Zhihu is very impressed by the recent claims of @iris_IGB (Iris Alexander) to have achieved 0 resistivity of #LK99 under 280K (7 Celsius).
@sanxiyn
fully agrees with this sentiment.
Chinese observers are impressed. Iris Alexander is one of the first to replicate levitation effect in an LK99 Replication effort.
IMPORTANT NOTE: There is no peer reviewed confirmation of the original LK99 room temperature superconductor claim or of the Iris Alexander experiment. It will only be a matter of 1-3 months to get a clearer result from more labs on these claims. The original samples produced by the South Koreans are being analyzed by others and the original group is creating a more thorough and carefully produced paper for peer review.
NEXTBIGFUTURE position is that this is extremely important and is worth the time and effort to chase down and verify thoroughly. There has been DFT simulations indicating that LK99 or things similar to LK99 (with more oxygen and with a different arrangement of copper atoms) could work as a room temperature superconductor. If the trusted simulations from several major labs indicates that variations could work then it is worth trying the variations. Also, the original papers from south korea talked about the chemical vapor deposition work having the best results. This needs to be confirmed by other labs.
Translation of Zhihu comments on Iris_Alexander claim:
From the preceding discourse about the subject, it appears that [Iris Alexander] possesses exceptional dexterity, profound acumen, and a proclivity for knowledge dissemination. Through this interaction, I have substantially augmented my own knowledge and have conceived several novel ideas that I am eager to experiment with. Reportedly, in the current endeavor, lead sulfate has been replaced by lead silicate, thereby obviating the need for the cumbersome byproduct management. Moreover, the degradation products of lead silicate are unlikely to undergo elemental silicon reduction, rendering them highly insulating and presumably eliminating complications akin to cuprous sulfide formation. The approach displays remarkable boldness coupled with ingenuity. Indeed, it is a source of admiration to observe such bold refinements in synthetic pathways, indicative of a high level of expertise.
Zhihu is very impressed by the recent claims of @iris_IGB to have achieved 0 resistivity of #LK99 under 280K (7 Celsius)@sanxiyn fully agrees with this sentiment
Translation:
From the preceding discourse about the subject, it appears that the individual possesses exceptional… pic.twitter.com/gky7UldRj7— Elsa Zhou (@elsa17z) August 13, 2023
This is not out of blue. I heard about lead silicate plan in DM five days ago, and that was before both PKU and CAS paper. I understand why it seems to be a hoax, but accusation of timing hopium withdrawal is without ground.
— Seo Sanghyeon (@sanxiyn) August 13, 2023
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
A recent paper has looked at Pb10(PO4)6(OH)2 and Pb9Cu(PO4)6(OH)2: arxiv /abs/2308.05143 . I noticed in their calculated graphs that the flat bands in the hydroxide Pb10(PO4)6(OH)2 are actually closer to the Fermi level than in Pb10(PO4)6O. That is before Cu doping. Cu doping brings them even closer.
So maybe – just maybe – the hydroxide might also work if doped correctly. But I admit I haven’t read the paper in detail. I’m not sure what their stance is on the hydroxide.
Anyway, the anhydrous version is using P2O5, under dry atmosphere:
9 PbO + CuO + 3 P2O5 -> Pb9Cu(PO4)6O
However, here you actually need to break and reform some covalent bonds. With H3PO4, the phosphate ions are the same in the reagent and product.
There is another option: first create the lead phosphate Pb9(PO4)6, dry it, and then mix and bake in the dopants such as CuO in a separate step. Lead phosphate is insoluble in water, so it should (hopefully) be relatively easy to dry.
(Reply to Cavan Stone)
I’m just talking out loud to myself here, but what if this is like magic-angle graphene, and at the moment, results are dependent on the luck of whoever is making the sample. Some work okay, showing promise, and others don’t work at all.
I’ve been wanting to make a comment, but I couldn’t find the right spot for it and was concerned that it would be lost within the tsunami of commentary.
The fact that LK99 generated a claim of ambient temperature and pressure superconductivity had an unstated implication … which this article reveals. That is, once ambient temperature and pressure superconductivity has been demonstrated, for the very first time, ***to be possible*** — with the caveat that the claim remains to be confirmed — the opportunity/challenge moves to the next level: Research to elucidate the theoretical basis, research to discover other formulations and efforts toward optimizing the manufacturing process.
I apologize if I’m stating the obvious. No matter the milestone, no matter the breakthrough this is just the beginning of a much longer process, process which is in fact never ending.
Good luck to everyone on the journey.
No one has proven that it is possible, that’s the point. There has been no evidence of superconductivity at any temperature. No transition. No meissner effect. No peak in heat capacity. No divergence in susceptibility. Literally a half magnetic rock and resistances higher than ordinary metals.
That said, there’s nothing in physics that states it is impossible. It’s just very unlikely, due to multiple competing phenomena that are generally preferred by strong electron-phonon or electron-electron interactions , over superconductivity.
There was one group that saw some evidence of possible superconductivity below 110K, IIRC. And several reproductions have shown the partial “levitation”. But that may be some other sort of magnetic response, I suppose.
Brian, it feels like you may be clinging on a bit too hard to this LK99 thing?
Just a thought …
Clicks clicks clicks….
After this, back to Musk.
Site is dying.
Full of it or not, I think this is the promise of LK99. It opened up a whole new avenue for research on a whole new class of materials. We’ve already seen the DFT modeling from a half dozen reputable labs. This is a new target.
That said, there are way too many fake videos and such out there. The first one or two were funny, but this has crossed the rubicon and become stupid.
Hopefully, more labs will pick up on the theoretical work done with the modeling, and get to work on making RTS a reality.
A room temp super conductor would not have as many applications as most people think becuase an invention needs to be economical to go from curiosity to real world applications
For example let’s say Gold was a room temp superconductor. How many applications would there be for a super conductor that costs $60,000/kg ? Lossless power transmission wouldn’t be feasible if the mateiral cost $60,000/kg instead we would just continue to use copper (which is almost Lossless using HVDC as its 98% Lossless) which costs closer to $6/kg
This new material if it costs significantly more than basic elemental copper or aluminium would have quite limited applications. Especially considering all the additional benefits of copper like its very ductile and not brittle. It handles large temp swings well. Etc
So hold your horses
Even if this is a room temp super conductor it’s not going to be a revolution only a marginal improvement in a few small areas which overall won’t impact gdp (and thus your life) much at all
Something like self drive car software would do a lot more for humanity than an expensive super conductor
I find it odd, that biologist by trade without very expensive equipment would suddenly succeed at something, what doctors with thousand of hours in that area are failing. She mixes her data with jokes and when they ask her more precise about procedures,… she gets angry and accuses them of clown behaviour. Her claims are big, but actual evidence from her is almost zero, non existent.
Iris is a scam artist. There’s a reason this is not coming from a reputable institute. If she has the goods then she will publish it, until then the most probable (and default) position should be that this is a hoax.
I agree with that, although Atomstroyexpert would say she is a good scientist based on few tweets.
You got me. I was caught up and impressed. It felt good to think there was going to be a fundamental discovery in my life span. Scammer or not, she is undoubtedly smarter than 99.99% of the people I’ve ever interacted with… based on a few tweets.
For S&G I put an oxidized ingot of Pb in phosphoric acid pickling solution that I use on rusted steel prior to painting or mortar cleanup.
I left it in the solution for a day and saw no visible change in the oxide or general corroded state of the ingot.
I was able to clean a brass boiler safety relief valve that was weeping with this solution…. made the valve look new and it seated cleanly (no weep).
If you’re sure about your phosphoric acid chemistry then make a video.
Not sure 100%, just basing it on my BA level understanding of chemistry. I haven’t worked in the area since graduating, and don’t have the resources to try it myself, so thanks for your experimental contribution.
It is possible the acid is not strong enough to dissolve PbO. Moreover, lead phosphate is practically insoluble, so even if there is a reaction in these conditions it would only occur on the very surface, and the product would not dissolve, so you wouldn’t notice any visible difference. The excess of water also works against the reaction.
I was thinking of using anhydrous H3PO4 (which is a solid at room temperature). Grind the PbO and H3PO4 together with mortar and pestle to obtain at least a partial reaction in the solid state, similar to the original paper’s process. (Using adequate PPE, since PbO is toxic!) After this, the mixture needs to be heated to at least 100 C, preferably in a vacuum. This gives additional energy for the reaction to proceed, and crucially, allows any water byproduct to evaporate. The removal of water is what *should* drive the reaction to completion, theoretically.
Basically, the metal cations and phosphate anions are spectator ions. They don’t participate in the reaction chemically, but they do need to properly intermix to form the product. This is helped by the mechanical grinding and by heat (which increases diffusion). This leaves the following equilibrium of the remaining hydrogen and oxygen:
2 H+ + O-2 H+ + OH- H2O
As you can see, the removal of water should drive this towards completion, while excess water pushes it away from completion (Le Chatelier’s principle).
The arrows got dropped from the equilibrium equation. Let me try this again…
2 H+ + O-2 ⇌ H+ + OH- ⇌ H2O
If I had the resources, I would be trying this myself instead of posting it here.
For michael k
She is full of it
> Reportedly, in the current endeavor, lead sulfate has been replaced by lead silicate, thereby obviating the need for the cumbersome byproduct management.
Or, you know… they could just go to phosphate directly, and eliminate all the byproducts altogether:
9 PbO + CuO + 6 H3PO4 -> Pb9Cu(PO4)6O + 9 H2O (g)
The issue is that the OH ion likes to find itself in there and according to tight binding models, that OH is the dream killer. It would be much better to use as much anhydrous reactions as possible.