▲ 272 ▼ S.Korean experts seek to verify room-temperature superconductor claim (www.reuters.com) submitted 3 years ago by nulluser@programming.dev to c/technology@lemmy.world 35 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Mrduckrocks@lemmy.world 16 points 3 years ago* (6 children) What does it mean? More efficiency? No heat generated? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [–] There1snospoon7491@lemmy.world 44 points 3 years ago (1 child) Iirc (and as an extreme novice) superconductors allow for transfer of incredible amounts of energy with little to no loss, but require extreme supercooling to do so. A superconductor that doesn’t need that cooling would allow super-efficient energy transfer with very little to no cooling needed, meaning the overhead costs are reduced dramatically. This would be a wonder technology if proven to be true, but my understanding is most of the rest of the world is highly skeptical at the moment. It’s like having your cake and eating it too. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 3 years ago (1 child) This would be a wonder technology if proven to be true, but my understanding is most of the rest of the world is highly skeptical at the moment. It’s like having your cake and eating it too. I’d say it’s more like simulating the best tasting cake ever in a computer, then telling everyone else to go bake it. Hopefully someone can figure out a process to create the material in real life (then hopefully it’s durable and eventually economical to produce). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] aebrer@kbin.social 9 points 3 years ago (1 child) Afaik they did build it in real life, and the paper in fact is about the process for manufacturing it, not just about the properties or simulations. People have replicated the simulations so far, but are still working on replicating the manufacturing process, as it has low yeild and some variability apparently permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Maximilious@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) The problem with that paper as I understand it is that the writer was recently outed for making many false claims in his research. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] aebrer@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago Interesting I hadn't seen that. Do you have a source I could check out? There's six authors so it'd help figure out what you're referring to permalink fedilink source parent [–] tsz@lemmy.world 23 points 3 years ago (1 child) Most scifi movie things you can think of would be on the table. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] clgoh@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago* (2 children) Warp drive? Artificial gravity? Time travel? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] aebrer@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago* (2 children) Maybe (or at least an albecuire drive) Maybe Probably not Also some more "basic" things like cheap MRI without requiring helium (which we are running out of), cheap and easy magnetic levitation (more available high-speed trains) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] SkybreakerEngineer@lemmy.world 6 points 3 years ago (1 child) Last I checked, alcubierre drive still requires negative mass, which is not a thing. Time travel and artificial gravity are still theoretically impossible. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] aebrer@kbin.social 3 points 3 years ago Yeah artificial gravity I was thinking more along the lines of faking it via magnetism. Albecuire drive I was just wrong about, you're right it's not a maybe it's a nearly 100% no lol. Sorry just excited. permalink fedilink source parent [–] WarmSoda@lemm.ee 1 point 3 years ago Albecuire drive is basically science fiction. If it's actually possible we won't be seeing it any time soon unless we find a crashed ship on Mars or something. permalink fedilink source parent [+] skillissuer@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 17 points 3 years ago Way more efficiency, almost no heat generated. Quantum computers in your pocket. No need for fans in computers anymore, even for supercomputers. Way more efficiency at sending electricity long distances. Things like maglev trains and fusion reactors and MRI machines can use superconductors without needing to keep the temp at negative 450 F. Cheap MRIs mean accessible, inexpensive MRIs for all. The list goes on and on. permalink fedilink source parent [–] cassetti@kbin.social 16 points 3 years ago (2 children) Yep. You know how hot your phone gets when charging? Or how hot a playstation gets when gaming for hours at a time? That's due to heat-loss generated by the circuits. Superconductors would allow them to run much cooler generating essentially zero heat. Which means they can run more efficiently or faster without the need for larger heatsinks or complicated expensive cooling systems. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Mrduckrocks@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago This is huge if true. permalink fedilink source parent [+] skillissuer@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 15 points 3 years ago Much less heat output Much less power usage because the components traditionally used to cool are not required (which makes it much cheaper to run) Lossless power transfer which is much more efficient permalink fedilink source parent [–] AES@lemmy.ronsmans.eu 10 points 3 years ago (2 children) And faster computers permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Djeikup@lemmy.world 8 points 3 years ago Yes, because less heat. So we can crank it higher with no drawbacks. (Simplified reasoning I dont know a lot about circuit boards) permalink fedilink source parent [+] skillissuer@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] There1snospoon7491@lemmy.world 44 points 3 years ago (1 child) Iirc (and as an extreme novice) superconductors allow for transfer of incredible amounts of energy with little to no loss, but require extreme supercooling to do so. A superconductor that doesn’t need that cooling would allow super-efficient energy transfer with very little to no cooling needed, meaning the overhead costs are reduced dramatically. This would be a wonder technology if proven to be true, but my understanding is most of the rest of the world is highly skeptical at the moment. It’s like having your cake and eating it too. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 3 years ago (1 child) This would be a wonder technology if proven to be true, but my understanding is most of the rest of the world is highly skeptical at the moment. It’s like having your cake and eating it too. I’d say it’s more like simulating the best tasting cake ever in a computer, then telling everyone else to go bake it. Hopefully someone can figure out a process to create the material in real life (then hopefully it’s durable and eventually economical to produce). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] aebrer@kbin.social 9 points 3 years ago (1 child) Afaik they did build it in real life, and the paper in fact is about the process for manufacturing it, not just about the properties or simulations. People have replicated the simulations so far, but are still working on replicating the manufacturing process, as it has low yeild and some variability apparently permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Maximilious@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) The problem with that paper as I understand it is that the writer was recently outed for making many false claims in his research. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] aebrer@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago Interesting I hadn't seen that. Do you have a source I could check out? There's six authors so it'd help figure out what you're referring to permalink fedilink source parent
[–] nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 3 years ago (1 child) This would be a wonder technology if proven to be true, but my understanding is most of the rest of the world is highly skeptical at the moment. It’s like having your cake and eating it too. I’d say it’s more like simulating the best tasting cake ever in a computer, then telling everyone else to go bake it. Hopefully someone can figure out a process to create the material in real life (then hopefully it’s durable and eventually economical to produce). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] aebrer@kbin.social 9 points 3 years ago (1 child) Afaik they did build it in real life, and the paper in fact is about the process for manufacturing it, not just about the properties or simulations. People have replicated the simulations so far, but are still working on replicating the manufacturing process, as it has low yeild and some variability apparently permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Maximilious@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) The problem with that paper as I understand it is that the writer was recently outed for making many false claims in his research. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] aebrer@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago Interesting I hadn't seen that. Do you have a source I could check out? There's six authors so it'd help figure out what you're referring to permalink fedilink source parent
[–] aebrer@kbin.social 9 points 3 years ago (1 child) Afaik they did build it in real life, and the paper in fact is about the process for manufacturing it, not just about the properties or simulations. People have replicated the simulations so far, but are still working on replicating the manufacturing process, as it has low yeild and some variability apparently permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Maximilious@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) The problem with that paper as I understand it is that the writer was recently outed for making many false claims in his research. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] aebrer@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago Interesting I hadn't seen that. Do you have a source I could check out? There's six authors so it'd help figure out what you're referring to permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Maximilious@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) The problem with that paper as I understand it is that the writer was recently outed for making many false claims in his research. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] aebrer@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago Interesting I hadn't seen that. Do you have a source I could check out? There's six authors so it'd help figure out what you're referring to permalink fedilink source parent
[–] aebrer@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago Interesting I hadn't seen that. Do you have a source I could check out? There's six authors so it'd help figure out what you're referring to permalink fedilink source parent
[–] tsz@lemmy.world 23 points 3 years ago (1 child) Most scifi movie things you can think of would be on the table. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] clgoh@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago* (2 children) Warp drive? Artificial gravity? Time travel? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] aebrer@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago* (2 children) Maybe (or at least an albecuire drive) Maybe Probably not Also some more "basic" things like cheap MRI without requiring helium (which we are running out of), cheap and easy magnetic levitation (more available high-speed trains) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] SkybreakerEngineer@lemmy.world 6 points 3 years ago (1 child) Last I checked, alcubierre drive still requires negative mass, which is not a thing. Time travel and artificial gravity are still theoretically impossible. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] aebrer@kbin.social 3 points 3 years ago Yeah artificial gravity I was thinking more along the lines of faking it via magnetism. Albecuire drive I was just wrong about, you're right it's not a maybe it's a nearly 100% no lol. Sorry just excited. permalink fedilink source parent [–] WarmSoda@lemm.ee 1 point 3 years ago Albecuire drive is basically science fiction. If it's actually possible we won't be seeing it any time soon unless we find a crashed ship on Mars or something. permalink fedilink source parent [+] skillissuer@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] clgoh@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago* (2 children) Warp drive? Artificial gravity? Time travel? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] aebrer@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago* (2 children) Maybe (or at least an albecuire drive) Maybe Probably not Also some more "basic" things like cheap MRI without requiring helium (which we are running out of), cheap and easy magnetic levitation (more available high-speed trains) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] SkybreakerEngineer@lemmy.world 6 points 3 years ago (1 child) Last I checked, alcubierre drive still requires negative mass, which is not a thing. Time travel and artificial gravity are still theoretically impossible. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] aebrer@kbin.social 3 points 3 years ago Yeah artificial gravity I was thinking more along the lines of faking it via magnetism. Albecuire drive I was just wrong about, you're right it's not a maybe it's a nearly 100% no lol. Sorry just excited. permalink fedilink source parent [–] WarmSoda@lemm.ee 1 point 3 years ago Albecuire drive is basically science fiction. If it's actually possible we won't be seeing it any time soon unless we find a crashed ship on Mars or something. permalink fedilink source parent [+] skillissuer@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] aebrer@kbin.social 4 points 3 years ago* (2 children) Maybe (or at least an albecuire drive) Maybe Probably not Also some more "basic" things like cheap MRI without requiring helium (which we are running out of), cheap and easy magnetic levitation (more available high-speed trains) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] SkybreakerEngineer@lemmy.world 6 points 3 years ago (1 child) Last I checked, alcubierre drive still requires negative mass, which is not a thing. Time travel and artificial gravity are still theoretically impossible. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] aebrer@kbin.social 3 points 3 years ago Yeah artificial gravity I was thinking more along the lines of faking it via magnetism. Albecuire drive I was just wrong about, you're right it's not a maybe it's a nearly 100% no lol. Sorry just excited. permalink fedilink source parent [–] WarmSoda@lemm.ee 1 point 3 years ago Albecuire drive is basically science fiction. If it's actually possible we won't be seeing it any time soon unless we find a crashed ship on Mars or something. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SkybreakerEngineer@lemmy.world 6 points 3 years ago (1 child) Last I checked, alcubierre drive still requires negative mass, which is not a thing. Time travel and artificial gravity are still theoretically impossible. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] aebrer@kbin.social 3 points 3 years ago Yeah artificial gravity I was thinking more along the lines of faking it via magnetism. Albecuire drive I was just wrong about, you're right it's not a maybe it's a nearly 100% no lol. Sorry just excited. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] aebrer@kbin.social 3 points 3 years ago Yeah artificial gravity I was thinking more along the lines of faking it via magnetism. Albecuire drive I was just wrong about, you're right it's not a maybe it's a nearly 100% no lol. Sorry just excited. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] WarmSoda@lemm.ee 1 point 3 years ago Albecuire drive is basically science fiction. If it's actually possible we won't be seeing it any time soon unless we find a crashed ship on Mars or something. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] skillissuer@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 17 points 3 years ago Way more efficiency, almost no heat generated. Quantum computers in your pocket. No need for fans in computers anymore, even for supercomputers. Way more efficiency at sending electricity long distances. Things like maglev trains and fusion reactors and MRI machines can use superconductors without needing to keep the temp at negative 450 F. Cheap MRIs mean accessible, inexpensive MRIs for all. The list goes on and on. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] cassetti@kbin.social 16 points 3 years ago (2 children) Yep. You know how hot your phone gets when charging? Or how hot a playstation gets when gaming for hours at a time? That's due to heat-loss generated by the circuits. Superconductors would allow them to run much cooler generating essentially zero heat. Which means they can run more efficiently or faster without the need for larger heatsinks or complicated expensive cooling systems. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Mrduckrocks@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago This is huge if true. permalink fedilink source parent [+] skillissuer@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Mrduckrocks@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago This is huge if true. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] skillissuer@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 15 points 3 years ago Much less heat output Much less power usage because the components traditionally used to cool are not required (which makes it much cheaper to run) Lossless power transfer which is much more efficient permalink fedilink source parent
[–] AES@lemmy.ronsmans.eu 10 points 3 years ago (2 children) And faster computers permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Djeikup@lemmy.world 8 points 3 years ago Yes, because less heat. So we can crank it higher with no drawbacks. (Simplified reasoning I dont know a lot about circuit boards) permalink fedilink source parent [+] skillissuer@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Djeikup@lemmy.world 8 points 3 years ago Yes, because less heat. So we can crank it higher with no drawbacks. (Simplified reasoning I dont know a lot about circuit boards) permalink fedilink source parent
[+] skillissuer@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent