so there may be errors:
Zhihu user wrote:
链接：https://www.zhihu.com/question/613850973/answer/3136000933 This synthesis method is so simple that it can be reproduced in a high school laboratory. The most important thing is that the paper also verified that the superconducting resistance is zero and the Meissner effect. If the paper is true, it is really outrageous. Synthesis in three steps: Step 1: Synthesis of Chaloste Pb2(SO4)O Mix lead oxide PbO and lead sulfate Pb(SO4) powders in a crucible at a ratio of 50% each, heat the mixed powder in a furnace at 725 degrees for 24 hours in the presence of air, and the mixture undergoes a chemical reaction. Generates chalkite. Step 2: Synthesis of Cu3P Cu3P Copper Cu and phosphorus P powders were mixed in a crucible according to the ratio, and the mixed powder was sealed in a 20 cm per gram sealed tube with a vacuum degree of 10-3 torr. The sealed tube was heated in a furnace at 550°C for 48 hours to eventually produce cuprous phosphide crystals. Step 3: To generate room temperature and pressure superconductor Pb(10-x)Cux(PO4)6O Grind chalcopyrite and cuprous phosphide crystals into powder and mix them in a crucible, then put them into a sealed tube with a vacuum of 10 torr. Heat the sealed tube in a furnace at 925°C for 5-20 hours, and finally generate a copper-doped lead apatite Pb(10-x)Cux(PO4)6O, which is a superconducting material at room temperature and pressure.
But they are saying they have not confirmed room-temperature superconductivity. This team has stated it's a very good diamagnetic material with a resistance of about 10~100 KΩ. Still unconfirmed, but there are dozens of other labs trying to reproduce it. I just thought it was neat to see the lab steps to make it.
I don't have enough chemistry background to completely understand the steps, but if it works... the secret sauce seems to be the diamagnetic properties. Did some reading up and it seems that water has diametric properties causing it be repelled slightly went thinly placed on a very strong magnet. Frogs and other critters (with high water content, I suppose) have been levitated if magnets are strong enough. Weird stuff. Thanx for the info, you really did some homework.
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day" Badfinger
-
I don't have enough chemistry background to completely understand the steps, but if it works... the secret sauce seems to be the diamagnetic properties. Did some reading up and it seems that water has diametric properties causing it be repelled slightly went thinly placed on a very strong magnet. Frogs and other critters (with high water content, I suppose) have been levitated if magnets are strong enough. Weird stuff. Thanx for the info, you really did some homework.
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day" Badfinger
I'm just closely monitoring the topic on a few sites with high quality data. [Space Battles forum](https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/claims-of-room-temperature-and-ambient-pressure-superconductor.1106083/) has a great thread following the situation. The /r/singularity sub is also a good resource. And Zhihu for monitoring the Chinese progress.
-
I'm just closely monitoring the topic on a few sites with high quality data. [Space Battles forum](https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/claims-of-room-temperature-and-ambient-pressure-superconductor.1106083/) has a great thread following the situation. The /r/singularity sub is also a good resource. And Zhihu for monitoring the Chinese progress.
-
First claimed successful replication of LK-99 Accomplished by a team at the Huazhong University of Science and Technology and posted 30 minutes ago. Why this is evidence: The LK-99 flake slightly levitates for both orientations of the magnetic field, meaning it is not simply a magnetized piece of iron or similar 'magnetic material'. A simple magnetic flake would be attracted to one polarity of the strong magnet, and repelled by the other. A diamagnet would be repelled under either orientation, since it resists and expels all fields regardless of the polarity. Caveats There is no way to verify the orientation of the strong magnet in this video, also, there are yet to be published experimental measured values of this sample. Diamagnetism is a property of superconductors but without measured and verified data, this is just suggestive of a result. (emphasis honey's) Take-away If this synthesis was indeed successful, then this material is easy enough to be made by labs other than the original research team. I would watch carefully for results out of Argonne National Lab, who are reported to be working on their own synthesis of a sample. This overall corroborates two independent simulation studies that investigated the original Korean authors claim about material and crystal structure, and both studies supported the claims. Lawrence Berkeley National Lab: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.16892.pdf[^] Shenyang National Lab: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.16040.pdf[^] Anyway, my takeaway is this is another bit of evidence that points to this being more than just a fluke or a bad experiment. It has been replicated. Can they do it again? Can they get around the limitations of their current methodologies? None of this is peer reviewed yet, to my knowledge so caveat emptor. However, it's extremely interesting.
Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
Thanks for this report, "honey." This is good stuff, and not something that makes the local news. For my purposes, I want to see the current density this tech can support, but I know it's far too soon to expect that.
Will Rogers never met me.
-
Wow what a weird website. Interesting to say the least. I'll get back.
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day" Badfinger
-
First claimed successful replication of LK-99 Accomplished by a team at the Huazhong University of Science and Technology and posted 30 minutes ago. Why this is evidence: The LK-99 flake slightly levitates for both orientations of the magnetic field, meaning it is not simply a magnetized piece of iron or similar 'magnetic material'. A simple magnetic flake would be attracted to one polarity of the strong magnet, and repelled by the other. A diamagnet would be repelled under either orientation, since it resists and expels all fields regardless of the polarity. Caveats There is no way to verify the orientation of the strong magnet in this video, also, there are yet to be published experimental measured values of this sample. Diamagnetism is a property of superconductors but without measured and verified data, this is just suggestive of a result. (emphasis honey's) Take-away If this synthesis was indeed successful, then this material is easy enough to be made by labs other than the original research team. I would watch carefully for results out of Argonne National Lab, who are reported to be working on their own synthesis of a sample. This overall corroborates two independent simulation studies that investigated the original Korean authors claim about material and crystal structure, and both studies supported the claims. Lawrence Berkeley National Lab: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.16892.pdf[^] Shenyang National Lab: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.16040.pdf[^] Anyway, my takeaway is this is another bit of evidence that points to this being more than just a fluke or a bad experiment. It has been replicated. Can they do it again? Can they get around the limitations of their current methodologies? None of this is peer reviewed yet, to my knowledge so caveat emptor. However, it's extremely interesting.
Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
I always like to remember the Nature reproducibility paper when hearing about things like this -> 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility | Nature[^] On the whole individual scientific breakthroughs tend to be quite small, so I tend to be on the skep[tical side when hearing about this sort of thing. Bearing in mind that scientists survive from grants and competition for grant money is fierce, it's always good to be skeptical when claims are made that are not backed by easily reproducible evidence.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
-
I don't have enough chemistry background to completely understand the steps, but if it works... the secret sauce seems to be the diamagnetic properties. Did some reading up and it seems that water has diametric properties causing it be repelled slightly went thinly placed on a very strong magnet. Frogs and other critters (with high water content, I suppose) have been levitated if magnets are strong enough. Weird stuff. Thanx for the info, you really did some homework.
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day" Badfinger
-
I always like to remember the Nature reproducibility paper when hearing about things like this -> 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility | Nature[^] On the whole individual scientific breakthroughs tend to be quite small, so I tend to be on the skep[tical side when hearing about this sort of thing. Bearing in mind that scientists survive from grants and competition for grant money is fierce, it's always good to be skeptical when claims are made that are not backed by easily reproducible evidence.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
-
Check Sabine Hossenfelder's video on this you YouTube. It's all very dodgy and they have a history of bad science. So in short, yeah nah.
-
I always like to remember the Nature reproducibility paper when hearing about things like this -> 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility | Nature[^] On the whole individual scientific breakthroughs tend to be quite small, so I tend to be on the skep[tical side when hearing about this sort of thing. Bearing in mind that scientists survive from grants and competition for grant money is fierce, it's always good to be skeptical when claims are made that are not backed by easily reproducible evidence.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
I remain skeptical, yet interested enough to follow the development of this, if that makes sense. I recognize that all prior claims like this have been debunked, and it does give me pause, but not quite enough for me to tune it out. :)
Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
-
I remain skeptical, yet interested enough to follow the development of this, if that makes sense. I recognize that all prior claims like this have been debunked, and it does give me pause, but not quite enough for me to tune it out. :)
Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
I think that's a reasonable and rational approach you are taking. It's an area I know nothing about and I have seen too many Hyperloops,Theranos and FTxs in my life to not be a little bit cynical on some claims.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
