News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Breaking Superconductor News by lolc on Thursday July 27, 2023 @08:41AM (#36892561)
I can't see why they'd skip replication given the uncertain status of the original process. They'd try to replicate as closely as possible, confirm they have a superconducting material, then they'd branch out from their established process. Starting from a variation means they don't know whether it doesn't work because of the variation or because it doesn't work at all.
Re:Breaking Superconductor News by stu255 on Thursday July 27, 2023 @10:28AM (#36894130)
I hear some very clever labs can do more than one thing at a time.
Re:Breaking Superconductor News by curiousObject on Thursday July 27, 2023 @11:45AM (#36895312)
That’s not unreasonable, but the high-risk, high-reward approach would be to let researchers elsewhere do basic verification, while you try to leap a step ahead of them by going directly to derivative variations.

Abandon the work if nobody can replicate LK-99 within a few weeks and you haven’t really lost out badly.