News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Ongoing compilation table of LK-99 reproduction claims by WJW on Monday August 07, 2023 @06:06AM (#37032456)
Magnetic levitation can't be done with normal magnets alone: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earnshaw%27s_theorem

TL;DR: Normal magnets have two poles, and will try to flip themselves around to achieve a lower energy state. You cannot levitate a normal magnet on another magnet without mechanical stabilization. Superconducting materials actively repel all magnetic field lines and can achieve levitation without external stabilization.

Re:Ongoing compilation table of LK-99 reproduction claims by davidhyde on Monday August 07, 2023 @06:19AM (#37032551)
> “You cannot levitate a normal magnet on another magnet without mechanical stabilization”

The mechanical stabilisation is right there in plain sight where one side of the magnet is clearly resting on the other magnet (physically in contact). Anyone who’s played around with magnets that are heavy and too weak to flip themselves around will not be satisfied with this video. It could be explained by two South Poles opposing each other.

Re:Ongoing compilation table of LK-99 reproduction claims by DoingIsLearning on Monday August 07, 2023 @06:18AM (#37032538)
> Magnetic levitation can't be done with normal magnets alone

Technically it can be done with an array of magnets with opposing polarities.

Without more details from on this video's source and legitimacy, one could argue that an array of magnets is hiding under the 'single magnet' cover plate.

I am not saying this is a hoax, but as exciting as this seems we just have to wait it out for more replication publications to make that call.

Re:Ongoing compilation table of LK-99 reproduction claims by drsopp on Monday August 07, 2023 @06:38AM (#37032668)
> Technically it can be done with an array of magnets with opposing polarities

How?

Re:Ongoing compilation table of LK-99 reproduction claims by DoingIsLearning on Monday August 07, 2023 @06:42AM (#37032700)
An example of Pyrolytic Carbon levitating on top of a 2x2 matrix of magnets. [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamagnetism#/media/File:Diama...

Re:Ongoing compilation table of LK-99 reproduction claims by yebyen on Monday August 07, 2023 @06:51AM (#37032768)
Re:Ongoing compilation table of LK-99 reproduction claims by hoseja on Monday August 07, 2023 @06:40AM (#37032681)
No, it mathematically cannot be done with any combination of permanent magnets.
Re:Ongoing compilation table of LK-99 reproduction claims by gpderetta on Monday August 07, 2023 @06:52AM (#37032777)
aside from non-superconducting diamagnetic materials, I think it can be done with non-static magnets, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin-stabilized_magnetic_levit...
Re:Ongoing compilation table of LK-99 reproduction claims by hoseja on Monday August 07, 2023 @06:58AM (#37032816)
Oh of course. Brainfarted and fused "static permanent magnets" into just "permanent magnets".
Re:Ongoing compilation table of LK-99 reproduction claims by kaba0 on Monday August 07, 2023 @07:17AM (#37032951)
If we doubt the legitimacy of basic claims like a fair setup of magnets, then there are much easier ways to create a fake, like just tie something on top of it.. but why would we doubt the legitimacy of reliable institutions?
Re:Ongoing compilation table of LK-99 reproduction claims by DoingIsLearning on Monday August 07, 2023 @07:39AM (#37033103)
Grand parent was saying it's "impossible". I say it is _technically_ possible.

To which I then added:

"I am not saying this is a hoax, but as exciting as this seems we just have to wait it out for more replication publications to make that call"

It last been a little over 2 weeks since the first pre-print from Korea University.

The hashing out of a fabrication process with less impurities will be a long one. My point is not that everyone is pulling a con, my point is that we need to wait it out.

Re:Ongoing compilation table of LK-99 reproduction claims by unyttigfjelltol on Monday August 07, 2023 @06:19AM (#37032543)
Why can't the weakly positive results be explained by an irregular formation of magnetic crystals that stabilizes the forces, in a way a single magnetic object cannot? As in, not a superconductor, just a novel configuration of magnetic particles?