News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on “we now believe that the game is over. LK99 is NOT a superconductor”.

Re:“we now believe that the game is over. LK99 is NOT a supe... by cfcf14 on Tuesday August 08, 2023 @07:45AM (#37047494)
Was fun while it lasted! Will be interesting watching the internal story of the original lab unfold as it all becomes public eventually.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:“we now believe that the game is over. LK99 is NOT a supe... by calderknight on Tuesday August 08, 2023 @07:47AM (#37047512)
Just because a Twitter said it's over doesn't mean it's over. Prediction markets still think there's a ~1/5 chance of it being legit.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:“we now believe that the game is over. LK99 is NOT a supe... by doitLP on Tuesday August 08, 2023 @07:54AM (#37047575)
Can you share which markets your following?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:“we now believe that the game is over. LK99 is NOT a supe... by calderknight on Tuesday August 08, 2023 @07:57AM (#37047611)
This is the only one I'm following myself:

https://manifold.markets/QuantumObserver/will-the-lk99-room-...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:“we now believe that the game is over. LK99 is NOT a supe... by ranting-moth on Tuesday August 08, 2023 @07:50AM (#37047537)
No it wasn't. Things like this (or at least the dubious media frenzy around this) erode public's trust in science.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:“we now believe that the game is over. LK99 is NOT a supe... by alexmolas on Tuesday August 08, 2023 @07:53AM (#37047564)
Science is like that. The problem is not with science or with this material not being super-conducting. The problem is with how science is explained in media. Failing to test hypothesis is a critical step in the scientific method.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:“we now believe that the game is over. LK99 is NOT a supe... by gus_massa on Tuesday August 08, 2023 @09:27AM (#37048664)
It's important that public understand the difference between a preprint in arXiv, a paper in a serious peer review journal and the truth.

We've seen a lot of miracle cures during the covid-19 epidemic where all the support was a bunch of preprints (and some of the preprints were horrible, I read a few of them to write angry comments in HN).

A paper in a serious peer review journal (if possible/relevant preregistered and with a randomized controlled group) is much better evidence, but it still can be wrong.

[ Parent | on HN ]