Science

4 readers

6 users here now

This magazine is dedicated to discussions on scientific discoveries, research, and theories across various fields, including physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, and more. Whether you are a scientist, a science enthusiast, or simply curious about the world around us, this is the place for you. Here you can share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage in discussions on a wide range of scientific topics. From the latest breakthroughs to historical discoveries and ongoing research, this category covers a wide range of topics related to science.

founded 2 years ago

Hopes Dashed As LK-99 Confirmed Not To Be A Room-Temperature Superconductor (www.iflscience.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

After a few intense weeks of speculation and drama, more and more labs have been able to recreate LK-99, also known as modified lead-apatite. The material was touted as the first-ever room-temperature ambient pressure superconductor, a claim that was met with healthy skepticism and excitement. After all, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (3 children)

This will probably be the outcome but it’s way too early to be making this claim as fact. The article references one lab in China that found no SC. Meanwhile there’s a different lab in China claiming that there is SC.

The material is non-uniform and different crystal structures within the material are expected to have vastly different properties. The original paper was (suspiciously) vague about exactly how to create the material and different labs are following different steps to synthesize it. So it’s expected that they may get different results.

The original samples that inspired the paper have been sent to other labs for testing, those results should give us the final answer.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Indeed, this kind of reaction has driven me to unsubscribe from the specifically LK-99-related subreddits and forums that have cropped up. "These guys tried reproing it, and they failed, so that's it, game over. We can forget all about this stuff now." Or even worse, "this one guy made a deliberately fraudulent video, so all of the news about LK-99 can be dismissed as fake now."

This is exactly the inverse of what skeptics keep cautioning against. There are plenty of ways to fail to make superconductors, finding a new one of those doesn't tell us much. All it takes is for one lab to figure out a reliable way to make them and all the failures in the world can't overcome that.

Patience.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That sounds like there's maybe variables not taken into consideration.

Tbh that's the hopium speaking but I've taken a big dose of it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Arstechnica has a great writeup here. Seems like the process is just so variable that recreating the exact substance will be very difficult, even if the original sample is confirmed - akin to Flash's speed force experiment, or Steve Roger's super serum.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Yeah this all smacks hard of a con then. You don't publish except to get replication. That's the entire point.

Publishing while being intentionally vague about replication is a huge red flag.