Re:A Room-Temperature Superconductor? New Developments
by zootreeves on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @01:22PM
(#36959182)
I haven’t been this excited since the EmDrive
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:A Room-Temperature Superconductor? New Developments
by MPSimmons on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @01:44PM
(#36959543)
Which should honestly be a warning sign.
Re:A Room-Temperature Superconductor? New Developments
by marcusverus on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @03:51PM
(#36961688)
Why is that?
Re:A Room-Temperature Superconductor? New Developments
by suby on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @04:26PM
(#36962249)
The EMDrive didn't pan out.
Re:A Room-Temperature Superconductor? New Developments
by declan_roberts on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @01:53PM
(#36959682)
Does LK-99 defy the laws of physics like the EmDrive did?
Re:A Room-Temperature Superconductor? New Developments
by zamadatix on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @02:08PM
(#36959945)
A room temperature and pressure semiconductor is more an astoundingly large jump forward in the space than something that defies known physics.
Re:A Room-Temperature Superconductor? New Developments
by distortionfield on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @04:12PM
(#36962013)
That doesn’t track. The EmDrive was legitimately pushing a premise that we had some fundamental law of physics wrong. Superconductors are pretty well understood, they’ve been around for a while. Finding a room temperature one isn’t that big of a jump, it’s just a really hard one to make.
Re:A Room-Temperature Superconductor? New Developments
by mitthrowaway2 on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @05:37PM
(#36963425)
You're in agreement with the GP, their comment was just hard to parse.