Comment

Comment on Which side are you placing your bets on?

MossyFeathers@pawb.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

LK-99 is a supposed superconductor that can operate at ambient atmospheric press and below temperatures of 127°c/260°f. In other words, a room-temperature superconductor. The holy grail of conductors. A material that’d completely revolutionize literally everything. Not only that, it’s made out of a lead-apatite, meaning it would potentially be relatively inexpensive to make. We could be on the edge of a new era.

AND HERE COMES THE BUTT

BUT my understanding is that attempts to replicate the experiment are currently inconclusive. There have supposedly been successful replications as well as unsuccessful attempts, however none of the papers have been peer reviewed yet. Additionally, computer simulations have given inconsistent results.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
To add to this, this all burst into the news last week when some of the researchers behind LK-99 announced it just last week, and so labs around the world have been furiously trying to replicate their claimed results these past several days.

source
- programmer_belch@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  Understandably so, the paper says the material doesn’t need that much energy to produce a small sample
  
  source
BlueN1te@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
You forgot to mention the source of this info on lk 99 is coming from Russian and Chinese sources… and in the current climate they don’t have truckloads of credibility

source
- ghostface@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  Hey, you guys need to get out of the echo chamber every now and then. Originally discovered from a south Korean team. The experiment has been replicated by US, Chinese and Russian teams.
  
  I’m very team skeptical, but I also like to celebrate good news and by itself. This is good news, is sort of the spirit of OP post. Once this gets out the lab what are the possibilities
  
  source
  - MossyFeathers@pawb.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    Where all the replications successful? I’d heard the Chinese team claimed success but didn’t show proof, the Russian team claimed their results were negative but there was supposedly evidence that they’d used the wrong material (I’m not a scientist, just repeating what I’ve read) and I hadn’t heard anything about a US team replicating it in a lab (I’d heard there were simulations, but no lab results from US teams). Is there new info that I’ve missed? The fact that some simulations show similar results to the original paper makes me hopeful, but again, those are just simulations.
    
    source
- objectionist@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  scientific discoveries really shouldn’t be determined as good or bad based on who discovered it.
  
  not like a superconductor can spy on you lmao
  
  source
agressivelyPassive@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

AND HERE COMES THE BUTT

That’s what she said!

Sorry.

source