Re:LK99: Team of Southeast University observed zero resistan...
by hatsunearu on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @06:02PM
(#36978307)
that's the wrong way to look at this.
what i see in this noisy measurement is nothing interesting. that always means:
a) the noise is obscuring something interesting
b) there is nothing interesting
for a), if it's practical and/or likely that there is something interesting in the noise, I'd try to find a way to lower the noise (or SNR).
you would assert b) if you have some strong convictions that there's nothing interesting down there.
Since the assertion that LK-99 is superconducting at room temp, there's already enough data to say that this is either A) whatever they measured is not LK-99 B) whatever they measured is LK-99, but doesn't superconduct at room temp.
Their ridiculous interpretation pointing at the SNR=1 point saying that's the critical temperature is actually hilarious.
what i see in this noisy measurement is nothing interesting. that always means:
a) the noise is obscuring something interesting
b) there is nothing interesting
for a), if it's practical and/or likely that there is something interesting in the noise, I'd try to find a way to lower the noise (or SNR).
you would assert b) if you have some strong convictions that there's nothing interesting down there.
Since the assertion that LK-99 is superconducting at room temp, there's already enough data to say that this is either A) whatever they measured is not LK-99 B) whatever they measured is LK-99, but doesn't superconduct at room temp.
Their ridiculous interpretation pointing at the SNR=1 point saying that's the critical temperature is actually hilarious.