There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

**Ferromagnetic** half levitation of LK-99-like samples

In this preprint, the authors synthesize samples based on the claimed room temperature superconductor LK-99, and observe half-levitation similar to that seen in other recent videos, which has been ascribed to the Meissner Effect (a signature of superconductivity).

However, they performed a careful magnetization measurement and found that the sample is ferromagnetic. They also did a resistance measurement on a larger sample, and found that the majority of the material is a semiconductor. This points to a simpler explanation for the half-levitation phenomenon: it is a consequence of ferromagnetism (+ mechanical effects due to friction and sample shape), rather than the Meissner Effect.

Unless someone can demonstrate full levitation or better resistivity data for LK-99, this is arguably fatal for the claims of room temperature superconductivity.

expatriado ,

i decided not to get excited until replicated experiments by third parties were done, it was too good to be true

gibmiser ,

I know better and still got excited.

I know we need to fix our problems as a society, but damn that technology hopium really gets me going.

In unrelated news, did you see the fusion news! We did it! Net positive energy! Fusion will be in our toasters in a few short years!

cyd OP ,

In unrelated news, did you see the fusion news! We did it! Net positive energy! Fusion will be in our toasters in a few short years!

Now they simply have to figure out how to get that super-powerful laser, which can fire only once a day, to firing once every milisecond ;-)

karmiclychee ,

Easy! Run it on fusion!

quicksand ,

Do you have more information on said laser? I work on lasers that I would consider quite powerful and they fire at 6 kHz, soon to be 8 on the next model. I’d like to compare the specs

cyd OP ,

The National Ignition Facility has an explainer here. Typically, these facilities operate at petawatt peak powers by using lots and lots of pulse amplifiers. From what I heard, after every shot, the staff have to comb through the facility making sure things are still working, replacing blown out components, etc…

quicksand ,

Oh wow a few Joules, that’s orders of magnitude bigger than ours

jpeps ,

You may know more than me on this, but I believe multiple fires per day are possible now. Besides, tokamak reactors show more promise.

6mementomori ,

i hate to break it to you, but net positive isn’t exact here. the “energy in” used to calculate it is the energy of the actual photons, but to actually fire those lasers, you need 100 times the energy, so it’s a net 1%

TonyTonyChopper ,
@TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz avatar

The fusion definition of “net positive” has always been heavily inflated so that investors and governments will actually put money into these dreams

ChrisLicht ,

I tapped out after high school physics and college organic chem, so have almost zero understanding of what’s at work here, but why wouldn’t the original authors have thought to test for ferromagnetism?

Castor ,

Motivated reasoning effects everyone. Even scientists can see what they want to see over what is. One of many reasons peer review is an important part of the process.

ChrisLicht ,

What’s the typical damage done to the careers of folks who mistakenly claim cold fusion or room-temp superconductor discoveries?

Bipta ,

What careers?

traveler01 ,

There shouldn’t be any. They made a paper, got peer reviewed, their founds was dismissed. If any miss fire by scientists get their career destroyed, they will probably be afraid of reporting other discoveries that might prove useful to humanity.

I mean, I’m no expect but for my understanding the material still shows some promising qualities no?

Sigmatics ,

Nothing, people in research usually judge your work for what it is. In non blind peer review your work might not be looked at with as much interest or diligence, as you already lost some credibility

TonyTonyChopper ,
@TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz avatar

These are often done purposefully. And the scientists are often repeat offenders of academic fraud. It’s a very bad look for their career.

www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-02401-2

randomaccount43543 ,

That’s a shame. Is was hoping this could be it

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines