this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2023
106 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37730 readers
323 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ThemboMcBembo@beehaw.org 39 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I 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@beehaw.org 9 points 1 year ago

Related 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