Future Timeline

Summary of the four replication efforts thus far.

So basically, LK-99 is interesting enough to open a new pathway to superconductor research, possibly towards the discovery of a bona fide room-temperature superconductor, but it is not the pancena a lot are claiming it to be.

Two biggest takeaways of note:

- LK-99 appears to retain its superconducting properties while the crystal lattice is not perfectly uniform or structured. It might explain why this occurs at ambient pressures.

- They concluded the appearance of diamagnetism without superconductivity seems unlikely, so the possibility of superconductivity at work is tantalizing.

They measure 0 resistance at 110K (-163C) using the four-point probe method. 0 resistance at this high of a temperature at ambient pressure is a new discovery in materials science

NYT article: https://archive.ph/E7yZQ

"Successful growth and room temperature ambient-pressure magnetic levitation of LK-99"

The paper would indicate they did not test for superconductivity. The replication evidence so far in conjunction with a few of the theoretical preprints imo leans towards isolated pockets of superconductivity within samples, not the entire sample being superconductive.

I imagine this makes it much harder to test and also explains why the successful levitation videos are usually near microscopic specks.

Is anyone else remaining ultra-skeptical about this supposed "breakthrough", or is it just me?

One of my mottos in life – if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Show me a peer-reviewed, published article in a top-tier journal like Nature or Science, confirming the effect and its reproducibility, and then I'll probably change my mind. Until then, it just seems to be pre-prints, rushed lab experiments, and Twitter speculation. We've seen this kind of thing before in other science/tech, where it ends in disappointment.

We weren't supposed to get this technology until ~2100...

wjfox wrote: ↑Fri Aug 04, 2023 11:35 am Is anyone else remaining ultra-skeptical about this supposed "breakthrough", or is it just me?

One of my mottos in life – if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Show me a peer-reviewed, published article in a top-tier journal like Nature or Science, confirming the effect and its reproducibility, and then I'll probably change my mind. Until then, it just seems to be pre-prints, rushed lab experiments, and Twitter speculation. We've seen this kind of thing before in other science/tech, where it ends in disappointment.

We weren't supposed to get this technology until ~2100...

Prediction markets have the odds that this is legit around ~40% right now. When the initial preprints came out, they only had the odds around 10-25%.

Update - 8/8/2023: It's back down to 23%.

Update - 8/9/2023: Down to 11%. It's basically over.

wjfox wrote: ↑Fri Aug 04, 2023 11:35 am We weren't supposed to get this technology until ~2100...

Well, we were supposed to have civilization changing A.I. till much later as well. Perhaps what we think of as advanced really isn't the moment someone simply figures out how something works.

Considering how much this has blown up recently, I really hope it's legit as can be, because it couldn't have been placed at a better time than now. It quite literally means a new industrial revolution if it can be replicated at scale. If this affects computing power like it's theorized to, the Singularity is all but guaranteed.

Video source: https://www.douyin.com/video/7263715495256378659