LK99 is the material that South Korean researchers claimed was a room temperature superconductor. The patents and the original papers described superconducting low level electrical resistance for thin film versions of LK99. There were a lot of negative experiments from researchers who made bulk samples of LK99. The negative papers never made and never wrote about trying to make thin film LK99.
There were also many positive LK99 science papers based upon computer simulation mainly using DFT (Density Function Theory).
The latest experimental paper from China is the strongest experimental confirmation to date for the original korean work.
A large portion of the scientific community and public have turned against LK99. A room temperature superconductor is VERY hard work. The original cuprate superconductors had difficult replication until the YCBO formulation was discovered.
Hopefully, this new chinese experimental will get people to realize that they vastly underestimated the effort to do LK99. People will see that they made a mistake in trying to go scorched earth over anyone trying to do work on LK99. This is science and it can be difficult and unreliable making something as remarkable as room temperature superconductors.
School of Minerals Processing and Bioengineering, Central South University, Changsha, China
State Key Laboratory of Luminescent Materials and Devices, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China
Department of Physics, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China
Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Luminescence from Molecular Aggregates, Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Joint Laboratory of Optoelectronic and Magnetic Functional Materials, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China
School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China
They observe a considerable hysteresis effect of low-field microwave absorption (LFMA) in copper-substituted lead apatite. By continuously rotating samples under external magnetic field, this effect is diminished which can not be renewed by a strong magnetic field but will be spontaneously recovered after two days, indicating its glassy features and excluding possibility of any ferromagnetism. The intensity of LFMA is found to sharply decrease at around 250K, suggesting a phase transition takes place. A lattice gauge model is then employed to assign these effects to the transition between superconducting Meissner phase and vortex glass, and the slow dynamics wherein is calculated as well.
As suggested by Lee et al., the structure of CSLA possesses two circles: The outer circle serves as a shield to protect the inner one which forms a quasi-one-dimensional (1D) conducting channel Lee et al.. The essential idea is to substitute the outer lead atoms with copper to shrink the whole structure. This 1D superconductivity model can be well applied to explain the anisotropic levitation posting on the social media and thus greatly inspires us to uncover the possible 1D strongly-correlated mechanism with a magnetic flux. Previously, the chinese researchers have reported that the cuprate radicals in CSLA hold sufficiently long coherence time to be quantum manipulated Liu et al., which yields a useful hint for a successful synthesis. So far, only the powder of mixture has manifested possible superconducting features, so normal electric and magnetic measurements are not available in the current stage. Learnt from the research history of other superconducting materials, such as Y-Ba-Cu-O, alkali-metal-doped fullerene, magnesium diboride and iron pnictides. The detection of microwave absorption turns out to be an appropriate approach to determine whether there is superconducting phase in the mixtures, which motivates the main subject of the present work.
Most superconductors have got the low-field microwave absorption (LFMA) due to the presence of superconducting gap and the relevant superconducting vortices as excited states. More importantly, the derivative LFMA of superconductors is positively dependent of the magnetic field as the vortices are more induced under higher field. As a comparison, although the soft magnetism is also active under low field, the precession of spin moments will be suppressed so that the derivative LFMA of magnetic materials is normally negative. The sign of LFMA can be always corrected by the signal of radicals in their measurements. In this cases, the signals below 500 Gauss are all positive, implying the presence of superconductivity.
In summary, they have found significant hysteresis and memory effect of LFMA in samples of CSLA. The effect is sufficiently robust in magnetic field sweep and rotation and will lose memory in a long duration. The temperature dependence of LFMA intensity exhibits a phase transition at 250 K. The phase diagram of superconducting Meissner and vortex glass is then calculated in the framework of lattice gauge model. In the near future, they will continue to improve the quality of samples to realize full levitation and magnetic flux pinning by increasing active components. The application of a microwave power repository will be considered as well.
2. A member of the original korean research team, repeated his statement that LK99 is a room temperature superconductor and that the original team is working on fresh evidence. However, the new work is not ready at this time.
At about 37 minutes into the talk, he talks about getting the small funding and says there will be “large” US military funded room temperature superconducting research program. “Soon government will announce a BIG program on the DARPA level”.
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.
There is little incentive to be the second to confirm something. Nobel and patents go to #1.
Team #1 should make it as easy as possible for replicators, maybe offer a bounty.
Dear God guys, the earth was flat until some very controversial theories were made! They of course were dismissed as heresy by the best scientists in the world, endorsed at the time by the Pope.
Look I have no idea if high temp superconductivity is possible. But the temperature and understanding has been improving for decades. Is it possible that some Korean scientists did stumble onto the holy grail… Of course it is. Fleming wasn’t looking for an antibiotic he just noticed something odd in a Petri dish.
We need Science to be controversial otherwise nothing new will be discovered. And as for Chinese researchers faking data I think that borders on racism. There are plenty of examples of this in the west.
If the data proves superconductivity great, if not we are still a step closer to understanding it.
I am sorry to say, but your history knowledge is lacking Fatdonny.
Western civilization is aware the Earth is spherical since at least 500 BC.
Erastothenes calculated the circumference of the planet, only only 800 km error to a real diameter of over 40 thousand km, in 250 BC.
Nobody forgot the Earth was spherical in the middle ages. It was literally the SYMBOL of Christian kings, the scepter with a sphere representing Earth and a cross over it representing the dominion of Christianity over the globe.
Columbus difficulty to get funds to reach Asia by sailing west was not due to people thinking the world was flat. It was due for them knowing the correct size of the planet and Columbus WRONGLY thinking the globe was MUCH smaller (he thought Japan was so far west from Spain as Florida).
In the absence of knowledge of the American continent, considering the REAL size of the planet, sailing across the HUGE ocean that theoretically would be the Pacific + Atlantic in diameter, would be SUICIDE.
Columbus was lucky the New World was 1/3 of the way to Asia, or all the crew would have perished long before.
It seems to me you are confusing Flat Earth with GEOCENTRISM, which was only PARTIALLY based on the Bible. It was much more strongly rooted on ancient Greek models of the universe and Claudius Ptolomy model, which was quite sucessful and accepted in Europe and the Islamic World.
There was no “heresy” endorsed by the Pope.
Copernicus was never accused of anything. He published his heliocentric model book and it was well received. Published with help from the Church.
Galileu also had support from the Church, however, he was quite the non pleasant character, and had a fallout with the Jesuits and the Pope, after he published a book where there was a character named SIMPLETON and who resembled the Pope, defending the geocentric model.
Galileu also did not propose it was hypothesis or theory, but as fact, which he however lacked evidence to prove.
And if you say Giordano Bruno, he was basically a priest who said Jesus was not divine, Mary was not a virgin, believed in witchcraft, etc.
He said stars were suns, but that was NOT based on scientific rationale. It was part of hys mysticysm.
Giordano Bruno can be considered a sort of DEEPAK CHOPRA. Who speaks a lot of mystical nonsense about Quantum Theory.
If Deepak Chopra was condemned to death for his beliefs, nobody would consider him a martyr of science. And nor should Bruno. His many worlds theory was not even the main accusation.
Giordano Bruno can be a martyr of free speech, not science.
I think we’re clutching at straws here. LK99 is very very old trademarked material which has failed it’s originators promises twice over.
This time around they tried selling Copper substituted Lead Apatite and no one could isolate a lattice of it exhibiting RTS.
Interstitial impurities held ‘peomuse’ But that was no longer Cu substituted Pb Apatite.
So now we’re punting “thin film’.
Can we just bury LK99 and start a new life?
Er, but the original Korean research team still intends to show results in the future, no? It hasn’t failed the originators promises because the originators haven’t completed the necessary processes to see the complete results yet. I’ll never understand why people are dismissive in science when there’s no objective advantage to being dismissive in science. Even if you abstract out research funding the reality is not all funding comes equally and just because somebody’s team received it doesn’t mean someone else would’ve gotten it in their absence. I’m happy that things are still playing out.
Why is it only Chinese universities, which have a reputation for acedemic dishonesty, that are reporting successes with LK99?
Because they have world’s largest number of full-time R&D personnel, so whatever science niche and branch you pick up, you will have more Chinese working on the problem/s than people from any other region of the world, therefore more papers/results.
https://govt.chinadaily.com.cn/s/202312/18/WS657fe83c498ed2d7b7ea30da/china-leads-world-in-full-time-equivalent-of-r-d-personnel-report.html
“As an important indicator measuring sci-tech manpower input, the number of full-time equivalent R&D personnel in China increased from 3.247 million in 2012 to 6.354 million in 2022, the report said.”
In 2023 it’s probably around 7 million and in 2024 it will be way bigger.
That’s incorrect. Having the most researchers of any individual country only increases the percentage of publications on a given topic worldwide, all things being equal. You’d expect that if China had 10% of the world’s researchers, they’d produce 10% of the papers on a topic. That isn’t what we see here, China is the *only* country producing papers with a “positive” result on this topic.
False. Korea has also produced papers with a “positive” result.