- cross-posted to:
- science
collegefurtrader ( @collegefurtrader@discuss.tchncs.de ) English106•11 months agoJUST HAPPENED!!1!11
I’ll believe it when its not just youtube clickbait.
abbadon420 ( @abbadon420@lemm.ee ) 10•11 months agoI mean, publishing on youtube gets more viewers than publishing in a scientific paper
kjack ( @kjack@lemmy.ca ) 43•11 months agoI’m not sure that “number of eyeballs” is the metric by which a successful scientific discovery should be judged…
Bipta ( @Bipta@kbin.social ) 6•11 months agoNonsense; this is the future.
Everything is shit in the future!
abbadon420 ( @abbadon420@lemm.ee ) 2•11 months agoYou’re right, of course, but more eyeballs can lead to more sponsorship and more money, which leads to a greater chance of succes. Downside is that you’ve picked the commercial road and you’ll probably end up in the pocket of some Nestle or Shell.
FaceDeer ( @FaceDeer@kbin.social ) 5•11 months agoIt’s not just youtube clickbait, were you not aware of this news before this video?
collegefurtrader ( @collegefurtrader@discuss.tchncs.de ) English5•11 months agoNo I wasn’t. Source?
FaceDeer ( @FaceDeer@kbin.social ) 20•11 months agoIf you do a Google search for LK-99 you’ll see a whole pile of news articles from the past two days. A preprint was posted on arXiv and everything exploded. There are labs all over the world working on reproducing the material and testing it right now, and it’s a pretty simple thing to make so we’ll have a solid answer likely within a week.
collegefurtrader ( @collegefurtrader@discuss.tchncs.de ) English3•11 months agoVery cool!
coffeekomrade ( @coffeekomrade@lemmy.ml ) English73•11 months agoIt would be cool if these YouTubers could wait til the paper was peer reviewed and its results replicated before shooting their mouth off
OttoVonGoon ( @OttoVonGoon@beehaw.org ) 62•11 months agoFor people put off by the shitty title, the video is actually really good and comprehensive, and sets realistic expectations. It’s a shame that these garbage clickbaity titles are a thing.
Being a content creator these days is not easy! I forgive him for the clickbait.
OttoVonGoon ( @OttoVonGoon@beehaw.org ) 4•11 months agoAgreed! If it lets people like this guy make videos like this, a little clickbait isn’t so bad. I just wish they’d phrase titles slightly differently, like “THIS COULD CHANGE EVERYTHING” would still draw eyes without being a lie.
jarfil ( @jarfil@beehaw.org ) 2•11 months agoI found the arxiv papers more interesting, but it’s not a bad divulgation video.
galilette ( @galilette@mander.xyz ) 39•11 months agoNot to be snobbish or anything, but at this juncture I wouldn’t trust anyone who can’t pronounce
arXiv
(orSchrieffer
for that matter) correctly to explain room temperature superconductivity to me. Hell I barely believe anyone with a materials/physics degree… barsoap ( @barsoap@lemm.ee ) 13•11 months agoDoing that cute “X is chi” thing TeX does is kinda obvious but I have to tell you that it’s probably you who’s pronouncing Schrieffer wrong. Because Americans can’t pronounce German names, not even their own.
Also just wait until your hear the takes economists will have. They’re going to set the record for how many fields a single statement can be simultaneously wrong in (including, of course, their own).
galilette ( @galilette@mander.xyz ) 5•11 months agoThe point is there are established conventions among the practitioners on how these are pronounced, and not getting them right says something about the youtuber who may otherwise appear as an expert.
You might be right on how the name ‘Schrieffer’ should be pronounced in its original tongue, but I’ve heard multiple former students and colleagues of Bob Schrieffer pronounce it otherwise to conclude that theirs is probably how Schrieffer himself intended his name to be pronounced.
Yeah, can’t wait to hear economists’ take, or The Economist’s…
bermuda ( @bermuda@beehaw.org ) 3•11 months agoI don’t see where the person you’re responding to said they’re American
barsoap ( @barsoap@lemm.ee ) 5•11 months agoJohn Robert Schrieffer, one of the original superconductivity guys, is American.
Damage ( @Damage@feddit.it ) 4•11 months agojuncture
at this junction, you mean! wink wink
anlumo ( @anlumo@feddit.de ) 33•11 months agoWe get one of those about once a year, and none of them have been replicated yet.
VanillaGorilla ( @VanillaGorilla@kbin.social ) 12•11 months agoYes, see… it stops working when it leaves their lab.
anlumo ( @anlumo@feddit.de ) English4•11 months agoThen we should build a huge battery right there in their lab and let it store energy for the whole world.
bluGill ( @bluGill@kbin.social ) 1•11 months agoDid it even work in the lab? Replication is needed, otherwise they might have had something else happen. For that matter even if it really happened, if it can’t be duplicated it changes nothing
- argv_minus_one ( @argv_minus_one@beehaw.org ) 19•11 months ago
Will it turn out to be legit, or will it be this generation’s cold fusion?
Thembo McBembo ( @ThemboMcBembo@beehaw.org ) 39•11 months agoI recommend looking at the summary on Wikipedia. See the “Response” and “Publication History” sections: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LK-99#Publication_history
Similar research has been falsified, the third author of this paper left the university months ago, some authors filed patents on the material years in advance, and the underlying mechanisms haven’t been thoroughly explained.
However, they presented it in a way that is EXTREMELY straightforward to reproduce. There’s even a live stream on Twitch of someone working on it: https://www.twitch.tv/andrewmccalip So I doubt they’d make a claim that large when it’s so easy to disprove, and we’ll know for sure in a matter of days, most likely.
pemmykins ( @pemmykins@beehaw.org ) 9•11 months agoRelated to what you’ve posted, the Wikipedia article on room temperature superconductors has a decent history on other claims, which have all turned out to be false or only usable in very specific circumstances: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room-temperature_superconductor
Dandroid ( @dandroid@dandroid.app ) 17•11 months agoIf this gets peer reviewed and confirmed, what would that mean? What applications would this material have?
SmoothSurfer ( @SmoothSurfer@lemm.ee ) English7•11 months agowhat I can think of
No resistance => faster tech, less temp in tech
Hovering things, especially for public transportation
Cheaper mri
Aaron ( @aaronbieber@beehaw.org ) English3•11 months agoAlso conserve helium, which would be huge.
Solemn ( @Solemn@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) 7•11 months agoRemote power generation becomes much more useful since you can eliminate transmission losses. Things like covering the Sahara with solar panels to sell energy to Europe become possible to think about.
everything uses copper wire and want to reduce resistance can use superconductor.
Starmina ( @Starmina@lemm.ee ) English2•11 months agoEverything. Instant prize too
SpaceCowboy639 ( @SpaceCowboy639@beehaw.org ) 10•11 months agoCall me when its 5 sigma.
Elbrond ( @Elbrond@feddit.nl ) Nederlands10•11 months agoYes, not so fast. Only if other teams can replicate LK-99 and they can confirm room temperature super conductivity will it be time to say that this changes something.
Rentlar ( @Rentlar@beehaw.org ) 10•11 months agoThis discovery has potential. At least it’s not a totally exotic process to make this LK-99. I bet more researchers are going to jump on it and explore how it will work and where its limitations are.
The click-baityness is a little off-putting about this video. This doesn’t solve everything, but it’s possibly a big leap in the field of superconductors.
Rapidcreek ( @Rapidcreek@reddthat.com ) 8•11 months agoThe Wikipedia for LK-99 is fairly solid… https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LK-99
Bipta ( @Bipta@kbin.social ) 8•11 months ago260° F?!
If that’s true, this would be a huge fucking deal. But most room temperature superconductors don’t operate anywhere near what laymen would call room temperature.
TheYang ( @TheYang@lemmy.ml ) 5•11 months agoroom temperature superconductors don’t exist. (well… when/if this paper turns out to be bullshit)
High Temperature Superconductors do, and refer to the fact that they can be cooled with liquid nitrogen, and do not require liquid helium.
meteorswarm ( @meteorswarm@beehaw.org ) 10•11 months ago“well actually” room temperature superconductors do exist, quite definitely! … But only at 100 gigapascals of pressure. https://uspex-team.org/static/file/Troyan2022_ufn227g_High-temperature superconductivity in hydrides.pdf
Still really cool, but not useful for engineering.
I agree that this paper needs to be replicated before we get excited.
TheYang ( @TheYang@lemmy.ml ) 3•11 months agodamn, right.
i totally forgot about those, and assumend the mix-up of room temperature and “high-temperature”, because “high” is very relative and confused me as well.
Centurix ( @Centurix@lemm.ee ) 5•11 months agoTurns out we were putting Lead into the wrong thing all along.
jarfil ( @jarfil@beehaw.org ) 3•11 months agoBut the guy who put lead into gasoline proved how it wasn’t poisonous, even washed his bare hands in it! (then died from totally unrelated lead poisoning)
Twashe ( @Twashe@lemmy.ml ) 5•11 months agoSo actual hover boards soon?
Superconducting skateboard looks like a reality.