News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by Waterluvian on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @09:43PM (#36980326)
I don’t understand the physics, but it feels like a truly zero resistance conductor would violate some law of thermodynamics or something.

Is a superconductor truly zero impedence or just very very very low? Because I’m seeing a lot of these graphs with something like: “0.00001ohm” as the y-axis floor.

Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by distortionfield on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @09:59PM (#36980442)
It doesn’t though, that’s what’s so tantalizing about it. It’s counterintuitive but as I understand it, the current best theory of superconductor behavior properly conserves mass and energy and the math says a room temperature one should be perfectly possible. It’s just not been found. And yes, it’s truly zero resistance as far as we understand the concept of “resistance”.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by ramraj07 on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @09:56PM (#36980431)
MRI machines work using superconducting magnets as does the LHC. So you better believe it buddy.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by Waterluvian on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @10:00PM (#36980450)
Why do MRIs need zero resistance vs incredibly low resistance?
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by wbl on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @10:13PM (#36980536)
The more you crank up the field and gradients the better resolution you can get. Being able to take MRI of a beating heart depends on that sort of thing.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by jacquesm on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @10:24PM (#36980618)
Because the resistance is the limiting factor in how strong a magnetic field can be made in a given volume using the conducting material.

Copper across an area of 1 cm ^2 does about 300A, compare with https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8047038/ for what some superconductors can do.

Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by robotresearcher on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @10:34PM (#36980702)
Link says 90 MA per cm^2, or 30,000X more than copper.

Gulp!

Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by patrec on Thursday August 03, 2023 @03:24AM (#36982487)
I think you are missing a zero.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by robotresearcher on Thursday August 03, 2023 @03:30PM (#36990614)
You are right!

300,000X more than copper.

Typo converting from brain to screen. I should have used exponential notation and the mistake would have been more obvious.

Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by yreg on Thursday August 03, 2023 @05:14AM (#36983311)
That's not an answer to that question.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by thelazyone on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @10:48PM (#36980790)
I think it's a fair question. I guess the answer is "because we have superconductors, and no material with 'very small resistance' instead".

Also note that while there is zero resistance you still have parasitic currents and general interaction with the rest of the environment. So no perpetual motion for us today!

Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by jacquesm on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @11:06PM (#36980883)
Even a 'very small resistance' would likely be prohibitive. Pure silver for instance is an excellent conductor, but when you're talking about the last little bits it's orders of magnitude difference between that and a superconductor, and those orders of magnitude difference in resistance translate into orders of magnitude more current. So even a small resistance would cause your MRI machine to have a resolution so low as to be unusable.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by jychang on Thursday August 03, 2023 @12:26AM (#36981356)
Actually, there are infinite orders of magnitude between the resistance of silver and that of a superconductor.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by obrix on Thursday August 03, 2023 @02:45AM (#36982218)
MR imaging is possible with permanent magnets and resistive (copper wire wound) magnets at low field strengths, below 0.35T or so. Above that the heating of the magnet windings becomes excessive and it would be very difficult to maintain a stable enough field strength.

Superconducting magnets are very nice as long as there is no quenching. The material used for conductors must be mechanically stable and perform consistently from one production batch to another. One reason why current high tc superconductors are not popular...

Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by stcredzero on Thursday August 03, 2023 @11:16AM (#36987062)
The material used for conductors must be mechanically stable and perform consistently from one production batch to another. One reason why current high tc superconductors are not popular

I was going to ask: Why don't we use the current high temperature superconductors, and start building grid interconnects? I guess part of the answer lies in the cost that would be incurred because of the mechanical properties of the existing superconductors.

Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by mrguyorama on Thursday August 03, 2023 @01:36PM (#36989052)
The current best "High temperature", standard pressure superconductor only works at -150ish degrees Celsius. That's not as bad as cryogenic superconductors, but it is still a blocker for large scale use.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by stcredzero on Monday August 07, 2023 @11:18AM (#37035668)
In essence, my comment is asking, "Why is it a blocker?" Very efficient thermal insulation is something we already have.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by jacquesm on Friday August 04, 2023 @11:34AM (#37001440)
Because it is easier to keep a localized thing cool than something that is 100's of km long. That's why iceboxes are boxes and not ice ribbons and why most applications of superconductors right now are using them as coils for magnetic field and volume economy. For instance there is one grid component that uses superconducting coils as inertia free stabilizers, they can be used to source and sink current very rapidly to absorb transients in the load. This allows older and less stable grids to be used to transfer wind power because the power over time is a bit lower. Allowing those peaks unfiltered onto the grid would cause parts of it to go down.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by stcredzero on Monday August 07, 2023 @11:16AM (#37035631)
Because it is easier to keep a localized thing cool than something that is 100's of km long.

If we simply decided to make this kind of thing a priority, we could probably manufacture suspension components at scale. (Or create small tunnel boring machines and bury them?) We wouldn't need to replace all of the lines. We'd just need enough interconnects to make transferring more power economical.

Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by thelazyone on Saturday August 05, 2023 @08:59AM (#37011585)
I think that the initial question was "why a 0 resistance compared to a ridicously low resistance". And my point is that it's easier to get a superconductor than some material with "ridicously low" resistance. As you said, silver is unusable for potent magnets, and such is any other non-superconducting magnets.

Probably if we had materials with a billionth of the resistance of silver they would work, but we haven't. And we have superconductors, luckly. :)

Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by userbinator on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @11:38PM (#36981061)
To create very, very strong magnetic fields.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by scythe on Thursday August 03, 2023 @12:55AM (#36981539)
The current is ridiculously large and would lead to an unacceptably high power consumption and thermal expansion with the resistivity of even a good metal (copper).
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by crote on Thursday August 03, 2023 @05:57AM (#36983640)
They don't!

MRI scanners work just fine with regular electromagnets, or even plain old normal magnets. However, work better with stronger magnetic fields. In practice normal magnets end up being extremely large and heavy, and electromagnets end up using massive amounts of power. Both options are also limited in their field strength because getting enough stuff close together is tricky.

A superconducting magnet is an electromagnet which is way smaller and uses orders of magnitude less power. For extremely high field strength MRIs they are the only viable option, and for regular MRIs they are often the best option.

Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by yongjik on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @10:19PM (#36980571)
Not an answer, but if you think superconductor is weird, look up superfluid, now that's going to make your head spin.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by LightMachine on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @11:20PM (#36980960)
why there are no good videos of superfluids in action in the whole internet?
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by fragmede on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @11:27PM (#36980998)
I thought https://youtu.be/2Z6UJbwxBZI was pretty good, even if it's low res from being a bit dated.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by 55555 on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @11:40PM (#36981078)
there’s not a single high-quality video anywhere. Science YouTubers need to get on this
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by 55555 on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @11:36PM (#36981051)
Thanks for the interesting new thing. If they suffer no loss in kinetic energy and a wave can move forever, could we use a circular pool of superfluid as an an energy storage mechanism?
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by n2d4 on Thursday August 03, 2023 @12:21AM (#36981322)
Probably, but it's probably easier to just use a superconductor for the same: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energ...
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by yongjik on Thursday August 03, 2023 @12:26AM (#36981358)
Well, the whole thing must be at liquid helium temperature, so probably not practical ...
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by alex_suzuki on Thursday August 03, 2023 @01:39AM (#36981836)
Superfluids have been around for ages - we call them beers.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by marcosdumay on Wednesday August 02, 2023 @10:59PM (#36980848)
The electrons are always moving in some direction. What a superconductor does is "just" making an electron pull others with it, making a cascade effect that biases the movement permanently.

There is no work or state change, so no reason at all to conflict with the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by klyrs on Thursday August 03, 2023 @12:51AM (#36981506)
Key point, resistance is the real part of impedance. The imaginary part, or inductance and capacitance, are not zero in a superconductor.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by _ph_ on Thursday August 03, 2023 @04:26AM (#36982941)
Yes, as others already said, superconductors are zero resistance. Which is easy to check if you have enough of the substance to run meaninful currents through it. There might be miniscule amounts of resistance for contacting and impurities, but the resistance doesn't grow e.g. with wire length.

So how is this possible? The explanation is acutally reasonably easy, but requires the strangeness of quantum dynamics. One basic principle of quantum dynamics is, that at least most things are quantisized. Especially energy of a state comes in discrete amounts. That is the reason we have orbitals of electrons in atoms. They can only take very specific values, which creates these separate orbitals. There is no in between state, they have always to absorb or emit exactly the amount of energy which is the difference between orbitals when moving between them. Which is a very easy effect to literally see: take glowing phosphors as you find them on your watch etc. These are transitions bound to a specific photon energy. With red light, you cannot "charge" them, as red photons have to little energy, and you can only absorb single photons. Any green or blue light would work though. And whatever light you used to "charge" them, they always glow in the precise same color, coming from their destinct energy state.

The resistance an electron encounters while moving through a conductor is also quantisized. In superconductors we have a situation like trying to charge a watch dial with red light: the amounts of energy an electron could release cannot be absorbed by the material. And an interaction would require this. The consequence is: no interaction, no resistance.

The situation is like trying to buy a $1 bottle of water with a $100 bill. That could turn out to be impossible, because no one is willing to give you back $99, and you can of course not pay $100 for the bottle. So even when having the money, you can't buy the bottle.

This is, in a very naive way, the principle how superconductivity and superfluidity work. The trick now is to prepare the conditions which allow for superconductivity. One way is to make things increadibly cold. All metals become superconductive, if the temperature is close enough to 0. But that is with single digit degrees or below, even fractions of a Kelvin. Konsequently it was a huge sensation when the first complex substance was presented which showed the effect at larger temperatures. Since then the hunt is up to find better substances.

Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by Jyaif on Thursday August 03, 2023 @09:33AM (#36985655)
Fascinating.

Let me get this straight: If you have a piece of phosphor, you can't heat it up with red light, regardless of the amount of red light you shine at it? If so, does the red light bounce off? Go straight through?

Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by _ph_ on Thursday August 03, 2023 @11:20AM (#36987122)
Yes, it will of course absorb or reflect the red light like any stone would, but to "charge" its luminiszence you need at least green light - blue works great. That is, why you never could charge your watch dial with incandescent light, but any white LED will work great because their light usually contains a lot of blue light. Fun fact: though it is calles "phosphorescence" all those colors don't contain any Phosphor, that Phosphor isn't phosphorescent :p An error in early naming.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by daxfohl on Thursday August 03, 2023 @05:23AM (#36983372)
Similar to how a magnet works. A magnet can hold something forever, so seems like a violation of thermodynamics. But "holding" isn't work, it's just force. (Which is still kinda spooky, admittedly) Similarly, conducting itself isn't work, it's just conduction.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by huthuthike on Thursday August 03, 2023 @09:53AM (#36985937)
It's a lot less spooky when you consider that your desk can hold your coffee mug forever. It's exerting force on the mug, but not doing any work.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by flavius29663 on Thursday August 03, 2023 @10:32AM (#36986517)
even more so as the mug literally levitates above the desk, the atoms of the mug are not really touching the atoms of the desk.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by snowwrestler on Thursday August 03, 2023 @01:57PM (#36989360)
The atoms do touch, by interacting electrically--which is the physical definition of how anything touches anything.
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by daxfohl on Sunday August 06, 2023 @11:43PM (#37029816)
(for fermions)
Re:Observation of zero resistance above 100 K in Pb₁₀₋ₓCuₓ(P... by thehappypm on Thursday August 03, 2023 @11:23AM (#36987167)
Ask yourself this question: Why does resistance occur at all? Why is it that electrons moving through a material cause them to heat up? What is actually happening to cause that?

At micro levels, like molecules bouncing around in a gas, collisions are lossless. What makes electrons moving through materials different?